Organ Preservation Riskier in Rectal Cancer

TOPLINE:
Patients with rectal cancer managed by watch and wait and subsequent local regrowth have a higher risk for distant metastases than those undergoing immediate surgery. The new study highlights the importance of timely surgical intervention to improve distant metastases–free survival rates.
METHODOLOGY:
Organ preservation has become an attractive alternative to surgery for patients with rectal cancer who achieve a clinical complete response after neoadjuvant therapy, with the risk for local regrowth after initial clinical complete response being around 25%-30%.
The new study aimed to compare the risk for distant metastases between patients with local regrowth after watch and wait and patients with near-complete pathologic response managed by total mesorectal excision.
A total of 508 patients with local regrowth were included from the International Watch & Wait Database, and 893 patients with near-complete pathologic response were included from the Spanish Rectal Cancer Project.
The primary endpoint was distant metastases–free survival at 3 years from the decision to watch and wait or total mesorectal excision, and the secondary endpoints included possible risk factors associated with distant metastases.
TAKEAWAY:
Patients with local regrowth had a significantly higher rate of distant metastases (rate, 22.8% vs 10.2%; P ≤.001) than those with near-complete pathologic response managed by total mesorectal excision.
Distant metastases–free survival at 3 years was significantly worse for patients with local regrowth (rate, 75% vs 87%; P < .001).
Independent risk factors for distant metastases included local regrowth (vs total mesorectal excision at reassessment; P = .001), ypT3-4 status (P = .016), and ypN+ status (P = .001) at the time of surgery.
Patients with local regrowth had worse distant metastases–free survival across all pathologic stages than those managed by total mesorectal excision.
IN PRACTICE:
“Patients with local regrowth appear to have a higher risk for subsequent distant metastases development than patients with near-complete pathologic response managed by total mesorectal excision at restaging irrespective of final pathology,” the authors of the study wrote.
SOURCE:
This study was led by Laura M. Fernandez, MD, of the Champalimaud Foundation in Lisbon, Portugal. It was published online in Journal of Clinical Oncology.
LIMITATIONS:
This study’s limitations included the heterogeneity in defining clinical complete response and the decision to watch and wait across different institutions. Additionally, the majority of patients did not receive total neoadjuvant therapy regimens, which may have affected the generalizability of the findings. The study also had a considerable amount of follow-up losses, which could have introduced bias.
DISCLOSURES:
This study was supported by the European Society of Surgical Oncology, the Champalimaud Foundation, the Bas Mulder Award, the Alpe d’HuZes Foundation, the Dutch Cancer Society, the European Research Council Advanced Grant, and the National Institute of Health and Research Manchester Biomedical Research Centre. Fernandez disclosed receiving grants from Johnson & Johnson. Additional disclosures are noted in the original article.
This article was created using several editorial tools, including AI, as part of the process. Human editors reviewed this content before publication.
 
Send comments and news tips to [email protected].