Julia Kitz1, Emmanouil Fokas2, Tim Beissbarth3, Philipp Ströbel1, Christian Wittekind4, Arndt Hartmann5, Josef Rüschoff6, Thomas Papadopoulos7, Elisabeth Rösler8, Peter Ortloff-Kittredge8, Ulrich Kania9, Hans Schlitt10, Karl-Heinrich Link11, Wolf Bechstein12, Hans-Rudolf Raab13, Ludger Staib14, Christoph-Thomas Germer15, Torsten Liersch16, Rolf Sauer17, Claus Rödel2, Michael Ghadimi16, Werner Hohenberger18. 1. Institute of Pathology, University Medical Center Göttingen, Göttingen, Germany. 2. Department of Radiotherapy and Oncology, University of Frankfurt, Frankfurt, Germany. 3. Department of Medical Statistics, University Medical Center Göttingen, Göttingen, Germany. 4. Institute of Pathology, University Medical Center Leipzig, Leipzig, Germany. 5. Institute of Pathology, University Medical Center Erlangen, Erlangen, Germany. 6. Institute of Pathology Nordhessen, Kassel, Germany. 7. Institute of Pathology, Klinikum Nürnberg Nord, Nuremberg, Germany. 8. Institute of Pathology, Mönchengladbach, Germany. 9. Department of General and Visceral Surgery, Krankenhaus Maria Hilf, Mönchengladbach, Germany. 10. Department of Visceral Surgery, University Medical Center Regensburg, Regensburg, Germany. 11. Department of Visceral Surgery, Asklepios Paulinen Klinik Wiesbaden, Wiesbaden, Germany. 12. Department of General and Visceral Surgery, University Medical Center Frankfurt, Frankfurt, Germany. 13. Department of General and Visceral Surgery, University Medical Center Oldenburg, Oldenburg, Germany. 14. Department of General and Visceral Surgery, Klinikum Esslingen, Esslingen, Germany. 15. Department of General, Visceral, Vascular and Pediatric Surgery, University Hospital Würzburg, Würzburg, Germany. 16. Department of General and Visceral Surgery, University Medical Center Göttingen, Göttingen, Germany. 17. Department of Radiation Therapy, University of Erlangen, Erlangen, Germany. 18. Department of General and Visceral Surgery, University of Erlangen, Erlangen, Germany.
Abstract
Importance: Previous retrospective studies have shown that surgical quality affects local control in rectal cancer.. Objective: In this secondary end point analysis, we evaluated the prognostic effect of the total mesorectal excision (TME) plane in the CAO/ARO/AIO-04 phase 3 randomized clinical trial. Design, Setting, and Participants: The CAO/ARO/AIO-04 trial enrolled 1236 patients with cT3-4 and/or node-positive rectal adenocarcinoma from 88 centers in Germany between July 25, 2006, and February 26, 2010. Interventions: Patients were randomized to receive treatment with standard fluorouracil-based preoperative chemoradiotherapy (CRT) alone (control arm) or oxaliplatin (experimental arm) followed by TME and adjuvant chemotherapy. Main Outcomes and Measures: The TME quality (mesorectal, intramesorectal, and muscularis propria plane) was prospectively assessed in 1152 operation specimens. An assessment was performed independently by pathologists and surgeons. The results were correlated with clinicopathologic data and the clinical outcome was tested, including multivariable analysis with the Cox regression model. Results: Of 1152 German Caucasian participants, 332 (28.8) were women and the mean age was 63 years. The plane of TME was mesorectal in 930 patients (80.7%), intramesorectal in 169 (14.7%), and muscularis propria in 53 (4.6%). In a univariable analysis, the TME plane was significantly associated with 3-year disease-free survival (mesorectal vs intramesorectal vs muscularis propria, 95% CI, 73.1-78.8 vs 61.6-76.0 vs 55.6-81.3, respectively; P = .01), cumulative incidence of local and distant recurrences (mesorectal vs intramesorectal vs muscularis propria, 95% CI, 2.0-4.5 vs 1.2-8.1 vs 2.5-20.5, respectively; P < .001; and mesorectal vs intramesorectal vs muscularis propria, 95% CI, 17.0-22.4 vs 18.3-32.0 vs 14.2-39.0, respectively; P = .03, respectively), and overall survival (mesorectal vs intramesorectal vs muscularis propria, 95% CI, 88.3-92.3 vs 79.7-91.0 vs 81.6-98.7, respectively; P = .02). In contrast to the pathologist-based evaluation, the assessment of TME plane by the operating surgeon failed to demonstrate prognostic significance for any of these clinical end points. In a multivariable analysis, the plane of surgery (mesorectal vs muscularis propria TME) constituted an independent factor for local recurrence (P = .002). Conclusions and Relevance: This phase 3 randomized clinical trial confirms the long-term clinical effect of TME plane quality on local recurrence, as initially reported in the MRC CR07 study. The data highlight the key role of pathologists and surgeons in the multidisciplinary management of rectal cancer. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT00349076.
RCT Entities:
Importance: Previous retrospective studies have shown that surgical quality affects local control in rectal cancer.. Objective: In this secondary end point analysis, we evaluated the prognostic effect of the total mesorectal excision (TME) plane in the CAO/ARO/AIO-04 phase 3 randomized clinical trial. Design, Setting, and Participants: The CAO/ARO/AIO-04 trial enrolled 1236 patients with cT3-4 and/or node-positive rectal adenocarcinoma from 88 centers in Germany between July 25, 2006, and February 26, 2010. Interventions: Patients were randomized to receive treatment with standard fluorouracil-based preoperative chemoradiotherapy (CRT) alone (control arm) or oxaliplatin (experimental arm) followed by TME and adjuvant chemotherapy. Main Outcomes and Measures: The TME quality (mesorectal, intramesorectal, and muscularis propria plane) was prospectively assessed in 1152 operation specimens. An assessment was performed independently by pathologists and surgeons. The results were correlated with clinicopathologic data and the clinical outcome was tested, including multivariable analysis with the Cox regression model. Results: Of 1152 German Caucasian participants, 332 (28.8) were women and the mean age was 63 years. The plane of TME was mesorectal in 930 patients (80.7%), intramesorectal in 169 (14.7%), and muscularis propria in 53 (4.6%). In a univariable analysis, the TME plane was significantly associated with 3-year disease-free survival (mesorectal vs intramesorectal vs muscularis propria, 95% CI, 73.1-78.8 vs 61.6-76.0 vs 55.6-81.3, respectively; P = .01), cumulative incidence of local and distant recurrences (mesorectal vs intramesorectal vs muscularis propria, 95% CI, 2.0-4.5 vs 1.2-8.1 vs 2.5-20.5, respectively; P < .001; and mesorectal vs intramesorectal vs muscularis propria, 95% CI, 17.0-22.4 vs 18.3-32.0 vs 14.2-39.0, respectively; P = .03, respectively), and overall survival (mesorectal vs intramesorectal vs muscularis propria, 95% CI, 88.3-92.3 vs 79.7-91.0 vs 81.6-98.7, respectively; P = .02). In contrast to the pathologist-based evaluation, the assessment of TME plane by the operating surgeon failed to demonstrate prognostic significance for any of these clinical end points. In a multivariable analysis, the plane of surgery (mesorectal vs muscularis propria TME) constituted an independent factor for local recurrence (P = .002). Conclusions and Relevance: This phase 3 randomized clinical trial confirms the long-term clinical effect of TME plane quality on local recurrence, as initially reported in the MRC CR07 study. The data highlight the key role of pathologists and surgeons in the multidisciplinary management of rectal cancer. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT00349076.
Authors: E Kapiteijn; C A Marijnen; I D Nagtegaal; H Putter; W H Steup; T Wiggers; H J Rutten; L Pahlman; B Glimelius; J H van Krieken; J W Leer; C J van de Velde Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2001-08-30 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: Iris D Nagtegaal; Cornelius J H van de Velde; Corrie A M Marijnen; Jan H J M van Krieken; Philip Quirke Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2005-12-20 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: P Demetter; A Jouret-Mourin; G Silversmit; T Vandendael; C Sempoux; A Hoorens; N Nagy; C Cuvelier; N Van Damme; F Penninckx Journal: Colorectal Dis Date: 2016-09 Impact factor: 3.788
Authors: Sushil Maslekar; Abhiram Sharma; Alistair Macdonald; James Gunn; John R T Monson; John E Hartley Journal: Dis Colon Rectum Date: 2007-02 Impact factor: 4.585
Authors: Christian Wittekind; Carolyn Compton; Phil Quirke; Iris Nagtegaal; Susanne Merkel; Paul Hermanek; Leslie H Sobin Journal: Cancer Date: 2009-08-01 Impact factor: 6.860
Authors: Nathan J Curtis; Jake D Foster; Danilo Miskovic; Chris S B Brown; Peter J Hewett; Sarah Abbott; George B Hanna; Andrew R L Stevenson; Nader K Francis Journal: JAMA Surg Date: 2020-07-01 Impact factor: 14.766
Authors: Gretchen C Edwards; Adriana C Gamboa; Michael P Feng; Roberta L Muldoon; Michael B Hopkins; Sherif Abdel-Misih; Glen C Balch; Jennifer Holder-Murray; Maryam Mohammed; Scott E Regenbogen; Matthew L Silviera; Alexander T Hawkins Journal: Surgery Date: 2021-09-24 Impact factor: 4.348
Authors: F B de Lacy; S X Roodbeen; J Ríos; J van Laarhoven; A Otero-Piñeiro; R Bravo; T Visser; R van Poppel; S Valverde; R Hompes; C Sietses; A Castells; W A Bemelman; P J Tanis; A M Lacy Journal: BMC Cancer Date: 2020-07-20 Impact factor: 4.430