Assessment of a Watch-and-Wait Strategy for Rectal Cancer in Patients With a Complete Response After Neoadjuvant Therapy.
Journal
JAMA oncology
ISSN: 2374-2445
Titre abrégé: JAMA Oncol
Pays: United States
ID NLM: 101652861
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
01 Apr 2019
01 Apr 2019
Historique:
pubmed:
11
1
2019
medline:
11
2
2020
entrez:
11
1
2019
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
The watch-and-wait (WW) strategy aims to spare patients with rectal cancer unnecessary resection. To analyze the outcomes of WW among patients with rectal cancer who had a clinical complete response to neoadjuvant therapy. This retrospective case series analysis conducted at a comprehensive cancer center in New York included patients who received a diagnosis of rectal adenocarcinoma between January 1, 2006, and January 31, 2015. The median follow-up was 43 months. Data analyses were conducted from June 1, 2016, to October 1, 2018. Patients had a clinical complete response after completing neoadjuvant therapy and agreed to a WW strategy of active surveillance and possible salvage surgery (n = 113), or patients underwent total mesorectal excision and were found to have a pathologic complete response (pCR) at resection (n = 136). Kaplan-Meier estimates were used for analyses of local regrowth and 5-year rates of overall survival, disease-free survival, and disease-specific survival. Compared with the 136 patients in the pCR group, the 113 patients in the WW group were older (median [range], 67.2 [32.1-90.9] vs 57.3 [25.0-87.9] years, P < .001) with cancers closer to the anal verge (median [range] height from anal verge, 5.5 [0.0-15.0] vs 7.0 [0.0-13.0] cm). All 22 local regrowths in the WW group were detected on routine surveillance and treated by salvage surgery (20 total mesorectal excisions plus 2 transanal excisions). Pelvic control after salvage surgery was maintained in 20 of 22 patients (91%). No pelvic recurrences occurred in the pCR group. Rectal preservation was achieved in 93 of 113 patients (82%) in the WW group (91 patients with no local regrowths plus 2 patients with local regrowths salvaged with transanal excision). At 5 years, overall survival was 73% (95% CI, 60%-89%) in the WW group and 94% (95% CI, 90%-99%) in the pCR group; disease-free survival was 75% (95% CI, 62%-90%) in the WW group and 92% (95% CI, 87%-98%) in the pCR group; and disease-specific survival was 90% (95% CI, 81%-99%) in the WW group and 98% (95% CI, 95%-100%) in the pCR group. A higher rate of distant metastasis was observed among patients in the WW group who had local regrowth vs those who did not have local regrowth (36% vs 1%, P < .001). A WW strategy for select rectal cancer patients who had a clinical complete response after neoadjuvant therapy resulted in excellent rectal preservation and pelvic tumor control; however, in the WW group, worse survival was noted along with a higher incidence of distant progression in patients with local regrowth vs those without local regrowth.
Identifiants
pubmed: 30629084
pii: 2720474
doi: 10.1001/jamaoncol.2018.5896
pmc: PMC6459120
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
e185896Subventions
Organisme : NCI NIH HHS
ID : K08 CA230213
Pays : United States
Organisme : NCI NIH HHS
ID : P30 CA008748
Pays : United States
Organisme : National Cancer Institute
ID : P30 CA008748
Pays : United States
Organisme : National Cancer Institute
ID : K08 CA230213
Pays : United States
Commentaires et corrections
Type : CommentIn
Type : CommentIn
Références
Ann Surg. 2012 Dec;256(6):965-72
pubmed: 23154394
J Clin Oncol. 2012 May 20;30(15):1770-6
pubmed: 22493423
Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2014 Mar 15;88(4):822-8
pubmed: 24495589
BMC Cancer. 2015 Oct 23;15:767
pubmed: 26497495
J Natl Compr Canc Netw. 2014 Apr;12(4):513-9
pubmed: 24717570
Lancet. 2018 Jun 23;391(10139):2537-2545
pubmed: 29976470
J Clin Oncol. 2011 Dec 10;29(35):4633-40
pubmed: 22067400
Lancet Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2017 Jul;2(7):501-513
pubmed: 28479372
Ann Oncol. 2015 Aug;26(8):1722-8
pubmed: 25957330
Ann Surg. 2011 Jan;253(1):71-7
pubmed: 21135694
J Clin Oncol. 2015 Jun 1;33(16):1797-808
pubmed: 25918296
Ann Surg. 2017 Jan;265(1):e4-e6
pubmed: 27479130
Lancet Oncol. 2016 Feb;17(2):174-183
pubmed: 26705854
Lancet. 2010 Mar 20;375(9719):1030-47
pubmed: 20304247
Lancet Oncol. 2015 Aug;16(8):979-89
pubmed: 26189067
Ann Surg. 2004 Oct;240(4):711-7; discussion 717-8
pubmed: 15383798
Lancet Oncol. 2010 Sep;11(9):835-44
pubmed: 20692872
Lancet Oncol. 2015 Aug;16(8):919-27
pubmed: 26156652
J Natl Cancer Inst. 2016 Aug 10;108(12):
pubmed: 27509881