Organ Preservation Among Patients With Clinically Node-Positive Rectal Cancer: Is It Really More Dangerous?

Nenhuma Miniatura disponível
Citações na Scopus
25
Tipo de produção
article
Data de publicação
2019
DOI
Scopus
Web of Science
PubMed
Título da Revista
ISSN da Revista
Título do Volume
Editora
LIPPINCOTT WILLIAMS & WILKINS
Autores
JULIAO, Guilherme Pagin Sao
VAILATI, Bruna Borba
FERNANDEZ, Laura M.
FIGUEIREDO, Nuno
Citação
DISEASES OF THE COLON & RECTUM, v.62, n.6, p.675-683, 2019
Projetos de Pesquisa
Unidades Organizacionais
Fascículo
Resumo
BACKGROUND: Select patients with complete clinical response to chemoradiation have been managed without radical surgery. The presence of radiologic evidence of nodal metastases at baseline could be a risk factor for local tumor regrowth, more advanced stage at the time of recurrence, and worse distant metastases-free survival. OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to compare the outcomes of patients with baseline node-positive and node-negative cancer after neoadjuvant chemoradiation and complete clinical response managed nonoperatively. DESIGN: This was a retrospective review of consecutive patients with nonmetastatic distal rectal cancer undergoing neoadjuvant chemoradiation. PATIENTS: Consecutive patients with clinical and radiologic evidence of complete clinical response at 8 to 10 weeks were managed nonoperatively and enrolled in a strict follow-up program (watch and wait). Patients with incomplete clinical response or tumor regrowth after initial complete clinical response were referred to surgery. MAIN OUTCOMES MEASURES: Surgery-free and distant metastases-free survival were compared between patients according to nodal status at baseline. RESULTS: A total of 117 patients with node-positive and 218 with node-negative cancer at baseline were reviewed. Overall, 62 (53.0%; node positive) and 135 (61.9%; node negative) achieved a complete clinical response and were managed nonoperatively (p = 0.13). Patients with baseline node-positive cancer had similar rates of pathologic nodal metastases at the time of recurrence. Five-year surgery-free (39.7% vs 46.8%; p = 0.2) and distant metastases-free survival (77.5% vs 80.5%; p = 0.49) were similar between baseline node-positive and node-negative patients. LIMITATIONS: This was a retrospective study with a small sample size and possible inaccurate nodal staging. CONCLUSIONS: Patients with rectal cancer with node-positive cancer at baseline who develop a complete clinical response after neoadjuvant chemoradiation are not at increased risk for local tumor regrowth or development of more advanced disease at the time of recurrence. These patients seem to be safe candidates for organ-preserving strategies after achieving complete clinical response. See Video Abstract at http://links.lww.com/DCR/A902.
Palavras-chave
Lymph node metastases, Organ preservation, Rectal cancer, Watch and wait
URI
https://observatorio.fm.usp.br/handle/OPI/32475
Referências
  1. Al-Sukhni E, 2012, ANN SURG ONCOL, V19, P2212, DOI 10.1245/s10434-011-2210-5
  2. Appelt AL, 2015, LANCET ONCOL, V16, P919, DOI 10.1016/S1470-2045(15)00120-5
  3. Bipat S, 2004, RADIOLOGY, V232, P773, DOI 10.1148/radiol.2323031368
  4. Dossa F, 2017, LANCET GASTROENTEROL, V2, P501, DOI 10.1016/S2468-1253(17)30074-2
  5. Habr-Gama A, 2004, ANN SURG, V240, P711, DOI 10.1097/01.sla.0000141194.27992.32
  6. Habr-Gama A, 2017, DIS COLON RECTUM, V60, P586, DOI 10.1097/DCR.0000000000000830
  7. Habr-Gama A, 2016, DIS COLON RECTUM, V59, P264, DOI 10.1097/DCR.0000000000000543
  8. Habr-Gama A, 2014, INT J RADIAT ONCOL, V88, P822, DOI 10.1016/j.ijrobp.2013.12.012
  9. Habr-Gama A, 2013, DIS COLON RECTUM, V56, P1109, DOI 10.1097/DCR.0b013e3182a25c4e
  10. Habr-Gama A, 2010, DIS COLON RECTUM, V53, P1692, DOI 10.1007/DCR.0b013e3181f42b89
  11. Jung KU, 2015, J SURG ONCOL, V111, P439, DOI 10.1002/jso.23835
  12. Kiran RP, 2012, ANN SURG ONCOL, V19, P1206, DOI 10.1245/s10434-011-2044-1
  13. Kusters M, 2010, EJSO-EUR J SURG ONC, V36, P470, DOI 10.1016/j.ejso.2009.11.011
  14. Maas M, 2011, J CLIN ONCOL, V29, P4633, DOI 10.1200/JCO.2011.37.7176
  15. Maas M, 2010, LANCET ONCOL, V11, P835, DOI 10.1016/S1470-2045(10)70172-8
  16. Mace AG, 2015, DIS COLON RECTUM, V58, P32, DOI 10.1097/DCR.0000000000000266
  17. Martens MH, 2016, JNCI-J NATL CANCER I, V108, DOI 10.1093/jnci/djw171
  18. Park IJ, 2013, DIS COLON RECTUM, V56, P135, DOI 10.1097/DCR.0b013e318278ff8a
  19. Perez RO, 2009, DIS COLON RECTUM, V52, P1278, DOI 10.1007/DCR.0b013e3181a0af4b
  20. Quah HM, 2008, CANCER-AM CANCER SOC, V113, P57, DOI 10.1002/cncr.23516
  21. Renehan AG, 2016, LANCET ONCOL, V17, P174, DOI 10.1016/S1470-2045(15)00467-2
  22. van der Valk MJM, 2018, LANCET, V391, P2537, DOI 10.1016/S0140-6736(18)31078-X

Coleções
Artigos e Materiais de Revistas Científicas - FM/MGT
Artigos e Materiais de Revistas Científicas - HC/InRad
Artigos e Materiais de Revistas Científicas - ODS/03