Download - Locally advanced Rectal cancer debate: adjuvant chemotherapy following neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy
![Page 1: Locally advanced Rectal cancer debate: adjuvant chemotherapy following neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy](https://reader036.vdocuments.mx/reader036/viewer/2022062412/587e62ca1a28ab2a538b6607/html5/thumbnails/1.jpg)
Rectal cancer debate:
Adjuvant chemotherapy following neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy (CRT)
Ahmed Zeeneldin, MDConsultant Medical Oncology
KAMC Jeddah Oncology CenterMarch, 2016
NO
![Page 2: Locally advanced Rectal cancer debate: adjuvant chemotherapy following neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy](https://reader036.vdocuments.mx/reader036/viewer/2022062412/587e62ca1a28ab2a538b6607/html5/thumbnails/2.jpg)
Outline
Current treatment of non-metastctic rectal CA
Why adjuvant Ctx is used in LARC? Comment on evidence that advocate
use of adjuvant Ctx in LARC Studies against use of adjuvant Ctx
in LARC Conclusions and my view
![Page 3: Locally advanced Rectal cancer debate: adjuvant chemotherapy following neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy](https://reader036.vdocuments.mx/reader036/viewer/2022062412/587e62ca1a28ab2a538b6607/html5/thumbnails/3.jpg)
Current Treatment of M0 rectal CA
T N M NACRT
S(TME)
Adj
CTT1 N
0M0
Local
- + -
T2 N0
M0
Local
- + -
T3 N0
M0
LA + + +?
T4 N0
M0
LA + + +?
Any N+
M0
LA + + +?
![Page 4: Locally advanced Rectal cancer debate: adjuvant chemotherapy following neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy](https://reader036.vdocuments.mx/reader036/viewer/2022062412/587e62ca1a28ab2a538b6607/html5/thumbnails/4.jpg)
Why adjuvant Ctx is used in LARC? Justifications RCT Pooled analysis of 5 key trials Cochrane Metanalysis of 21 RCTs
![Page 5: Locally advanced Rectal cancer debate: adjuvant chemotherapy following neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy](https://reader036.vdocuments.mx/reader036/viewer/2022062412/587e62ca1a28ab2a538b6607/html5/thumbnails/5.jpg)
Justifications for adj CT
Still ,30% metastasis rate
Aim: Eliminate CTCs and micro mets
![Page 6: Locally advanced Rectal cancer debate: adjuvant chemotherapy following neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy](https://reader036.vdocuments.mx/reader036/viewer/2022062412/587e62ca1a28ab2a538b6607/html5/thumbnails/6.jpg)
NSABP R-01Postoperative adjuvant chemotherapy or radiation therapy for rectal cancer
J Natl Cancer Inst. 1988 Mar 2;80(1):21-9.
![Page 7: Locally advanced Rectal cancer debate: adjuvant chemotherapy following neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy](https://reader036.vdocuments.mx/reader036/viewer/2022062412/587e62ca1a28ab2a538b6607/html5/thumbnails/7.jpg)
NSABP R-01 results
Benefits limited to Males and Young age RT only reduced LR
![Page 8: Locally advanced Rectal cancer debate: adjuvant chemotherapy following neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy](https://reader036.vdocuments.mx/reader036/viewer/2022062412/587e62ca1a28ab2a538b6607/html5/thumbnails/8.jpg)
Comment NSABP R-01 (1988)
Recruited 1977-1986 Not TME No NA CRT
![Page 9: Locally advanced Rectal cancer debate: adjuvant chemotherapy following neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy](https://reader036.vdocuments.mx/reader036/viewer/2022062412/587e62ca1a28ab2a538b6607/html5/thumbnails/9.jpg)
![Page 10: Locally advanced Rectal cancer debate: adjuvant chemotherapy following neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy](https://reader036.vdocuments.mx/reader036/viewer/2022062412/587e62ca1a28ab2a538b6607/html5/thumbnails/10.jpg)
Impact of treatment on survival
![Page 11: Locally advanced Rectal cancer debate: adjuvant chemotherapy following neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy](https://reader036.vdocuments.mx/reader036/viewer/2022062412/587e62ca1a28ab2a538b6607/html5/thumbnails/11.jpg)
Results according to riskDFS OS LR Mets
LR T1-2N0
~90% ~90% <5% ~10%
IR T1-2N1T3No
65-75%
75-80%
<10% 15-20%
MHR T1-2N2T4N0T3N1
50-60%
60-70%
<15% 30-40%
(V)HR
T3N2T4N1-2
30-35%
35-45%
15-25%
40-50%
![Page 12: Locally advanced Rectal cancer debate: adjuvant chemotherapy following neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy](https://reader036.vdocuments.mx/reader036/viewer/2022062412/587e62ca1a28ab2a538b6607/html5/thumbnails/12.jpg)
Comment Pooled analysis
Recruited 1977-1986 Not TME No NA CRT Chemotherapy arms included postop
CRTCT Still some risk groups (VHR)
Up to 25% LR Up to 50 Mets
![Page 13: Locally advanced Rectal cancer debate: adjuvant chemotherapy following neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy](https://reader036.vdocuments.mx/reader036/viewer/2022062412/587e62ca1a28ab2a538b6607/html5/thumbnails/13.jpg)
a systematic review 1975-March 2011
21 RCTs :11 west and 10 Japan Randomization
Surgery adj CT vs Surgery observation
Of ~16,000 patients with CRC, ~10,000 patients with rectal CA
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2012 Mar 14;3:CD004078.
![Page 14: Locally advanced Rectal cancer debate: adjuvant chemotherapy following neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy](https://reader036.vdocuments.mx/reader036/viewer/2022062412/587e62ca1a28ab2a538b6607/html5/thumbnails/14.jpg)
OS HR 0.83 (17% MORTALITY REDUCTION)
![Page 15: Locally advanced Rectal cancer debate: adjuvant chemotherapy following neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy](https://reader036.vdocuments.mx/reader036/viewer/2022062412/587e62ca1a28ab2a538b6607/html5/thumbnails/15.jpg)
Levels of evidence
![Page 16: Locally advanced Rectal cancer debate: adjuvant chemotherapy following neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy](https://reader036.vdocuments.mx/reader036/viewer/2022062412/587e62ca1a28ab2a538b6607/html5/thumbnails/16.jpg)
OS stage II
OS stage III
![Page 17: Locally advanced Rectal cancer debate: adjuvant chemotherapy following neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy](https://reader036.vdocuments.mx/reader036/viewer/2022062412/587e62ca1a28ab2a538b6607/html5/thumbnails/17.jpg)
DFS HR 0.75 (25% REDUCTION)
![Page 18: Locally advanced Rectal cancer debate: adjuvant chemotherapy following neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy](https://reader036.vdocuments.mx/reader036/viewer/2022062412/587e62ca1a28ab2a538b6607/html5/thumbnails/18.jpg)
DFS stage II
DFS stage III
![Page 19: Locally advanced Rectal cancer debate: adjuvant chemotherapy following neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy](https://reader036.vdocuments.mx/reader036/viewer/2022062412/587e62ca1a28ab2a538b6607/html5/thumbnails/19.jpg)
Western trials of adjuvant chemotherapy
Study Authro/y site C# R# (C)RT S arms
EORTC Bosset 2006 R 0 1000 (50)50% all 4 NART vs NACRT->O vs aCT
NSABP Fisher 1988 R 0 600 No all 3 O vs aCRT vs aRT
GTSG Thomas 1988 R 0 200 No all 4 O vs aCT vs aRT vs ACRT
NCCTG Krook 1991 R 0 200 No all 2 aRT vs ACRT
Austrian Kornek 1996 R 0 60 No all 2 O vs aCT
Italian Cafiero 2003 R 0 220 No all 2 aRT vs ACRT
GOG Grage 1981 CR 67 67 No all 2 O vs aCT
Swedish Hafström 1990 CR 201 99 No all 2 O vs aCT
NACCP Taal 2001 CR 700 300 No all 2 O vs aCT
R= rectum, c= colon, CRT chemoradio, O= observation,a= adjuvant
![Page 20: Locally advanced Rectal cancer debate: adjuvant chemotherapy following neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy](https://reader036.vdocuments.mx/reader036/viewer/2022062412/587e62ca1a28ab2a538b6607/html5/thumbnails/20.jpg)
Japanese trials of adjuvant chemotherapy
Study Authro/y site C# R# (C)RT S arms
CCCSGJ Sakamoto 1999 R 0 1000 No all 3 O vs aCT
JFMTC 7-2 Yasutomi 1997 R 0 700 No all 2 O vs aCT
JFMTC 7-1 Kodaira 1998 R 0 800 No all 2 O vs aCT
JFMTC 15-2 Watanabe 2004 R 0 440 No all 3 O vs aCT
JFMTC 15-1 Sakamoto 2007 R 0 440 No all 2 O vs aCT
Hamaguchi 2011 Hamaguchi 2011 R 0 270 No all 2 O vs aCT
SGACCS Matsuda 1991 CR 1300 1200 No all 2 O vs aCT
TSGHCFU Ito 1996 CR 113 77 No all 2 O vs aCT
TACSG Kato 2002 CR 150 140 No all 2 O vs aCT
Koda 2009 Koda 2009 CR 124 ? No all 2 O vs aCT
R= rectum, c= colon, CRT chemoradio, O= observation,a= adjuvant
![Page 21: Locally advanced Rectal cancer debate: adjuvant chemotherapy following neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy](https://reader036.vdocuments.mx/reader036/viewer/2022062412/587e62ca1a28ab2a538b6607/html5/thumbnails/21.jpg)
Conclusions
Adjuvant CT (5-FU based) is recommended following radical surgery
Encourage RCTs of adjuvant CT in patients receiving neoadjuvant therapy and surgery
Encourage adding modern anti-cancer agents in the adjuvant setting
![Page 22: Locally advanced Rectal cancer debate: adjuvant chemotherapy following neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy](https://reader036.vdocuments.mx/reader036/viewer/2022062412/587e62ca1a28ab2a538b6607/html5/thumbnails/22.jpg)
Comment Cochrane metaanlysis (2012)
RCTS 1975-2011 Most not TME Only one trial used CRT Significant Heterogeneity
![Page 23: Locally advanced Rectal cancer debate: adjuvant chemotherapy following neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy](https://reader036.vdocuments.mx/reader036/viewer/2022062412/587e62ca1a28ab2a538b6607/html5/thumbnails/23.jpg)
Preop CRT vs postop CRT
German Rectal Cancer Study Group CAO/ARO/AIO-94
N Engl J Med. 2004 Oct 21;351(17):1731-40.
![Page 24: Locally advanced Rectal cancer debate: adjuvant chemotherapy following neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy](https://reader036.vdocuments.mx/reader036/viewer/2022062412/587e62ca1a28ab2a538b6607/html5/thumbnails/24.jpg)
Preop CRT vs Postop CRT in T3-T4 or N+
Postop CRT FU/LV
Preop CRT
FU/LV
P
pCR -- 8%pStage I (T1-2 N0)
18% 25% <0.001
Sphincter preservation
19% 39% 0.004
doubled
Local Recurrence 13% 6% 0.006
halved
Toxicity G3-4 40% 27% <0.05
Less
Tx completioncompliance
Less more
![Page 25: Locally advanced Rectal cancer debate: adjuvant chemotherapy following neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy](https://reader036.vdocuments.mx/reader036/viewer/2022062412/587e62ca1a28ab2a538b6607/html5/thumbnails/25.jpg)
LR and Mets @ 5 years
LR and Mets @10 years
![Page 26: Locally advanced Rectal cancer debate: adjuvant chemotherapy following neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy](https://reader036.vdocuments.mx/reader036/viewer/2022062412/587e62ca1a28ab2a538b6607/html5/thumbnails/26.jpg)
Comparable OS and DFSPostop
CRTPreop CRT
P
Mets 34% 30% NSOS@ 5 y 74% 76% NSOS@ 10 y 59.9% 59.6% NSDFS@5y 68% 65% NS
![Page 27: Locally advanced Rectal cancer debate: adjuvant chemotherapy following neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy](https://reader036.vdocuments.mx/reader036/viewer/2022062412/587e62ca1a28ab2a538b6607/html5/thumbnails/27.jpg)
Comments
No observation arm CAO/ARO/AIO-94 Conclusions
With ~7% LR @ 10 y using Preop CRT (CI 5FU): Can LR be decreased further (?Add oxali)
With ~30% mets @ 10 y using adj bolus 5FU x 4: More effective adjuvant chemotherapy is
needed ?Add oxali
![Page 28: Locally advanced Rectal cancer debate: adjuvant chemotherapy following neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy](https://reader036.vdocuments.mx/reader036/viewer/2022062412/587e62ca1a28ab2a538b6607/html5/thumbnails/28.jpg)
Plausible Questions in LARC Is more better?
Does adding Oxaliplatin to FP in NACRT improve results? pCR, DFS, favorable toxicity
Does adding Oxaliplatin to FP in ACT improve result? DFS, OS, favorable toxicity
Is less worse? Does elimination of adjuvant chemotherapy
worsen results? DFS, OS
![Page 29: Locally advanced Rectal cancer debate: adjuvant chemotherapy following neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy](https://reader036.vdocuments.mx/reader036/viewer/2022062412/587e62ca1a28ab2a538b6607/html5/thumbnails/29.jpg)
Does adding Oxaliplatin to NACRT improve results?
* Unplanned exploratory p = 0.045
Comparable pCR but more toxicity (doubling of G3-4 toxicity: 8-11%25%)
![Page 30: Locally advanced Rectal cancer debate: adjuvant chemotherapy following neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy](https://reader036.vdocuments.mx/reader036/viewer/2022062412/587e62ca1a28ab2a538b6607/html5/thumbnails/30.jpg)
STAR-01 trialJ Clin Oncol. 2011 Jul 10;29(20):2773-80.
FU-RT FU-Oxali_RT P379 368
G3-4 toxicity 8% 24% <0.001pCR 16% 16% NSDFS, OS Not
yetreported
![Page 31: Locally advanced Rectal cancer debate: adjuvant chemotherapy following neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy](https://reader036.vdocuments.mx/reader036/viewer/2022062412/587e62ca1a28ab2a538b6607/html5/thumbnails/31.jpg)
ACCORD 12 trial
![Page 32: Locally advanced Rectal cancer debate: adjuvant chemotherapy following neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy](https://reader036.vdocuments.mx/reader036/viewer/2022062412/587e62ca1a28ab2a538b6607/html5/thumbnails/32.jpg)
ACCORD 12 results
LR: ~9% in both arms (P>0.05)
OS & DFS: no sig. difference (P>0.05)
![Page 33: Locally advanced Rectal cancer debate: adjuvant chemotherapy following neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy](https://reader036.vdocuments.mx/reader036/viewer/2022062412/587e62ca1a28ab2a538b6607/html5/thumbnails/33.jpg)
PETACC6
![Page 34: Locally advanced Rectal cancer debate: adjuvant chemotherapy following neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy](https://reader036.vdocuments.mx/reader036/viewer/2022062412/587e62ca1a28ab2a538b6607/html5/thumbnails/34.jpg)
DFS @ 3y
LR and Mets @ 3 y
![Page 35: Locally advanced Rectal cancer debate: adjuvant chemotherapy following neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy](https://reader036.vdocuments.mx/reader036/viewer/2022062412/587e62ca1a28ab2a538b6607/html5/thumbnails/35.jpg)
NSABP-R04 trial
Following surgery, pts encouraged to receive ACT
![Page 36: Locally advanced Rectal cancer debate: adjuvant chemotherapy following neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy](https://reader036.vdocuments.mx/reader036/viewer/2022062412/587e62ca1a28ab2a538b6607/html5/thumbnails/36.jpg)
NSABP-R04 results
![Page 37: Locally advanced Rectal cancer debate: adjuvant chemotherapy following neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy](https://reader036.vdocuments.mx/reader036/viewer/2022062412/587e62ca1a28ab2a538b6607/html5/thumbnails/37.jpg)
NSABP R-04 update
![Page 38: Locally advanced Rectal cancer debate: adjuvant chemotherapy following neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy](https://reader036.vdocuments.mx/reader036/viewer/2022062412/587e62ca1a28ab2a538b6607/html5/thumbnails/38.jpg)
German trial CAO/ARO/AIO-04
Primary endpoint DFS @ 3y
![Page 39: Locally advanced Rectal cancer debate: adjuvant chemotherapy following neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy](https://reader036.vdocuments.mx/reader036/viewer/2022062412/587e62ca1a28ab2a538b6607/html5/thumbnails/39.jpg)
ResultsFU-
RTFUFUOX-
RTFOLFOXP Report
edn 623 613NACRT 2012
CTx 79% 85%RT 96% 94%
Full Adjuvant CTx
83% 81% 2012
G3-4 diarrhea 8% 12% 2012G3-4 GI toxicities
12% 15%
pCR 13% 17% 0.045
2014- Lancet Oncol. 2012 Jul;13(7):679-87.
- ASCO 2014- Lancet Oncol. 2015 Aug;16(8):979-89.
![Page 40: Locally advanced Rectal cancer debate: adjuvant chemotherapy following neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy](https://reader036.vdocuments.mx/reader036/viewer/2022062412/587e62ca1a28ab2a538b6607/html5/thumbnails/40.jpg)
FU-RTFU
FUOX-RTFOLFOX
HR P Reported
DFS@3y 71.2% 75.9% 0.79 0.03 2012DFS@5y 64.3% 68.8% 0.79 <0.
052014
OS@5y 78.3% 78% 0.96 >0.05
2014
![Page 41: Locally advanced Rectal cancer debate: adjuvant chemotherapy following neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy](https://reader036.vdocuments.mx/reader036/viewer/2022062412/587e62ca1a28ab2a538b6607/html5/thumbnails/41.jpg)
Conclusions on NACRT
Adding Oxali No significant increase in OS in all trials
(including German 04) Increased toxicities in all trials (including
German 04) No significant increase in pCR or DFS
(except German 04) More is not better in NACRT
![Page 42: Locally advanced Rectal cancer debate: adjuvant chemotherapy following neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy](https://reader036.vdocuments.mx/reader036/viewer/2022062412/587e62ca1a28ab2a538b6607/html5/thumbnails/42.jpg)
Does adding Oxaliplatin to FPs in ACT improve result in colon ca?
MOSAIC study: ~20% relative reduction in DFS events ~5% absolute increase in 3-y DFS
~7% in stage III (p<0.5) ~3% in stage II (p>0.5) Detrimental in old age
OS improved only in stage II
![Page 43: Locally advanced Rectal cancer debate: adjuvant chemotherapy following neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy](https://reader036.vdocuments.mx/reader036/viewer/2022062412/587e62ca1a28ab2a538b6607/html5/thumbnails/43.jpg)
Does adding Oxaliplatin to FPs in ACT improve result in rectal ca?
![Page 44: Locally advanced Rectal cancer debate: adjuvant chemotherapy following neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy](https://reader036.vdocuments.mx/reader036/viewer/2022062412/587e62ca1a28ab2a538b6607/html5/thumbnails/44.jpg)
![Page 45: Locally advanced Rectal cancer debate: adjuvant chemotherapy following neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy](https://reader036.vdocuments.mx/reader036/viewer/2022062412/587e62ca1a28ab2a538b6607/html5/thumbnails/45.jpg)
ADORE 3-y results (both yII + yIII) DFS OS
FU FOLFOX HR P3y DFS 63% 72% 0.66 0.0473y OS 86% 95% 0.46 0.036
![Page 46: Locally advanced Rectal cancer debate: adjuvant chemotherapy following neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy](https://reader036.vdocuments.mx/reader036/viewer/2022062412/587e62ca1a28ab2a538b6607/html5/thumbnails/46.jpg)
DFS@ 3 years y-III vs y-III
Stage y-III Stage y-II
![Page 47: Locally advanced Rectal cancer debate: adjuvant chemotherapy following neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy](https://reader036.vdocuments.mx/reader036/viewer/2022062412/587e62ca1a28ab2a538b6607/html5/thumbnails/47.jpg)
FU-RTFU
FUOX-RTFOLFOX
HR P Reported
DFS@5y 64.3% 68.8% 0.79 <0.05
2014
OS@5y 78.3% 78% 0.96 >0.05
2014
German trial CAO/ARO/AIO-04
![Page 48: Locally advanced Rectal cancer debate: adjuvant chemotherapy following neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy](https://reader036.vdocuments.mx/reader036/viewer/2022062412/587e62ca1a28ab2a538b6607/html5/thumbnails/48.jpg)
PETACC 6
DFS @ 3y
LR and Mets @ 3 y
![Page 49: Locally advanced Rectal cancer debate: adjuvant chemotherapy following neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy](https://reader036.vdocuments.mx/reader036/viewer/2022062412/587e62ca1a28ab2a538b6607/html5/thumbnails/49.jpg)
Why PETACC6 is negative for DFS
Cape
CAPOX
∆
Did not get Adjuvant Ctx
23% 38% -15%
Did not get full adjuvant Ctx
32% 47% -14%
Cape dose <90%
35% 54% -19%
![Page 50: Locally advanced Rectal cancer debate: adjuvant chemotherapy following neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy](https://reader036.vdocuments.mx/reader036/viewer/2022062412/587e62ca1a28ab2a538b6607/html5/thumbnails/50.jpg)
Conclusion Conflicting data regarding adding
Oxaliplatin to adjuvant FP in rectal caStudy DFS OS complian
ceEligibili
tyADORE Improved Improved ?? y-II/IIICAO/ARO/AIO-04
Improved Did not improve
high c-II/III
PETACC 6 Did not improve
Did not improve
Low c-II/III Following NACRT, if pathologic stage is II/III: FOLFOX improves DFS and OS (in stage III)
Patients with Clinical stage II/III, following CRT, FOLFOX improves DFS and CapeOX did not
No OS improvement with FOLFOX or CapeOX
![Page 51: Locally advanced Rectal cancer debate: adjuvant chemotherapy following neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy](https://reader036.vdocuments.mx/reader036/viewer/2022062412/587e62ca1a28ab2a538b6607/html5/thumbnails/51.jpg)
Does elimination of ACT worsen outcome in LARC? 4 RCTS
EORTC 22921: FU/LV vs Observation
I-CNR-RT trial: FU/LV vs Observation
PROCTOR-SCRIPT: FU/LV or Cape vs Observation
Chronicle : Capeox vs observation
One metaanalysis
![Page 52: Locally advanced Rectal cancer debate: adjuvant chemotherapy following neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy](https://reader036.vdocuments.mx/reader036/viewer/2022062412/587e62ca1a28ab2a538b6607/html5/thumbnails/52.jpg)
I-CNR-RT trial
Radiother Oncol 2014 Nov;113(2):223-9.
![Page 53: Locally advanced Rectal cancer debate: adjuvant chemotherapy following neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy](https://reader036.vdocuments.mx/reader036/viewer/2022062412/587e62ca1a28ab2a538b6607/html5/thumbnails/53.jpg)
ResultsObservation FU/LV P
n 310 3245 Y OS Similar similar >0.055 y DFS Similar similar >0.05Mets 21% 19.6% >0.05Did not start planned CTx
28%
![Page 54: Locally advanced Rectal cancer debate: adjuvant chemotherapy following neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy](https://reader036.vdocuments.mx/reader036/viewer/2022062412/587e62ca1a28ab2a538b6607/html5/thumbnails/54.jpg)
Dutch (PROCTOR-SCRIPT) trial
Closed prematurely due to slow accrual
Ann Oncol. 2015 Apr;26(4):696-701.
![Page 55: Locally advanced Rectal cancer debate: adjuvant chemotherapy following neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy](https://reader036.vdocuments.mx/reader036/viewer/2022062412/587e62ca1a28ab2a538b6607/html5/thumbnails/55.jpg)
resultsObservati
onAdj CT
HR P
N 221 2165y OS 79.2% 80.4
%0.93
0.73
DFS 0.80
0.13
5 Y LR Rec
7.8% 7.8% NS
5 Y Mets
38.5% 34.7%
0.39
![Page 56: Locally advanced Rectal cancer debate: adjuvant chemotherapy following neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy](https://reader036.vdocuments.mx/reader036/viewer/2022062412/587e62ca1a28ab2a538b6607/html5/thumbnails/56.jpg)
Chronicle trial
Closed prematurely due to slow accrualAnn Oncol. 2014 Jul;25(7):1356-62.
![Page 57: Locally advanced Rectal cancer debate: adjuvant chemotherapy following neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy](https://reader036.vdocuments.mx/reader036/viewer/2022062412/587e62ca1a28ab2a538b6607/html5/thumbnails/57.jpg)
Results
Observation
XELOX
HR P
N 59 543 Y DSF 71% 78% 0.8
00.56
3 Y OS 89% 88% 1.18
0.75
Completed 6 cycles
----- 48%
Dose reductions
----- 39%
G3/4 toxicities ----- 40%Ann Oncol. 2014 Jul;25(7):1356-62.
![Page 58: Locally advanced Rectal cancer debate: adjuvant chemotherapy following neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy](https://reader036.vdocuments.mx/reader036/viewer/2022062412/587e62ca1a28ab2a538b6607/html5/thumbnails/58.jpg)
EORTC 22921
![Page 59: Locally advanced Rectal cancer debate: adjuvant chemotherapy following neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy](https://reader036.vdocuments.mx/reader036/viewer/2022062412/587e62ca1a28ab2a538b6607/html5/thumbnails/59.jpg)
Results at 5 years
![Page 60: Locally advanced Rectal cancer debate: adjuvant chemotherapy following neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy](https://reader036.vdocuments.mx/reader036/viewer/2022062412/587e62ca1a28ab2a538b6607/html5/thumbnails/60.jpg)
PFS
![Page 61: Locally advanced Rectal cancer debate: adjuvant chemotherapy following neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy](https://reader036.vdocuments.mx/reader036/viewer/2022062412/587e62ca1a28ab2a538b6607/html5/thumbnails/61.jpg)
Overall survival
![Page 62: Locally advanced Rectal cancer debate: adjuvant chemotherapy following neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy](https://reader036.vdocuments.mx/reader036/viewer/2022062412/587e62ca1a28ab2a538b6607/html5/thumbnails/62.jpg)
Chemotherapy after NACRT
![Page 63: Locally advanced Rectal cancer debate: adjuvant chemotherapy following neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy](https://reader036.vdocuments.mx/reader036/viewer/2022062412/587e62ca1a28ab2a538b6607/html5/thumbnails/63.jpg)
Conclusion
None of the trials that compared ACT to observation was positive
Question: Maybe the difference is small and it will
show in a mentanalysis? Lets see!
![Page 64: Locally advanced Rectal cancer debate: adjuvant chemotherapy following neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy](https://reader036.vdocuments.mx/reader036/viewer/2022062412/587e62ca1a28ab2a538b6607/html5/thumbnails/64.jpg)
![Page 65: Locally advanced Rectal cancer debate: adjuvant chemotherapy following neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy](https://reader036.vdocuments.mx/reader036/viewer/2022062412/587e62ca1a28ab2a538b6607/html5/thumbnails/65.jpg)
4 Studies having 1196 patients
![Page 66: Locally advanced Rectal cancer debate: adjuvant chemotherapy following neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy](https://reader036.vdocuments.mx/reader036/viewer/2022062412/587e62ca1a28ab2a538b6607/html5/thumbnails/66.jpg)
Patient characteristics
![Page 67: Locally advanced Rectal cancer debate: adjuvant chemotherapy following neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy](https://reader036.vdocuments.mx/reader036/viewer/2022062412/587e62ca1a28ab2a538b6607/html5/thumbnails/67.jpg)
OS HR 0.97 p=0.775
![Page 68: Locally advanced Rectal cancer debate: adjuvant chemotherapy following neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy](https://reader036.vdocuments.mx/reader036/viewer/2022062412/587e62ca1a28ab2a538b6607/html5/thumbnails/68.jpg)
DFS HR 0.91 p= 0.23
![Page 69: Locally advanced Rectal cancer debate: adjuvant chemotherapy following neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy](https://reader036.vdocuments.mx/reader036/viewer/2022062412/587e62ca1a28ab2a538b6607/html5/thumbnails/69.jpg)
Mets HR 0.94 p= 0.523
![Page 70: Locally advanced Rectal cancer debate: adjuvant chemotherapy following neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy](https://reader036.vdocuments.mx/reader036/viewer/2022062412/587e62ca1a28ab2a538b6607/html5/thumbnails/70.jpg)
Cumulative incidence of distant recurrences
![Page 71: Locally advanced Rectal cancer debate: adjuvant chemotherapy following neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy](https://reader036.vdocuments.mx/reader036/viewer/2022062412/587e62ca1a28ab2a538b6607/html5/thumbnails/71.jpg)
All were Stage y-II, y-III
![Page 72: Locally advanced Rectal cancer debate: adjuvant chemotherapy following neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy](https://reader036.vdocuments.mx/reader036/viewer/2022062412/587e62ca1a28ab2a538b6607/html5/thumbnails/72.jpg)
Conclusions and my viewIN LARC (T3-4 or N+) No preop CRT:
Adjuvant CTX is indicated in All cases Regimen: CapOX/FOLFOX or FLOX
![Page 73: Locally advanced Rectal cancer debate: adjuvant chemotherapy following neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy](https://reader036.vdocuments.mx/reader036/viewer/2022062412/587e62ca1a28ab2a538b6607/html5/thumbnails/73.jpg)
Conclusions and my view IN LARC (T3-4 or N+) Preop CRT
Adjuvant CTx is indicated in: High rectal tumors (10-15 CM from AV):
Pathologic stage y-II & y-III Regimen: (CapeOx/FOLOFOX in y-III, ?? FU/Cape in y-
II) Mid or low rectal tumors
Pathologic stage y-III (i.e. pN+) Regimen: CapeOx/FOLOFOX
High-risk y-II (all pT4 and pT3 + high risk features) Regimen: ?? FU/Cape
High-risk features in RC-CRM <= 2 mm-LVI-Poorly differentiated-Inadequate # LNs (<12)-Non-TME surgery-R1 resection that cannot be re-operated
![Page 74: Locally advanced Rectal cancer debate: adjuvant chemotherapy following neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy](https://reader036.vdocuments.mx/reader036/viewer/2022062412/587e62ca1a28ab2a538b6607/html5/thumbnails/74.jpg)
Conclusions and my view IN LARC (T3-4 or N+) Preop CRT
Adjuvant CTx is NOT indicated in: Pathologic stage (y-0) i.e. pCR Pathologic stage (y-I) i.e. pT1-2
particularly low-risk Pathologic stage (y-II) i.e. pT3
particularly low-risk High-risk features in RC-CRM <= 2 mm-LVI-Poorly differentiated-Inadequate # LNs (<12)-Non-TME surgery-R1 resection that cannot be re-operated
![Page 75: Locally advanced Rectal cancer debate: adjuvant chemotherapy following neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy](https://reader036.vdocuments.mx/reader036/viewer/2022062412/587e62ca1a28ab2a538b6607/html5/thumbnails/75.jpg)