More Is Not Better When It Comes to Treating Rectal Cancer With Multimodal Chemoradiation Beyond the Standard Radiation Dose of 5040 cGy.


Journal

Diseases of the colon and rectum
ISSN: 1530-0358
Titre abrégé: Dis Colon Rectum
Pays: United States
ID NLM: 0372764

Informations de publication

Date de publication:
01 05 2022
Historique:
pubmed: 4 6 2021
medline: 13 4 2022
entrez: 3 6 2021
Statut: ppublish

Résumé

Radiation dose schedules for neoadjuvant chemoradiation for rectal cancers differ, with the most common dose schedule using 5040 cGy in 28 fractions. The aim of this retrospective study was to assess the benefit of higher radiation doses beyond 5040 cGy in the context of pathological response and follow-up events. The database from a provincial tertiary cancer center in Canada was the source of information for this study. Included in this study were 508 consecutive patients with rectal cancer with locally advanced disease (clinical T3/T4 or N1/N2) who received neoadjuvant chemoradiation followed by surgery. Of the 508 patients, 281 received the standard radiation dose of 4500 to 5040 cGy and 227 received a dose >5040 cGy. The postsurgical pathology, late toxicities, and follow-up outcomes were analyzed. The outcomes were evaluated in relation to the dose of radiation received. Data regarding the clinical outcomes were comparable between the 4500 to 5040 cGy and >5040 cGy radiation groups with pathological complete response rates of 20.9% and 15.4% (p = 0.104); distant recurrence rates of 17.4% and 19.4% (p = 0.36); local recurrence rates of 3.2% and 3.5% (p = 0.36); and the median overall survival rates of 61 and 60.5 months (p = 0.8). No statistically significant correlation of improvement in outcomes was noted with radiation doses beyond 5040 cGy. This is a retrospective study. Our study showed that dose escalation beyond the standard dose of 4500 to 5040cGy failed to achieve meaningful clinical outcomes. See Video Abstract at http://links.lww.com/DCR/B633. ANTECEDENTES:En neoadyuvancia de cáncer rectal es posible encontrar muchas variaciones, en radioterapia la dosis más común que usa 5040 cGy en 28 fracciones.OBJETIVOS:El objetivo de este estudio retrospectivo fue evaluar el beneficio de dosis de radiación más altas más allá de 5040cGy en el contexto de la respuesta patológica y en su seguimiento.AJUSTE:Base de datos de un centro de cáncer terciario provincial en Canadá.PACIENTES:Se incluyeron en este estudio quinientos ocho pacientes consecutivos con cáncer de recto y enfermedad localmente avanzada (clínica T3 / T4 o N1 / N2) que recibieron quimiorradiación neoadyuvante seguida de cirugía. De los 508 pacientes, 281 recibieron la dosis de radiación estándar de 4500-5040 cGy y 227 recibieron una dosis > 5040 cGy.PRINCIPAL MEDIDA DE RESULTADO:Se analizo evolucion posquirúrgica, toxicidad tardía y seguimiento. Los resultados se evaluaron en relación con la dosis de radiación recibida.RESULTADOS:Los datos con respecto a los resultados clínicos fueron comparables entre los grupos de radiación de 4500-5040 cGy y> 5040 cGy con tasas de respuesta patológica completa de 20,9% y 15,4% respectivamente (p = 0,104); tasas de recurrencia a distancia de 17,4% y 19,4%, respectivamente (p = 0,36); tasas de recurrencia local de 3,2% y 3,5%, respectivamente (p = 0,36); y la mediana de las tasas de supervivencia global de 61 y 60,5 meses, respectivamente (p = 0,8). No se observó una correlación estadísticamente significativa de mejoría en los resultados con dosis de radiación superiores a 5040 cGy.LIMITACIONES:Este es un estudio retrospectivo.CONCLUSIONES:Nuestro estudio mostró que el aumento de la dosis más allá de la dosis estándar de 4500-5040cGy no logró resultados clínicos significativos. Consulte Video Resumen en http://links.lww.com/DCR/B633. (Traducción-Dr. Gunther Bocic).

Sections du résumé

BACKGROUND
Radiation dose schedules for neoadjuvant chemoradiation for rectal cancers differ, with the most common dose schedule using 5040 cGy in 28 fractions.
OBJECTIVES
The aim of this retrospective study was to assess the benefit of higher radiation doses beyond 5040 cGy in the context of pathological response and follow-up events.
SETTING
The database from a provincial tertiary cancer center in Canada was the source of information for this study.
PATIENTS
Included in this study were 508 consecutive patients with rectal cancer with locally advanced disease (clinical T3/T4 or N1/N2) who received neoadjuvant chemoradiation followed by surgery. Of the 508 patients, 281 received the standard radiation dose of 4500 to 5040 cGy and 227 received a dose >5040 cGy.
MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE
The postsurgical pathology, late toxicities, and follow-up outcomes were analyzed. The outcomes were evaluated in relation to the dose of radiation received.
RESULTS
Data regarding the clinical outcomes were comparable between the 4500 to 5040 cGy and >5040 cGy radiation groups with pathological complete response rates of 20.9% and 15.4% (p = 0.104); distant recurrence rates of 17.4% and 19.4% (p = 0.36); local recurrence rates of 3.2% and 3.5% (p = 0.36); and the median overall survival rates of 61 and 60.5 months (p = 0.8). No statistically significant correlation of improvement in outcomes was noted with radiation doses beyond 5040 cGy.
LIMITATIONS
This is a retrospective study.
CONCLUSION
Our study showed that dose escalation beyond the standard dose of 4500 to 5040cGy failed to achieve meaningful clinical outcomes. See Video Abstract at http://links.lww.com/DCR/B633.
MS NO ES MEJOR CUANDO SE TRATA DE TRATAR EL CNCER DE RECTO CON QUIMIORRADIACIN MULTIMODAL MS ALL DE LA DOSIS DE RADIACIN ESTNDAR DE CGY
ANTECEDENTES:En neoadyuvancia de cáncer rectal es posible encontrar muchas variaciones, en radioterapia la dosis más común que usa 5040 cGy en 28 fracciones.OBJETIVOS:El objetivo de este estudio retrospectivo fue evaluar el beneficio de dosis de radiación más altas más allá de 5040cGy en el contexto de la respuesta patológica y en su seguimiento.AJUSTE:Base de datos de un centro de cáncer terciario provincial en Canadá.PACIENTES:Se incluyeron en este estudio quinientos ocho pacientes consecutivos con cáncer de recto y enfermedad localmente avanzada (clínica T3 / T4 o N1 / N2) que recibieron quimiorradiación neoadyuvante seguida de cirugía. De los 508 pacientes, 281 recibieron la dosis de radiación estándar de 4500-5040 cGy y 227 recibieron una dosis > 5040 cGy.PRINCIPAL MEDIDA DE RESULTADO:Se analizo evolucion posquirúrgica, toxicidad tardía y seguimiento. Los resultados se evaluaron en relación con la dosis de radiación recibida.RESULTADOS:Los datos con respecto a los resultados clínicos fueron comparables entre los grupos de radiación de 4500-5040 cGy y> 5040 cGy con tasas de respuesta patológica completa de 20,9% y 15,4% respectivamente (p = 0,104); tasas de recurrencia a distancia de 17,4% y 19,4%, respectivamente (p = 0,36); tasas de recurrencia local de 3,2% y 3,5%, respectivamente (p = 0,36); y la mediana de las tasas de supervivencia global de 61 y 60,5 meses, respectivamente (p = 0,8). No se observó una correlación estadísticamente significativa de mejoría en los resultados con dosis de radiación superiores a 5040 cGy.LIMITACIONES:Este es un estudio retrospectivo.CONCLUSIONES:Nuestro estudio mostró que el aumento de la dosis más allá de la dosis estándar de 4500-5040cGy no logró resultados clínicos significativos. Consulte Video Resumen en http://links.lww.com/DCR/B633. (Traducción-Dr. Gunther Bocic).

Identifiants

pubmed: 34082437
doi: 10.1097/DCR.0000000000001986
pii: 00003453-202205000-00014
doi:

Types de publication

Journal Article Video-Audio Media

Langues

eng

Sous-ensembles de citation

IM

Pagination

692-701

Informations de copyright

Copyright © The ASCRS 2021.

Références

Sauer R, Becker H, Hohenberger W, et al.; German Rectal Cancer Study Group. Preoperative versus postoperative chemoradiotherapy for rectal cancer. N Engl J Med. 2004;351:1731–1740.
Sauer R, Liersch T, Merkel S, et al. Preoperative versus postoperative chemoradiotherapy for locally advanced rectal cancer: results of the German CAO/ARO/AIO-94 randomized phase III trial after a median follow-up of 11 years. J Clin Oncol. 2012;30:1926–1933.
Capirci C, Valentini V, Cionini L, et al. Prognostic value of pathologic complete response after neoadjuvant therapy in locally advanced rectal cancer: long-term analysis of 566 ypCR patients. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2008;72:99–107.
Maas M, Nelemans PJ, Valentini V, et al. Long-term outcome in patients with a pathological complete response after chemoradiation for rectal cancer: a pooled analysis of individual patient data. Lancet Oncol. 2010;11:835–844.
Zorcolo L, Rosman AS, Restivo A, et al. Complete pathologic response after combined modality treatment for rectal cancer and long-term survival: a meta-analysis. Ann Surg Oncol. 2012;19:2822–2832.
Sanghera P, Wong DW, McConkey CC, Geh JI, Hartley A. Chemoradiotherapy for rectal cancer: an updated analysis of factors affecting pathological response. Clin Oncol (R Coll Radiol). 2008;20:176–183.
Park IJ, You YN, Agarwal A, et al. Neoadjuvant treatment response as an early response indicator for patients with rectal cancer. J Clin Oncol. 2012;30:1770–1776.
Gunther JR, Chadha AS, Shin US, et al. Preoperative radiation dose escalation for rectal cancer using a concomitant boost strategy improves tumor downstaging without increasing toxicity: a matched-pair analysis. Adv Radiat Oncol. 2017;2:455–464.
Burbach JP, den Harder AM, Intven M, van Vulpen M, Verkooijen HM, Reerink O. Impact of radiotherapy boost on pathological complete response in patients with locally advanced rectal cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Radiother Oncol. 2014;113:1–9.
Van Wickle JD, Paulson ES, Landry JC, Erickson BA, Hall WA. Adaptive radiation dose escalation in rectal adenocarcinoma: a review. J Gastrointest Oncol. 2017;8:902–914.
Wiltshire KL, Ward IG, Swallow C, et al. Preoperative radiation with concurrent chemotherapy for resectable rectal cancer: effect of dose escalation on pathologic complete response, local recurrence-free survival, disease-free survival, and overall survival. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2006;64:709–716.
Ozyurt H, Ozden AS, Ozgen Z, Gemici C, Yaprak G. Pre- and post-surgery treatments in rectal cancer: a long-term single-centre experience. Curr Oncol. 2017;24:e24–e34.
Appelt AL, Pløen J, Vogelius IR, Bentzen SM, Jakobsen A. Radiation dose-response model for locally advanced rectal cancer after preoperative chemoradiation therapy. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2013;85:74–80.
Wegner RE, Hasan S, Renz PB, et al. Definitive chemoradiation for rectal cancer: is there a role for dose escalation? A National Cancer Database Study. Dis Colon Rectum. 2019;62:1336–1343.
Abraham AG, Joseph KJ, Thai J, et al. Lack of benefit of increasing radiation dose beyond conventional doses in patients receiving neoadjuvant chemoradiation for rectal cancer. Int J Radiat Oncol. 2020;108:E608.
Roh MS, Colangelo LH, O’Connell MJ, et al. Preoperative multimodality therapy improves disease-free survival in patients with carcinoma of the rectum: NSABP R-03. J Clin Oncol. 2009;27:5124–5130.
Park JH, Yoon SM, Yu CS, Kim JH, Kim TW, Kim JC. Randomized phase 3 trial comparing preoperative and postoperative chemoradiotherapy with capecitabine for locally advanced rectal cancer. Cancer. 2011;117:3703–3712.
Francois Y, Nemoz CJ, Baulieux J, et al. Influence of the interval between preoperative radiation therapy and surgery on downstaging and on the rate of sphincter-sparing surgery for rectal cancer: the Lyon R90-01 randomized trial. J Clin Oncol. 1999;17:2396.
Cotte E, Passot G, Decullier E, et al. Pathologic response, when increased by longer interval, is a marker but not the cause of good prognosis in rectal cancer: 17-year follow-up of the Lyon R90-01 randomized trial. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2016;94:544–553.
Lefevre JH, Mineur L, Kotti S, et al. Effect of interval (7 or 11 weeks) between neoadjuvant radiochemotherapy and surgery on complete pathologic response in rectal cancer: a multicenter, randomized, controlled trial (GRECCAR-6). J Clin Oncol. 2016;34:3773–3780.
Petrelli F, Sgroi G, Sarti E, Barni S. Increasing the interval between neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy and surgery in rectal cancer: a meta-analysis of published studies. Ann Surg. 2016;263:458–464.
Sun Z, Adam MA, Kim J, Shenoi M, Migaly J, Mantyh CR. Optimal timing to surgery after neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy for locally advanced rectal cancer. J Am Coll Surg. 2016;222:367–374.
Rödel C, Liersch T, Becker H, et al.; German Rectal Cancer Study Group. Preoperative chemoradiotherapy and postoperative chemotherapy with fluorouracil and oxaliplatin versus fluorouracil alone in locally advanced rectal cancer: initial results of the German CAO/ARO/AIO-04 randomised phase 3 trial. Lancet Oncol. 2012;13:679–687.
Abraham AG, Usmani N, Warkentin B, et al. Dosimetric parameters predicting late small bowel toxicity in patients with rectal cancer receiving neo-adjuvant chemoradiation. Pract Radiat Oncol. 2021;11:e70–e79.
Gérard JP, Azria D, Gourgou-Bourgade S, et al. Clinical outcome of the ACCORD 12/0405 PRODIGE 2 randomized trial in rectal cancer. J Clin Oncol. 2012;30:4558–4565.
Bosset JF, Magnin V, Maingon P, et al. Preoperative radiochemotherapy in rectal cancer: long-term results of a phase II trial. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2000;46:323–327.
Lee JH, Jang HS, Kim JG, et al. Lymphovascular invasion is a significant prognosticator in rectal cancer patients who receive preoperative chemoradiotherapy followed by total mesorectal excision. Ann Surg Oncol. 2012;19:1213–1221.
Kong JC, Guerra GR, Warrier SK, et al. Prognostic value of tumour regression grade in locally advanced rectal cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Colorectal Dis. 2018;20:574–585.
Hasan S, Renz P, Wegner RE, et al. Microsatellite instability (MSI) as an independent predictor of pathologic complete response (PCR) in locally advanced rectal cancer: a National Cancer Database (NCDB) analysis. Ann Surg. 2020;271:716–723.
Lino-Silva LS, Salcedo-Hernández RA, España-Ferrufino A, et al. Extramural perineural invasion in pT3 and pT4 rectal adenocarcinoma as prognostic factor after preoperative chemoradiotherapy. Hum Pathol. 2017;65:107–112.
Dhadda AS, Bessell EM, Scholefield J, Dickinson P, Zaitoun AM. Mandard tumour regression grade, perineural invasion, circumferential resection margin and post-chemoradiation nodal status strongly predict outcome in locally advanced rectal cancer treated with preoperative chemoradiotherapy. Clin Oncol (R Coll Radiol). 2014;26:197–202.
Appelt AL, Vogelius IR, Pløen J, et al. Long-term results of a randomized trial in locally advanced rectal cancer: no benefit from adding a brachytherapy boost. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2014;90:110–118.
Feeney G, Sehgal R, Sheehan M, et al. Neoadjuvant radiotherapy for rectal cancer management. World J Gastroenterol. 2019;25:4850–4869.

Auteurs

Aswin George Abraham (AG)

Division of Radiation Oncology, Cross Cancer Institute, Edmonton, Alberta, Canada.

Kurian Joseph (K)

Division of Radiation Oncology, Cross Cancer Institute, Edmonton, Alberta, Canada.
Department of Oncology, University of Alberta, Edmonton, Alberta, Canada.

Sunita Ghosh (S)

Department of Oncology, University of Alberta, Edmonton, Alberta, Canada.

Jihyun Yun (J)

Department of Oncology, University of Alberta, Edmonton, Alberta, Canada.

Brad J Warkentin (BJ)

Department of Oncology, University of Alberta, Edmonton, Alberta, Canada.

JoAnn J Thai (JJ)

Department of Oncology, University of Alberta, Edmonton, Alberta, Canada.

Winson Y Cheung (WY)

Department of Oncology, University of Calgary - Calgary, Alberta, Canada.

Yuan Xu (Y)

Department of Oncology, University of Calgary - Calgary, Alberta, Canada.

Tirath S Nijjar (TS)

Division of Radiation Oncology, Cross Cancer Institute, Edmonton, Alberta, Canada.
Department of Oncology, University of Alberta, Edmonton, Alberta, Canada.

Diane M Severin (DM)

Division of Radiation Oncology, Cross Cancer Institute, Edmonton, Alberta, Canada.
Department of Oncology, University of Alberta, Edmonton, Alberta, Canada.

Keith Tankel (K)

Division of Radiation Oncology, Cross Cancer Institute, Edmonton, Alberta, Canada.
Department of Oncology, University of Alberta, Edmonton, Alberta, Canada.

Alysa M Fairchild (AM)

Division of Radiation Oncology, Cross Cancer Institute, Edmonton, Alberta, Canada.
Department of Oncology, University of Alberta, Edmonton, Alberta, Canada.

Nawaid Usmani (N)

Division of Radiation Oncology, Cross Cancer Institute, Edmonton, Alberta, Canada.
Department of Oncology, University of Alberta, Edmonton, Alberta, Canada.

Articles similaires

[Redispensing of expensive oral anticancer medicines: a practical application].

Lisanne N van Merendonk, Kübra Akgöl, Bastiaan Nuijen
1.00
Humans Antineoplastic Agents Administration, Oral Drug Costs Counterfeit Drugs

Smoking Cessation and Incident Cardiovascular Disease.

Jun Hwan Cho, Seung Yong Shin, Hoseob Kim et al.
1.00
Humans Male Smoking Cessation Cardiovascular Diseases Female
Humans United States Aged Cross-Sectional Studies Medicare Part C
1.00
Humans Yoga Low Back Pain Female Male

Classifications MeSH