Long-term outcome in patients with a pathological complete response after chemoradiation for rectal cancer: a pooled analysis of individual patient data.

Department of Surgery, Maastricht University Medical Centre, Maastricht, Netherlands.
The Lancet Oncology (Impact Factor: 24.73). 09/2010; 11(9):835-44. DOI: 10.1016/S1470-2045(10)70172-8
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT Locally advanced rectal cancer is usually treated with preoperative chemoradiation. After chemoradiation and surgery, 15-27% of the patients have no residual viable tumour at pathological examination, a pathological complete response (pCR). This study established whether patients with pCR have better long-term outcome than do those without pCR.
In PubMed, Medline, and Embase we identified 27 articles, based on 17 different datasets, for long-term outcome of patients with and without pCR. 14 investigators agreed to provide individual patient data. All patients underwent chemoradiation and total mesorectal excision. Primary outcome was 5-year disease-free survival. Kaplan-Meier survival functions were computed and hazard ratios (HRs) calculated, with the Cox proportional hazards model. Subgroup analyses were done to test for effect modification by other predicting factors. Interstudy heterogeneity was assessed for disease-free survival and overall survival with forest plots and the Q test.
484 of 3105 included patients had a pCR. Median follow-up for all patients was 48 months (range 0-277). 5-year crude disease-free survival was 83.3% (95% CI 78.8-87.0) for patients with pCR (61/419 patients had disease recurrence) and 65.6% (63.6-68.0) for those without pCR (747/2263; HR 0.44, 95% CI 0.34-0.57; p<0.0001). The Q test and forest plots did not suggest significant interstudy variation. The adjusted HR for pCR for failure was 0.54 (95% CI 0.40-0.73), indicating that patients with pCR had a significantly increased probability of disease-free survival. The adjusted HR for disease-free survival for administration of adjuvant chemotherapy was 0.91 (95% CI 0.73-1.12). The effect of pCR on disease-free survival was not modified by other prognostic factors.
Patients with pCR after chemoradiation have better long-term outcome than do those without pCR. pCR might be indicative of a prognostically favourable biological tumour profile with less propensity for local or distant recurrence and improved survival.

  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Treatment for locally advanced rectal cancer (LARC) consists of chemoradiation therapy (CRT) and surgery. Approximately 15% of patients show a pathological complete response (pCR). Increased pCR-rates can be achieved through dose escalation, thereby increasing the number patients eligible for organ-preservation to improve quality of life (QoL). A randomized comparison of 65 versus 50Gy with external-beam radiation alone has not yet been performed. This trial investigates pCR rate, clinical response, toxicity, QoL and (disease-free) survival in LARC patients treated with 65Gy (boost + chemoradiation) compared with 50Gy standard chemoradiation (sCRT). This study follows the 'cohort multiple randomized controlled trial' (cmRCT) design: rectal cancer patients are included in a prospective cohort that registers clinical baseline, follow-up, survival and QoL data. At enrollment, patients are asked consent to offer them experimental interventions in the future. Eligible patients-histologically confirmed LARC (T3NxM0 <1 mm from mesorectal fascia, T4NxM0 or TxN2M0) located ≤10 cm from the anorectal transition who provided consent for experimental intervention offers-form a subcohort (n = 120). From this subcohort, a random sample is offered the boost prior to sCRT (n = 60), which they may accept or refuse. Informed consent is signed only after acceptance of the boost. Non-selected patients in the subcohort (n = 60) undergo sCRT alone and are not notified that they participate in the control arm until the trial is completed. sCRT consists of 50Gy (25 × 2Gy) with concomitant capecitabine. The boost (without chemotherapy) is given prior to sCRT and consists of 15 Gy (5 × 3Gy) delivered to the gross tumor volume (GTV). The primary endpoint is pCR (TRG 1). Secondary endpoints include acute grade 3-4 toxicity, good pathologic response (TRG 1-2), clinical response, surgical complications, QoL and (disease-free) survival. Data is analyzed by intention to treat. The boost is delivered prior to sCRT so that GTV adjustment for tumor shrinkage during sCRT is not necessary. Small margins also aim to limit irradiation of healthy tissue. The cmRCT design provides opportunity to overcome common shortcomings of classic RCTs, such as slow recruitment, disappointment-bias in control arm patients and poor generalizability. The Netherlands Trials Register NL46051.041.13. Registered 22 August 2013. NCT01951521 . Registered 18 September 2013.
    Trials 12/2015; 16(1). DOI:10.1186/s13063-015-0586-4 · 2.12 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Organ toxicity in cancer therapy is likely caused by an underlying disposition for given pathophysiological mechanisms in the individual patient. Mechanistic data on treatment toxicity at the patient level are scarce; hence, probabilistic and translational linkages among different layers of data information, all the way from cellular targets of the therapeutic exposure to tissues and ultimately the patient's organ systems, are required. Throughout all of these layers, untoward treatment effects may be viewed as perturbations that propagate within a hierarchically structured network from one functional level to the next, at each level causing disturbances that reach a critical threshold, which ultimately are manifested as clinical adverse reactions. Advances in bioinformatics permit compilation of information across the various levels of data organization, presumably enabling integrated systems biology-based prediction of treatment safety. In view of the complexity of biological responses to cancer therapy, this communication reports on a "top-down" strategy, starting with the systematic assessment of adverse effects within a defined therapeutic context and proceeding to transcriptomic and proteomic analysis of relevant patient tissue samples and computational exploration of the resulting data, with the ultimate aim of utilizing information from functional connectivity networks in evaluation of patient safety in multimodal cancer therapy.
    International Journal of Molecular Sciences 12/2014; 15(12):22835-22856. DOI:10.3390/ijms151222835 · 2.46 Impact Factor