Wait and see approach for rectal cancer with a clinically complete response after neoadjuvant concurrent chemoradiotherapy

Hyun Jung Kim, Jin Ho Song, Hyeong Sik Ahn, Bong Hoi Choi, Hojin Jeong, Hoon Sik Choi, Yun Hee Lee, Ki Mun Kang, Bae Kwon Jeong

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

4 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Purpose: Rectal cancer patients with a pathological complete response (pCR) after neoadjuvant concurrent chemoradiotherapy (CCRT) have a better prognosis compared to those without a pCR. Therefore, the “Wait and See” (W&S) approach in those who achieved clinically complete response (cCR) after CCRT was introduced as an alternative modality to the total mesorectal excision (TME). The aim of this study was to compare the oncological outcomes between W&S and TME via meta-analysis. Methods: We performed a comprehensive literature search on January 14, 2016, using MEDLINE, EMBASE, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Web of Science, and Scopus. In addition, the references of all articles obtained were searched manually. The qualities of each study were assessed using the Newcastle-Ottawa quality assessment scale. The main outcomes were recurrence, disease-free survival (DFS), and overall survival (OS). We calculated the risk ratio (RR) and hazard ratio (HR) for the recurrence and survival rates, respectively. Results: The RR of patients whose initial recurrences was local recurrence (LR), distant metastasis (DM), LR + DM, or overall recurrences were 0.18, 1.00, 0.61, and 0.49, respectively. There was no heterogeneity in the results. The HR of DFS was 0.59 and indicated that DFS in the TME group was superior compared with that in the W&S group. The OS has no significant difference between the studies. Conclusions: Although the W&S approach seemed feasible for rectal cancer patients with a cCR after neoadjuvant CCRT, concrete evidence obtained in well-controlled randomized trials with a long-term follow-up is required to validate potential treatment options.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)723-727
Number of pages5
JournalInternational Journal of Colorectal Disease
Volume32
Issue number5
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 2017 May 1

Fingerprint

Chemoradiotherapy
Rectal Neoplasms
Recurrence
Disease-Free Survival
Odds Ratio
Neoplasm Metastasis
Survival
MEDLINE
Meta-Analysis
Survival Rate
Randomized Controlled Trials

Keywords

  • Chemoradiotherapy
  • Mesorectal excision
  • Overall survival
  • Rectal cancer
  • Salvage therapy
  • Wait and see

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Gastroenterology

Cite this

Wait and see approach for rectal cancer with a clinically complete response after neoadjuvant concurrent chemoradiotherapy. / Kim, Hyun Jung; Song, Jin Ho; Ahn, Hyeong Sik; Choi, Bong Hoi; Jeong, Hojin; Choi, Hoon Sik; Lee, Yun Hee; Kang, Ki Mun; Jeong, Bae Kwon.

In: International Journal of Colorectal Disease, Vol. 32, No. 5, 01.05.2017, p. 723-727.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Kim, Hyun Jung ; Song, Jin Ho ; Ahn, Hyeong Sik ; Choi, Bong Hoi ; Jeong, Hojin ; Choi, Hoon Sik ; Lee, Yun Hee ; Kang, Ki Mun ; Jeong, Bae Kwon. / Wait and see approach for rectal cancer with a clinically complete response after neoadjuvant concurrent chemoradiotherapy. In: International Journal of Colorectal Disease. 2017 ; Vol. 32, No. 5. pp. 723-727.
@article{a9d1861f804741028e71489deac2b32b,
title = "Wait and see approach for rectal cancer with a clinically complete response after neoadjuvant concurrent chemoradiotherapy",
abstract = "Purpose: Rectal cancer patients with a pathological complete response (pCR) after neoadjuvant concurrent chemoradiotherapy (CCRT) have a better prognosis compared to those without a pCR. Therefore, the “Wait and See” (W&S) approach in those who achieved clinically complete response (cCR) after CCRT was introduced as an alternative modality to the total mesorectal excision (TME). The aim of this study was to compare the oncological outcomes between W&S and TME via meta-analysis. Methods: We performed a comprehensive literature search on January 14, 2016, using MEDLINE, EMBASE, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Web of Science, and Scopus. In addition, the references of all articles obtained were searched manually. The qualities of each study were assessed using the Newcastle-Ottawa quality assessment scale. The main outcomes were recurrence, disease-free survival (DFS), and overall survival (OS). We calculated the risk ratio (RR) and hazard ratio (HR) for the recurrence and survival rates, respectively. Results: The RR of patients whose initial recurrences was local recurrence (LR), distant metastasis (DM), LR + DM, or overall recurrences were 0.18, 1.00, 0.61, and 0.49, respectively. There was no heterogeneity in the results. The HR of DFS was 0.59 and indicated that DFS in the TME group was superior compared with that in the W&S group. The OS has no significant difference between the studies. Conclusions: Although the W&S approach seemed feasible for rectal cancer patients with a cCR after neoadjuvant CCRT, concrete evidence obtained in well-controlled randomized trials with a long-term follow-up is required to validate potential treatment options.",
keywords = "Chemoradiotherapy, Mesorectal excision, Overall survival, Rectal cancer, Salvage therapy, Wait and see",
author = "Kim, {Hyun Jung} and Song, {Jin Ho} and Ahn, {Hyeong Sik} and Choi, {Bong Hoi} and Hojin Jeong and Choi, {Hoon Sik} and Lee, {Yun Hee} and Kang, {Ki Mun} and Jeong, {Bae Kwon}",
year = "2017",
month = "5",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1007/s00384-016-2709-0",
language = "English",
volume = "32",
pages = "723--727",
journal = "International Journal of Colorectal Disease",
issn = "0179-1958",
publisher = "Springer Verlag",
number = "5",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Wait and see approach for rectal cancer with a clinically complete response after neoadjuvant concurrent chemoradiotherapy

AU - Kim, Hyun Jung

AU - Song, Jin Ho

AU - Ahn, Hyeong Sik

AU - Choi, Bong Hoi

AU - Jeong, Hojin

AU - Choi, Hoon Sik

AU - Lee, Yun Hee

AU - Kang, Ki Mun

AU - Jeong, Bae Kwon

PY - 2017/5/1

Y1 - 2017/5/1

N2 - Purpose: Rectal cancer patients with a pathological complete response (pCR) after neoadjuvant concurrent chemoradiotherapy (CCRT) have a better prognosis compared to those without a pCR. Therefore, the “Wait and See” (W&S) approach in those who achieved clinically complete response (cCR) after CCRT was introduced as an alternative modality to the total mesorectal excision (TME). The aim of this study was to compare the oncological outcomes between W&S and TME via meta-analysis. Methods: We performed a comprehensive literature search on January 14, 2016, using MEDLINE, EMBASE, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Web of Science, and Scopus. In addition, the references of all articles obtained were searched manually. The qualities of each study were assessed using the Newcastle-Ottawa quality assessment scale. The main outcomes were recurrence, disease-free survival (DFS), and overall survival (OS). We calculated the risk ratio (RR) and hazard ratio (HR) for the recurrence and survival rates, respectively. Results: The RR of patients whose initial recurrences was local recurrence (LR), distant metastasis (DM), LR + DM, or overall recurrences were 0.18, 1.00, 0.61, and 0.49, respectively. There was no heterogeneity in the results. The HR of DFS was 0.59 and indicated that DFS in the TME group was superior compared with that in the W&S group. The OS has no significant difference between the studies. Conclusions: Although the W&S approach seemed feasible for rectal cancer patients with a cCR after neoadjuvant CCRT, concrete evidence obtained in well-controlled randomized trials with a long-term follow-up is required to validate potential treatment options.

AB - Purpose: Rectal cancer patients with a pathological complete response (pCR) after neoadjuvant concurrent chemoradiotherapy (CCRT) have a better prognosis compared to those without a pCR. Therefore, the “Wait and See” (W&S) approach in those who achieved clinically complete response (cCR) after CCRT was introduced as an alternative modality to the total mesorectal excision (TME). The aim of this study was to compare the oncological outcomes between W&S and TME via meta-analysis. Methods: We performed a comprehensive literature search on January 14, 2016, using MEDLINE, EMBASE, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Web of Science, and Scopus. In addition, the references of all articles obtained were searched manually. The qualities of each study were assessed using the Newcastle-Ottawa quality assessment scale. The main outcomes were recurrence, disease-free survival (DFS), and overall survival (OS). We calculated the risk ratio (RR) and hazard ratio (HR) for the recurrence and survival rates, respectively. Results: The RR of patients whose initial recurrences was local recurrence (LR), distant metastasis (DM), LR + DM, or overall recurrences were 0.18, 1.00, 0.61, and 0.49, respectively. There was no heterogeneity in the results. The HR of DFS was 0.59 and indicated that DFS in the TME group was superior compared with that in the W&S group. The OS has no significant difference between the studies. Conclusions: Although the W&S approach seemed feasible for rectal cancer patients with a cCR after neoadjuvant CCRT, concrete evidence obtained in well-controlled randomized trials with a long-term follow-up is required to validate potential treatment options.

KW - Chemoradiotherapy

KW - Mesorectal excision

KW - Overall survival

KW - Rectal cancer

KW - Salvage therapy

KW - Wait and see

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84996878181&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84996878181&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1007/s00384-016-2709-0

DO - 10.1007/s00384-016-2709-0

M3 - Article

C2 - 27885479

AN - SCOPUS:84996878181

VL - 32

SP - 723

EP - 727

JO - International Journal of Colorectal Disease

JF - International Journal of Colorectal Disease

SN - 0179-1958

IS - 5

ER -