Luca Sorrentino1, Marcello Guaglio2, Luigi Battaglia1, Giuliano Bonfanti1, Marco Vitellaro1, Alessandro Cesa Bianchi1, Massimo Milione3, Filiberto Belli4. 1. Colorectal Surgery Unit, Fondazione IRCCS Istituto Nazionale dei Tumori, Via Venezian 1, 20133, Milan, Italy. 2. Colorectal Surgery Unit, Fondazione IRCCS Istituto Nazionale dei Tumori, Via Venezian 1, 20133, Milan, Italy. marcello.guaglio@istitutotumori.mi.it. 3. Pathology Unit, Fondazione IRCCS Istituto Nazionale dei Tumori, Via Venezian 1, 20133, Milan, Italy. 4. Colorectal Surgery Unit, Fondazione IRCCS Istituto Nazionale dei Tumori, Via Venezian 1, 20133, Milan, Italy. filiberto.belli@istitutotumori.mi.it.
Abstract
PURPOSE: Benefits of neoadjuvant chemo-radiotherapy (CRT) are well known for locally advanced and/or node-positive rectal cancer, but the best timing for CRT has been less explored for cT3N0 patients. The aim of the present study was to compare the 5-year disease-free survival (DFS) probability between neoadjuvant CRT and upfront surgery in patients affected by cT3N0 rectal cancer. METHODS: A retrospective review of 105 patients affected by cT3N0 rectal cancer, staged by pelvic magnetic resonance imaging and treated at the National Cancer Institute of Milan between 2011 and 2017, was performed: 42 (40.0%) were treated by neoadjuvant CRT and 63 (60.0%) by upfront surgery. Propensity score matching was performed to avoid selection bias, and Cox multivariate regression was used to analyze outcomes. RESULTS: The 5-year DFS probability was 87.5% in neoadjuvant CRT patients vs. 90.0% in upfront surgery cases (Log-rank p = 0.76). The 5-year loco-regional recurrence-free survival probability was respectively 96.8% vs. 96.3% (Log-rank p = 0.954). On multivariate analysis, neoadjuvant CRT had no impact on DFS when compared to upfront surgery (adjusted HR 0.71, 95%CI 0.18-2.70, p = 0.613), but 61.9% of upfront surgery cases were treated by adjuvant chemo-radiation (adjusted HR 0.41, 95%CI 0.11-1.57, p = 0.196). The only independent predictor of improved DFS was age at diagnosis (adjusted HR 0.95, p = 0.017). CONCLUSION: CRT should be considered for cT3N0 patients, but its timing (neoadjuvant vs. adjuvant) seems not to affect the disease-free survival in the present cohort of patients.
PURPOSE: Benefits of neoadjuvant chemo-radiotherapy (CRT) are well known for locally advanced and/or node-positive rectal cancer, but the best timing for CRT has been less explored for cT3N0 patients. The aim of the present study was to compare the 5-year disease-free survival (DFS) probability between neoadjuvant CRT and upfront surgery in patients affected by cT3N0 rectal cancer. METHODS: A retrospective review of 105 patients affected by cT3N0 rectal cancer, staged by pelvic magnetic resonance imaging and treated at the National Cancer Institute of Milan between 2011 and 2017, was performed: 42 (40.0%) were treated by neoadjuvant CRT and 63 (60.0%) by upfront surgery. Propensity score matching was performed to avoid selection bias, and Cox multivariate regression was used to analyze outcomes. RESULTS: The 5-year DFS probability was 87.5% in neoadjuvant CRT patients vs. 90.0% in upfront surgery cases (Log-rank p = 0.76). The 5-year loco-regional recurrence-free survival probability was respectively 96.8% vs. 96.3% (Log-rank p = 0.954). On multivariate analysis, neoadjuvant CRT had no impact on DFS when compared to upfront surgery (adjusted HR 0.71, 95%CI 0.18-2.70, p = 0.613), but 61.9% of upfront surgery cases were treated by adjuvant chemo-radiation (adjusted HR 0.41, 95%CI 0.11-1.57, p = 0.196). The only independent predictor of improved DFS was age at diagnosis (adjusted HR 0.95, p = 0.017). CONCLUSION: CRT should be considered for cT3N0 patients, but its timing (neoadjuvant vs. adjuvant) seems not to affect the disease-free survival in the present cohort of patients.
Authors: Rolf Sauer; Heinz Becker; Werner Hohenberger; Claus Rödel; Christian Wittekind; Rainer Fietkau; Peter Martus; Jörg Tschmelitsch; Eva Hager; Clemens F Hess; Johann-H Karstens; Torsten Liersch; Heinz Schmidberger; Rudolf Raab Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2004-10-21 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: Luigi Zorcolo; Alan S Rosman; Angelo Restivo; Michele Pisano; Giuseppe R Nigri; Alessandro Fancellu; Marcovalerio Melis Journal: Ann Surg Oncol Date: 2012-03-21 Impact factor: 5.344
Authors: Koen C M J Peeters; Corrie A M Marijnen; Iris D Nagtegaal; Elma Klein Kranenbarg; Hein Putter; Theo Wiggers; Harm Rutten; Lars Pahlman; Bengt Glimelius; Jan Willem Leer; Cornelis J H van de Velde Journal: Ann Surg Date: 2007-11 Impact factor: 12.969
Authors: James Fleshman; Megan E Branda; Daniel J Sargent; Anne Marie Boller; Virgilio V George; Maher A Abbas; Walter R Peters; Dipen C Maun; George J Chang; Alan Herline; Alessandro Fichera; Matthew G Mutch; Steven D Wexner; Mark H Whiteford; John Marks; Elisa Birnbaum; David A Margolin; David W Larson; Peter W Marcello; Mitchell C Posner; Thomas E Read; John R T Monson; Sherry M Wren; Peter W T Pisters; Heidi Nelson Journal: Ann Surg Date: 2019-04 Impact factor: 12.969
Authors: Andrew R L Stevenson; Michael J Solomon; Christopher S B Brown; John W Lumley; Peter Hewett; Andrew D Clouston; Val J Gebski; Kate Wilson; Wendy Hague; John Simes Journal: Ann Surg Date: 2019-04 Impact factor: 12.969