Quality of life in a randomized trial comparing two neoadjuvant regimens for locally advanced rectal cancer-INCAGI004.
Chemotherapy
Neoadjuvant treatment
Quality of life
Radiotherapy
Rectal cancer
Surgical oncology
Journal
Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer
ISSN: 1433-7339
Titre abrégé: Support Care Cancer
Pays: Germany
ID NLM: 9302957
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
Aug 2022
Aug 2022
Historique:
received:
29
09
2021
accepted:
11
04
2022
pubmed:
30
4
2022
medline:
24
6
2022
entrez:
29
4
2022
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
Neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy (neoCRT) followed by surgery is the standard of care for locally advanced rectal cancer (LARC), but the emergence of different drug regimens may result in different response rates. Good clinical response translates into greater sphincter preservation, but quality of life (QOL) may be impaired after treatment due to chemoradiotherapy and surgical side effects. To prospectively evaluate the impact of clinical response and surgical resection on QOL in a randomized trial comparing two different neoCRT regimens. Stage II and III rectal cancer patients were randomized to receive neoCRT with either capecitabine (group 1) or 5-Fu and leucovorin (group 2) concomitant to long-course radiotherapy. Clinical downstaging was accessed using MRI 6-8 weeks after treatment. EORTCs QLQ-C30 and CR38 were applied before treatment (T0), after neoCRT (T1), after rectal resection (T2), early after adjuvant chemotherapy (T3), and 1 year after the end of treatment or stoma closure (T4). The Wexner scale was used for fecal incontinence evaluation at T4. A C30SummaryScore (Geisinger and cols.) was calculated to compare QOL results. Thirty-two patients were assigned to group 1 and 31 to group 2. Clinical downstaging occurred in 70.0% of group 1 and 53.3% of group 2 (p = 0.288), and sphincter preservation was 83.3% in group 1 and 80.0% in group 2 (p = 0.111). No significant difference in QOL was detected when comparing the two treatment groups after neoCRT using QLQ-C30. However, the CR38 module detected differences in micturition problems (15.3 points), gastrointestinal problems (15.3 points), defecation problems (11.8 points), and sexual satisfaction (13.3 points) favoring the capecitabine group. C30SummaryScore detected significant improvement comparing T0 to T1 and deterioration comparing T1 to T2 (p = 0.025). The mean Wexner scale score was 9.2, and a high score correlated with symptoms of diarrhea and defecation problems at T4. QOL was equivalent between groups after neoCRT except for micturition problems, gastrointestinal problems, defecation problems, and sexual satisfaction favoring the capecitabine arm after. The overall QOL using the C30SummaryScore was improved after neoCRT, but decreased following rectal resection, returning to basal levels at late evaluation. Fecal incontinence was high after sphincter preservation. ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03428529.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
BACKGROUND
Neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy (neoCRT) followed by surgery is the standard of care for locally advanced rectal cancer (LARC), but the emergence of different drug regimens may result in different response rates. Good clinical response translates into greater sphincter preservation, but quality of life (QOL) may be impaired after treatment due to chemoradiotherapy and surgical side effects.
OBJECTIVE
OBJECTIVE
To prospectively evaluate the impact of clinical response and surgical resection on QOL in a randomized trial comparing two different neoCRT regimens.
METHODS
METHODS
Stage II and III rectal cancer patients were randomized to receive neoCRT with either capecitabine (group 1) or 5-Fu and leucovorin (group 2) concomitant to long-course radiotherapy. Clinical downstaging was accessed using MRI 6-8 weeks after treatment. EORTCs QLQ-C30 and CR38 were applied before treatment (T0), after neoCRT (T1), after rectal resection (T2), early after adjuvant chemotherapy (T3), and 1 year after the end of treatment or stoma closure (T4). The Wexner scale was used for fecal incontinence evaluation at T4. A C30SummaryScore (Geisinger and cols.) was calculated to compare QOL results.
RESULTS
RESULTS
Thirty-two patients were assigned to group 1 and 31 to group 2. Clinical downstaging occurred in 70.0% of group 1 and 53.3% of group 2 (p = 0.288), and sphincter preservation was 83.3% in group 1 and 80.0% in group 2 (p = 0.111). No significant difference in QOL was detected when comparing the two treatment groups after neoCRT using QLQ-C30. However, the CR38 module detected differences in micturition problems (15.3 points), gastrointestinal problems (15.3 points), defecation problems (11.8 points), and sexual satisfaction (13.3 points) favoring the capecitabine group. C30SummaryScore detected significant improvement comparing T0 to T1 and deterioration comparing T1 to T2 (p = 0.025). The mean Wexner scale score was 9.2, and a high score correlated with symptoms of diarrhea and defecation problems at T4.
CONCLUSIONS
CONCLUSIONS
QOL was equivalent between groups after neoCRT except for micturition problems, gastrointestinal problems, defecation problems, and sexual satisfaction favoring the capecitabine arm after. The overall QOL using the C30SummaryScore was improved after neoCRT, but decreased following rectal resection, returning to basal levels at late evaluation. Fecal incontinence was high after sphincter preservation.
TRIAL REGISTRATION
BACKGROUND
ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03428529.
Identifiants
pubmed: 35486228
doi: 10.1007/s00520-022-07059-6
pii: 10.1007/s00520-022-07059-6
doi:
Substances chimiques
Capecitabine
6804DJ8Z9U
Fluorouracil
U3P01618RT
Banques de données
ClinicalTrials.gov
['NCT03428529']
Types de publication
Journal Article
Randomized Controlled Trial
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
6557-6572Informations de copyright
© 2022. The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature.
Références
Bray F, Ferlay J, Soerjomataram I, Siegel RL, Torre LA, Jemal A. Global cancer statistics 2018: GLOBOCAN estimates of incidence and mortality worldwide for 36 cancers in 185 countries. CA: A Cancer Journal for Clinicians [Internet]. 2018 [cited 2020 Dec 5];68(6):394–424. Available from: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/30207593/
Instituto Nacional de Câncer José Alencar Gomes da Silva. Estimativa 2018: incidência de câncer no Brasil. Rio de Janeiro, Brazil: INCA; 2017. 128 p
Amin MB, Edge S, Greene F, Byrd DR, Brookland RK, Washington MK, Gershenwald JE, Compton CC, Hess KR et al (2017) AJCC Cancer Staging Manual (8th edition), 8th edn. Springer International Publishing, American Joint Commission on Cancer
doi: 10.1007/978-3-319-40618-3
Sauer R, Becker H, Hohenberger W, Rödel C, Wittekind C, Fietkau R et al (2004) Preoperative versus postoperative chemoradiotherapy for rectal cancer. N Engl J Med 351(17):1731–40. https://doi.org/10.1056/NEJMoa040694
doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa040694
pubmed: 15496622
Hofheinz R-D, Wenz F, Post S, Matzdorff A, Laechelt S, Hartmann JT et al (2012) Chemoradiotherapy with capecitabine versus fluorouracil for locally advanced rectal cancer: a randomised, multicentre, non-inferiority, phase 3 trial. Lancet Oncol 13(6):579–588
doi: 10.1016/S1470-2045(12)70116-X
Kim JS, Kim JS, Cho MJ, Yoon WH, Song KS (2006) Comparison of the efficacy of oral capecitabine versus bolus 5-FU in preoperative radiotherapy of locally advanced rectal cancer. J Korean Med Sci 21(1):52–57
doi: 10.3346/jkms.2006.21.1.52
Saif MW, Hashmi S, Zelterman D, Almhanna K, Kim R (2008) Capecitabine vs continuous infusion 5-FU in neoadjuvant treatment of rectal cancer. A retrospective review. Int J Color Dis 23(2):139–45
doi: 10.1007/s00384-007-0382-z
Allegra CJ, Yothers G, O’Connell MJ, Beart RW, Wozniak TF, Pitot HC et al (2015) Neoadjuvant 5-FU or capecitabine plus radiation with or without oxaliplatin in rectal cancer patients: a phase III randomized clinical trial. J Natl Cancer Inst 107(11)
O’Connell MJ, Colangelo LH, Beart RW, Petrelli NJ, Allegra CJ, Sharif S et al (2014) Capecitabine and oxaliplatin in the preoperative multimodality treatment of rectal cancer: surgical end points from National Surgical Adjuvant Breast and Bowel Project trial R-04. J Clin Oncol 32(18):1927–1934
doi: 10.1200/JCO.2013.53.7753
Sawada N, Ishikawa T, Sekiguchi F, Tanaka Y, Ishitsuka H (1999) X-Ray Irradiation induces thymidine phosphorylase and enhances the efficacy of capecitabine (Xeloda) in human cancer xenografts. Clin Cancer Res 5(10)
Schüller J, Cassidy J, Dumont E, Roos B, Durston S, Banken L et al (2000) Preferential activation of capecitabine in tumor following oral administration to colorectal cancer patients. Cancer Chemother Pharmacol 45(4):291–297
doi: 10.1007/s002800050043
Twelves C, Boyer M, Findlay M, Cassidy J, Weitzel C, Barker C et al (2001) Capecitabine (Xeloda) improves medical resource use compared with 5-fluorouracil plus leucovorin in a phase III trial conducted in patients with advanced colorectal carcinoma. Eur J Cancer (Oxford, English: 1990) 37(5):597–604
doi: 10.1016/S0959-8049(00)00444-5
Heald RJ, Moran BJ, Ryall RDH, Sexton R, MacFarlane JK. Rectal Cancer: The Basingstoke experience of total mesorectal excision, 1978–1997. Arch Surg [Internet]. 1998 [cited 2021 Mar 20];133(8):894–9. Available from: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/9711965/
Rödel C, Graeven U, Fietkau R, Hohenberger W, Hothorn T, Arnold D, et al. Oxaliplatin added to fluorouracil-based preoperative chemoradiotherapy and postoperative chemotherapy of locally advanced rectal cancer (the German CAO/ARO/AIO-04 study): Final results of the multicentre, open-label, randomised, phase 3 trial. Lancet Oncol [Internet]. 2015 [cited 2021 Mar 20];16(8):979–89. Available from: https://linkinghub.elsevier.com/retrieve/pii/S147020451500159X
Miles WE (1931) The present position of the radical abdomino-perineal operation for cancer of the rectum in regard to mortality and post-operative recurrence. Proc R Soc Med 24(7):989–991
pubmed: 19988156
pmcid: 2182882
Rullier E, Denost Q, Vendrely V, Rullier A, Laurent C. Low rectal cancer. Diseases of the Colon & Rectum [Internet]. 2013 [cited 2021 Mar 20];56(5):560–7. Available from: https://journals.lww.com/00003453-201305000-00004
Engel J, Kerr J, Schlesinger-Raab A, Eckel R, Sauer H, Hölzel D. Quality of life in rectal cancer patients. Ann Surg [Internet]. 2003 [cited 2021 Mar 20];238(2):203–13. Available from: /pmc/articles/PMC1422675/
Havenga K, Enker WE, McDermott K, Cohen AM, Minsky BD, Guillem J (1996) Male and female sexual and urinary function after total mesorectal excision with autonomic nerve preservation for carcinoma of the rectum. J Am Coll Surg 182(6):495–502
pubmed: 8646349
Ridolfi TJ, Berger N, Ludwig KA. Low anterior resection syndrome: current management and future directions. 2016.
Aaronson NK, Ahmedzai S, Bergman B, Bullinger M, Cull A, Duez NJ, et al. The European organization for research and treatment of cancer QLQ-C30: a quality-of-life instrument for use in international clinical trials in oncology. J Natl Cancer Inst [Internet]. 1993 [cited 2021 Mar 20];85(5):365–76. Available from: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/8433390/
Sprangers MA, Velde A, Aaronson NK (1999) The construction and testing of the EORTC colorectal cancer-specific quality of life questionnaire module (QLQ-CR38). European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer Study Group on Quality of Life. Eur J Cancer (Oxford, English: 1990) 35(2):238–47
doi: 10.1016/S0959-8049(98)00357-8
Whistance RN, Conroy T, Chie W, Costantini A, Sezer O, Koller M et al (2009) Clinical and psychometric validation of the EORTC QLQ-CR29 questionnaire module to assess health-related quality of life in patients with colorectal cancer. Eur J Cancer (Oxford, England: 1990) 45(17):3017–26
doi: 10.1016/j.ejca.2009.08.014
Maslyankov S, Penchev D, Todorov G, Vladov N (2015) A meta-analysis of quality of life, estimated by questionnaires of the European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) after rectal cancer surgery. Chirurgia (Bucharest, Romania: 1990) 110(4):356–61
Grumann MM, Noack EM, Hoffmann IA, Schlag PM. Comparison of quality of life in patients undergoing abdominoperineal extirpation or anterior resection for rectal cancer. 2001.
Phillips R, Gandhi M, Cheung YB, Findlay MP, Win KM, Hai HH et al (2015) Summary scores captured changes in subjects’ QoL as measured by the multiple scales of the EORTC QLQ-C30. J Clin Epidemiol 68(8):895–902
doi: 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2015.02.011
Giesinger JM, Kieffer JM, Fayers PM, Groenvold M, Petersen MA, Scott NW et al (2016) Replication and validation of higher order models demonstrated that a summary score for the EORTC QLQ-C30 is robust. J Clin Epidemiol 1(69):79–88
doi: 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2015.08.007
Pompili C, Koller M, Velikova G, Franks K, Absolom K, Callister M et al (2018) EORTC QLQ-C30 summary score reliably detects changes in QoL three months after anatomic lung resection for Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer (NSCLC). Lung Cancer (Amsterdam, Netherlands) 123:149–154
doi: 10.1016/j.lungcan.2018.07.021
Husson O, Rooij BH, Kieffer J, Oerlemans S, Mols F, Aaronson NK et al (2020) The EORTC QLQ-C30 summary score as prognostic factor for survival of patients with cancer in the “real-world”: results from the population-based PROFILES Registry. Oncologist 25(4)
AJCC Cancer Staging Handbook - From the AJCC Cancer Staging Manual | Stephen Edge | Springer [Internet]. [cited 2020 Dec 7]. Available from: https://www.springer.com/gp/book/9780387884424
Paiva CE, Carneseca EC, Barroso EM, de Camargos MG, Alfano ACC, Rugno FC et al (2014) Further evaluation of the EORTC QLQ-C30 psychometric properties in a large Brazilian cancer patient cohort as a function of their educational status. Support Care Cancer 22(8):2151–2160
pubmed: 24652051
Souza R, Barros C, Souza R, Cesar M, Rosa D, Bin F et al (2005) Avaliação da qualidade de vida de doentes de carcinoma retal, submetidos à ressecção com preservação esfincteriana ou à amputação abdominoperineal. Rev Bras Coloproct 25(3):235–240
Rusavy Z, Jansova M, Kalis V (2014) Anal incontinence severity assessment tools used worldwide. Int J Gynecol Obstet 126(2):146–50. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijgo.2014.02.025
doi: 10.1016/j.ijgo.2014.02.025
D’amico F, Wexner SD, Vaizey CJ, Elia Gouynou C, Danese S, Peyrin-Biroulet L. Tools for fecal incontinence assessment: lessons for inflammatory bowel disease trials based on a systematic review.
Fonseca AM, Meinberg MF, Lucas DV, Monteiro MV, Figueiredo EM, Fonseca L et al (2016) Cultural adaptation and validation of the Wexner scale in patients with anal incontinence in a Brazilian population. Int Urogynecol J 27(6):959–963
doi: 10.1007/s00192-015-2927-y
Osoba D (1999) Interpreting the meaningfulness of changes in health-related quality of life scores: lessons from studies in adults. Int J Cancer Suppl 12
Hathiramani S, Pettengell R, Moir H, Younis A. Relaxation versus exercise for improved quality of life in lymphoma survivors-a randomised controlled trial. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11764-020-00941-4
Vos JAM, Duineveld LAM, Wieldraaijer T, Wind J, Busschers WB, Sert E et al (2021) Effect of general practitioner-led versus surgeon-led colon cancer survivorship care, with or without eHealth support, on quality of life (I CARE): an interim analysis of 1-year results of a randomised, controlled trial. Lancet Oncol 22(8):1175–1187
doi: 10.1016/S1470-2045(21)00273-4
Lee KA, Dunne M, Small C, Kelly PJ, Mcardle O, O’sullivan J, et al. Acta Oncologica (ICORG 05–03): prospective randomized non-inferiority phase III trial comparing two radiation schedules in malignant spinal cord compression (not proceeding with surgical decompression); the quality of life analysis (ICORG 05–03): prospective randomized non-inferiority phase III trial comparing two radiation schedules in malignant spinal cord compression (not proceeding with surgical decompression); the quality of life analysis. 2018; Available from: https://www.tandfonline.com/action/journalInformation?journalCode=ionc20
Nesbakken A, Nygaard K, Lunde OC (2000) Outcome and late functional results after anastomotic leakage following mesorectal excision for rectal cancer [Internet]. Br J Surg 88. Available from: www.bjs.co.uk
Anthony T, Long J, Hynan LS, Sarosi GA, Nwariaku F, Huth J et al (2003) Surgical complications exert a lasting effect on disease-specific health-related quality of life for patients with colorectal cancer. Surgery 134(2):119–125
doi: 10.1067/msy.2003.212
Brown SR, Mathew R, Keding A, Marshall HC, Brown JM, Jayne DG (2014) The impact of postoperative complications on long-term quality of life after curative colorectal cancer surgery. Ann Surg [Internet]. [cited 2022 Feb 23];259(5):916–23. Available from: https://journals.lww.com/annalsofsurgery/Fulltext/2014/05000/The_Impact_of_Postoperative_Complications_on.13.aspx
Lin JK, Tan CHE, Yang MC (2015) Comparing the effectiveness of capecitabine versus 5-fluorouracil/leucovorin therapy for elderly Taiwanese stage III colorectal cancer patients based on quality-of-life measures (QLQ-C30 and QLQ-CR38) and a new cost assessment tool. Health and Quality of Life Outcomes [Internet]. [cited 2021 Mar 27];13(1):61. Available from: http://hqlo.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s12955-015-0261-1
Seymour MT, Thompson LC, Wasan HS, Middleton G, Brewster AE, Shepherd SF et al (2011) Chemotherapy options in elderly and frail patients with metastatic colorectal cancer (MRC FOCUS2): an open-label, randomised factorial trial. Lancet (London, England) 377(9779):1749–1759
doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(11)60399-1
Conroy T, Hebbar M, Bennouna J, Ducreux M, Ychou M, Llédo G et al (2010) Quality-of-life findings from a randomised phase-III study of XELOX vs FOLFOX-6 in metastatic colorectal cancer. Br J Cancer 102(1):59–67
doi: 10.1038/sj.bjc.6605442
Bonjer HJ, Deijen CL, Abis GA, Cuesta MA, van der Pas MHGM, de Lange-de Klerk ESM et al (2015) A randomized trial of laparoscopic versus open surgery for rectal cancer. N Engl J Med 372(14):1324–1332
doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa1414882
Rapkin BD, Schwartz CE (2019) Advancing quality-of-life research by deepening our understanding of response shift: a unifying theory of appraisal. Vol. 28, Quality of Life Research. Springer International Publishing; p. 2623–30
Schwartz CE, Sprangers MAG (1999) Methodological approaches for assessing response shift in longitudinal health-related quality-of-life research. In: Social Science and Medicine [Internet]. Soc Sci Med [cited 2021 Mar 27]. p. 1531–48. Available from: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/10400255/
van der Valk MJM, Hilling DE, Meershoek-Klein Kranenbarg E, Peeters KCMJ, Kapiteijn E, Tsonaka R et al (2019) Quality of life after curative resection for rectal cancer in patients treated with adjuvant chemotherapy compared with observation: results of the randomized phase III SCRIPT Trial. Dis Colon Rectum 62(6):711–720
doi: 10.1097/DCR.0000000000001336
Sturiale A, Martellucci J, Zurli L, Vaccaro C, Brusciano L, Limongelli P et al (2017) Long-term functional follow-up after anterior rectal resection for cancer. Int J Color Dis [Internet]. [cited 2021 Mar 27];32(1):83–8. Available from: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/27695976/
Pieniowski EHA, Palmer GJ, Juul T, Lagergren P, Johar A, Emmertsen KJ et al (2019) Low anterior resection syndrome and quality of life after sphincter-sparing rectal cancer surgery: a long-term longitudinal follow-up. Diseases of the Colon and Rectum [Internet]. [cited 2021 Mar 27];62(1):14–20. Available from: https://journals.lww.com/00003453-201901000-00005
Kasper B (2020) The EORTC QLQ-C30 summary score as a prognostic factor for survival of patients with cancer: a commentary. Available from: www.TheOncologist.com
Husson O, de Rooij BH, Kieffer J, Oerlemans S, Mols F, Aaronson NK et al (2019) The EORTC QLQ-C30 summary score as prognostic factor for survival of patients with cancer in the “real-world”: results from the population-based PROFILES Registry
Arraras JI, Suárez J, Arias-de-la-Vega F, Vera R, Ibáñez B, Asin G et al (2013) Quality of life assessment by applying EORTC questionnaires to rectal cancer patients after surgery and neoadjuvant and adjuvant treatment. Revista espanola de enfermedades digestivas 105(5):255–261
doi: 10.4321/S1130-01082013000500003
Dumont F, Ayadi M, Goéré D, Honoré C, Elias D (2013) Comparison of fecal continence and quality of life between intersphincteric resection and abdominoperineal resection plus perineal colostomy for ultra-low rectal cancer. J Surg Oncol 108(4):225–229
doi: 10.1002/jso.23379
Konanz J, Herrle F, Weiss C, Post S, Kienle P (2013) Quality of life of patients after low anterior, intersphincteric, and abdominoperineal resection for rectal cancer–a matched-pair analysis. Int J Colorectal Dis 28(5):679–688
doi: 10.1007/s00384-013-1683-z
Kasparek MS, Hassan I, Cima RR, Larson DR, Gullerud RE, Wolff BG (2011) Quality of life after coloanal anastomosis and abdominoperineal resection for distal rectal cancers: sphincter preservation vs quality of life. Color Dis 13(8):872–877
doi: 10.1111/j.1463-1318.2010.02347.x
Araujo ROC, Valadão M, Borges D, Linhares E, de Jesus JP, Ferreira CG et al (2015) Nonoperative management of rectal cancer after chemoradiation opposed to resection after complete clinical response. A comparative study. Eur J Surg Oncol 41(11)
Chadi SA, Malcomson L, Ensor J, Riley RD, Vaccaro CA, Rossi GL et al (2018) Factors affecting local regrowth after watch and wait for patients with a clinical complete response following chemoradiotherapy in rectal cancer (InterCoRe consortium): an individual participant data meta-analysis. Lancet Gastroenterol Hepatol 3(12)
Kamiya T, Uehara K, Nakayama G, Ishigure K, Kobayashi S, Hiramatsu K et al (2016) Early results of multicenter phase II trial of perioperative oxaliplatin and capecitabine without radiotherapy for high-risk rectal cancer: CORONA I study. European Journal of Surgical Oncology [Internet]. [cited 2021 Mar 20];42(6):829–35. Available from: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/26968228/
Hasegawa S, Goto S, Matsumoto T, Hida K, Kawada K, Matsusue R et al (2017) A multicenter phase 2 study on the feasibility and efficacy of neoadjuvant chemotherapy without radiotherapy for locally advanced rectal cancer. Annals of Surgical Oncology [Internet]. [cited 2021 Mar 19];24(12):3587–95. Available from: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/28685354/