Phil Quirke

Preoperative radiotherapy versus selective postoperative chemoradiotherapy in patients with rectal cancer (MRC CR07 and NCIC-CTG C016): a multicentre, randomised trial

Summary Background Preoperative or postoperative radiotherapy reduces the risk of local recurrence in patients with operable rectal cancer. However, improvements in surgery and histopathological assessment mean that the role of radiotherapy needs to be reassessed. We compared short-course preoperative radiotherapy versus initial surgery with selective postoperative chemoradiotherapy. Methods We undertook a randomised trial in 80 centres in four countries. 1350 patients with operable adenocarcinoma of the rectum were randomly assigned, by a minimisation procedure, to short-course preoperative radiotherapy (25 Gy in five fractions; n=674) or to initial surgery with selective postoperative chemoradiotherapy (45 Gy in 25 fractions with concurrent 5-fluorouracil) restricted to patients with involvement of the circumferential resection margin (n=676). The primary outcome measure was local recurrence. Analysis was by intention to treat. This study is registered, number ISRCTN 28785842. Findings At the time of analysis, which included all participants, 330 patients had died (157 preoperative radiotherapy group vs 173 selective postoperative chemoradiotherapy), and median follow-up of surviving patients was 4 years. 99 patients had developed local recurrence (27 preoperative radiotherapy vs 72 selective postoperative chemoradiotherapy). We noted a reduction of 61% in the relative risk of local recurrence for patients receiving preoperative radiotherapy (hazard ratio [HR] 0·39, 95% CI 0·27–0·58, p<0·0001), and an absolute difference at 3 years of 6·2% (95% CI 5·3–7·1) (4·4% preoperative radiotherapy vs 10·6% selective postoperative chemoradiotherapy). We recorded a relative improvement in disease-free survival of 24% for patients receiving preoperative radiotherapy (HR 0·76, 95% CI 0·62–0·94, p=0·013), and an absolute difference at 3 years of 6·0% (95% CI 5·3–6·8) (77·5% vs 71·5%). Overall survival did not differ between the groups (HR 0·91, 95% CI 0·73–1·13, p=0·40). Interpretation Taken with results from other randomised trials, our findings provide convincing and consistent evidence that short-course preoperative radiotherapy is an effective treatment for patients with operable rectal cancer. Funding Medical Research Council (UK) and the National Cancer Institute of Canada.

What Is the Role for the Circumferential Margin in the Modern Treatment of Rectal Cancer

PURPOSEnTreatment of rectal cancer has changed dramatically over the last decade. The worldwide introduction of total mesorectal excision in combination with the increasing use of radio(chemo)-therapy has led to an improved prognosis. One of the main prognostic factors in rectal cancer is the circumferential resection margin (CRM). Since the initial description of its clinical importance in 1986, the involvement of this margin (also called lateral or radial resection margin) has been associated with a poor prognosis.nnnMETHODSnIn the current review, the evidence for the importance of the CRM in more than 17,500 patients is reviewed, and the relevance of this assessment to modern treatment is assessed.nnnRESULTSnWe demonstrate that, after neoadjuvant therapy (both radiotherapy and radiochemotherapy), the predictive value of the CRM for local recurrence is significantly higher than when no preoperative therapy has been applied (hazard ratio [HR] = 6.3 v 2.0, respectively; P < .05). Furthermore, involvement of the CRM is a powerful predictor of both development of distant metastases (HR = 2.8; 95% CI, 1.9 to 4.3) and survival (HR = 1.7; 95% CI, 1.3 to 2.3). In addition to the prognostic data, this review describes different modes of margin involvement, exact definitions, and factors influencing its presence.nnnCONCLUSIONnCRM involvement is one of the key factors in rectal cancer treatment.

Macroscopic Evaluation of Rectal Cancer Resection Specimen: Clinical Significance of the Pathologist in Quality Control

PURPOSEnQuality assessment and assurance are important issues in modern health care. For the evaluation of surgical procedures, there are indirect parameters such as complication, recurrence, and survival rates. These parameters are of limited value for the individual surgeon, and there is an obvious need for direct parameters. We have evaluated criteria by which pathologists can judge the quality or completeness of the resection specimen in a randomized trial for rectal cancer.nnnPATIENTS AND METHODSnThe pathology reports of all patients entered onto a Dutch multicenter randomized trial were reviewed. All participating pathologists had been instructed by workshops and videos in order to obtain standardized pathology work-up. A three-tiered classification was applied to assess completeness of the total mesorectal excision (TME). Prognostic value of this classification was tested using log-rank analysis of Kaplan-Meier survival curves using the data of all patients who did not receive any adjuvant treatment.nnnRESULTSnIncluded were 180 patients. In 24% (n = 43), the mesorectum was incomplete. Patients in this group had an increased risk for local and distant recurrence, 36.1% v. 20.3% recurrence in the group with a complete mesorectum (P =.02). Follow-up is too short to observe an effect on survival rates.nnnCONCLUSIONnA patients prognosis is predicted by applying a classification of macroscopic completeness on a rectal resection specimen. We conclude that pathologists are able to judge the quality of TME for rectal cancer. With this direct interdisciplinary assessment instrument, we establish a new role of the pathologist in quality control.

Effect of the plane of surgery achieved on local recurrence in patients with operable rectal cancer: a prospective study using data from the MRC CR07 and NCIC-CTG CO16 randomised clinical trial

Summary Background Local recurrence rates in operable rectal cancer are improved by radiotherapy (with or without chemotherapy) and surgical techniques such as total mesorectal excision. However, the contributions of surgery and radiotherapy to outcomes are unclear. We assessed the effect of the involvement of the circumferential resection margin and the plane of surgery achieved. Methods In this prospective study, the plane of surgery achieved and the involvement of the circumferential resection margin were assessed by local pathologists, using a standard pathological protocol in 1156 patients with operable rectal cancer from the CR07 and NCIC-CTG CO16 trial, which compared short-course (5 days) preoperative radiotherapy and selective postoperative chemoradiotherapy, between March, 1998, and August, 2005. All analyses were by intention to treat. This trial is registered, number ISRCTN 28785842. Findings 128 patients (11%) had involvement of the circumferential resection margin, and the plane of surgery achieved was classified as good (mesorectal) in 604 (52%), intermediate (intramesorectal) in 398 (34%), and poor (muscularis propria plane) in 154 (13%). We found that both a negative circumferential resection margin and a superior plane of surgery achieved were associated with low local recurrence rates. Hazard ratio (HR) was 0·32 (95% CI 0·16–0·63, p=0·0011) with 3-year local recurrence rates of 6% (5–8%) and 17% (10–26%) for patients who were negative and positive for circumferential resection margin, respectively. For plane of surgery achieved, HRs for mesorectal and intramesorectal groups compared with the muscularis propria group were 0·32 (0·16–0·64) and 0·48 (0·25–0·93), respectively. At 3 years, the estimated local recurrence rates were 4% (3–6%) for mesorectal, 7% (5–11%) for intramesorectal, and 13% (8–21%) for muscularis propria groups. The benefit of short-course preoperative radiotherapy did not differ in the three plane of surgery groups (p=0·30 for trend). Patients in the short-course preoperative radiotherapy group who had a resection in the mesorectal plane had a 3-year local recurrence rate of only 1%. Interpretation In rectal cancer, the plane of surgery achieved is an important prognostic factor for local recurrence. Short-course preoperative radiotherapy reduced the rate of local recurrence for all three plane of surgery groups, almost abolishing local recurrence in short-course preoperative radiotherapy patients who had a resection in the mesorectal plane. The plane of surgery achieved should therefore be assessed and reported routinely. Funding Medical Research Council (UK) and the National Cancer Institute of Canada.

Multidisciplinary Rectal Cancer Management: 2nd European Rectal Cancer Consensus Conference (EURECA-CC2).

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSEnDuring the first decade of the 21st century a number of important European randomized studies were published. In order to help shape clinical practice based on best scientific evidence from the literature, the International Conference on Multidisciplinary Rectal Cancer Treatment: Looking for an European Consensus (EURECA-CC2) was organized in Italy under the endorsement of European Society of Medical Oncology (ESMO), European Society of Surgical Oncology (ESSO), and European Society of Therapeutic Radiation Oncology (ESTRO).nnnMETHODSnConsensus was achieved using the Delphi method. The document was available to all Committee members as a web-based document customized for the consensus process. Eight chapters were identified: epidemiology, diagnostics, pathology, surgery, radiotherapy and chemotherapy, treatment toxicity and quality of life, follow-up, and research questions. Each chapter was subdivided by a topic, and a series of statements were developed. Each member commented and voted, sentence by sentence thrice. Sentences upon which an agreement was not reached after voting round # 2 were openly debated during a Consensus Conference in Perugia (Italy) from 11 December to 13 December 2008. A hand-held televoting system collected the opinions of both the Committee members and the audience after each debate. The Executive Committee scored percentage consensus based on three categories: large consensus, moderate consensus, and minimum consensus.nnnRESULTSnThe total number of the voted sentences was 207. Of the 207, 86% achieved large consensus, 13% achieved moderate consensus, and only 3 (1%) resulted in minimum consensus. No statement was disagreed by more than 50% of the members. All chapters were voted on by at least 75% of the members, and the majority was voted on by >85%.nnnCONCLUSIONSnThis Consensus Conference represents an expertise opinion process that may help shape future programs, investigational protocols, and guidelines for staging and treatment of rectal cancer throughout Europe.

An international, multicentre, prospective, randomised, controlled, unblinded, parallel-group trial of robotic-assisted versus standard laparoscopic surgery for the curative treatment of rectal cancer

PurposeThere is growing enthusiasm for robotic-assisted laparoscopic operations across many surgical specialities, including colorectal surgery, often not supported by robust clinical or cost-effectiveness data. A proper assessment of this new technology is required, prior to widespread recommendation or implementation.Methods/designThe ROLARR trial is a pan-world, prospective, randomised, controlled, unblinded, superiority trial of robotic-assisted versus standard laparoscopic surgery for the curative treatment of rectal cancer. It will investigate differences in terms of the rate of conversion to open operation, rate of pathological involvement of circumferential resection margin, 3-year local recurrence, disease-free and overall survival rates and also operative morbidity and mortality, quality of life and cost-effectiveness. The primary outcome measure is the rate of conversion to open operation. For 80% power at the 5% (two-sided) significance level, to identify a relative 50% reduction in open conversion rate (25% to 12.5%), 336 patients will be required. The target recruitment is 400 patients overall to allow loss to follow-up. Patients will be followed up at 30xa0days and 6xa0months post-operatively and then annually until 3xa0years after the last patient has been randomised.DiscussionIn many centres, robotic-assisted surgery is being implemented on the basis of theoretical advantages, which have yet to be confirmed in practice. Robotic surgery is an expensive health care provision and merits robust evaluation. The ROLARR trial is a pragmatic trial aiming to provide a comprehensive evaluation of both robotic-assisted and standard laparoscopic surgery for the curative resection of rectal cancer.

Panitumumab and irinotecan versus irinotecan alone for patients with KRAS wild-type, fluorouracil-resistant advanced colorectal cancer (PICCOLO): a prospectively stratified randomised trial

Summary Background Therapeutic antibodies targeting EGFR have activity in advanced colorectal cancer, but results from clinical trials are inconsistent and the population in which most benefit is derived is uncertain. Our aim was to assess the addition of panitumumab to irinotecan in pretreated advanced colorectal cancer. Methods In this open-label, randomised trial, we enrolled patients who had advanced colorectal cancer progressing after fluoropyrimidine treatment with or without oxaliplatin from 60 centres in the UK. From December, 2006 until June, 2008, molecularly unselected patients were recruited to a three-arm design including irinotecan (control), irinotecan plus ciclosporin, and irinotecan plus panitumumab (IrPan) groups. From June 10, 2008, in response to new data, the trial was amended to a prospectively stratified design, restricting panitumumab randomisation to patients with KRAS wild-type tumours; the results of the comparison between the irinotcan and IrPan groups are reported here. We used a computer-generated randomisation sequence (stratified by previous EGFR targeted therapy and then minimised by centre, WHO performance status, previous oxaliplatin, previous bevacizumab, previous dose modifications, and best previous response) to randomly allocate patients to either irinotecan or IrPan. Patients in both groups received 350 mg/m2 intravenous irinotecan every 3 weeks (300 mg/m2 if aged ≥70 years or a performance status of 2); patients in the IrPan group also received intravenous panitumumab 9 mg/kg every 3 weeks. The primary endpoint was overall survival in KRAS wild-type patients who had not received previous EGFR targeted therapy, analysed by intention to treat. Tumour DNA was pyrosequenced for KRASc.146, BRAF, NRAS, and PIK3CA mutations, and predefined molecular subgroups were analysed for interaction with the effect of panitumumab. This study is registered, number ISRCTN93248876. Results Between Dec 4, 2006, and Aug 31, 2010, 1198 patients were enrolled, of whom 460 were included in the primary population of patients with KRASc.12–13,61 wild-type tumours and no previous EGFR targeted therapy. 230 patients were randomly allocated to irinotecan and 230 to IrPan. There was no difference in overall survival between groups (HR 1·01, 95% CI 0·83–1·23; p=0·91), but individuals in the IrPan group had longer progression-free survival (0·78, 0·64–0·95; p=0·015) and a greater number of responses (79 [34%] patients vs 27 [12%]; p<0·0001) than did individuals in the irinotecan group. Grade 3 or worse diarrhoea (64 [29%] of 219 patients vs 39 [18%] of 218 patients), skin toxicity (41 [19%] vs none), lethargy (45 [21]% vs 24 [11%]), infection (42 [19%] vs 22 [10%]) and haematological toxicity (48 [22%] vs 27 [12%]) were reported more commonly in the IrPan group than in the irinotecan group. We recorded five treatment-related deaths, two in the IrPan group and three in the irinotecan group. Interpretation Adding panitumumab to irinotecan did not improve the overall survival of patients with wild-type KRAS tumours. Further refinement of molecular selection is needed for substantial benefits to be derived from EGFR targeting agents. Funding Cancer Research UK, Amgen Inc.

Allelic drop-out and preferential amplification in single cells and human blastomeres: implications for preimplantation diagnosis of sex and cystic fibrosis.

Abstract Previously the diagnosis of sex and cystic fibrosis status has been studied on single cells using the polymerase chain reaction (PCR). It has been suggested that allelic drop-out (PCR failure of one allele) and/or preferential amplification (hypo-amplification of one allele) may contribute to poor reliability and misdiagnosis, although this remains controversial as some reports suggest that allelic drop-out does not occur. We investigated an improved method of diagnosing sex and cystic fibrosis in single cells using a new technology (fluorescent PCR) to determine the base level of PCR artefacts (allelic drop-out and preferential amplification) which, in combination with improved sensitivity, should improve PCR reliability and accuracy. Fluorescent PCR gives high reliability (approximately 97%) and accuracy rates (approximately 97%) in somatic cells for both sex and cystic fibrosis diagnosis and its lower detection threshold allows allelic drop-out and preferential amplification to be easily distinguished. We also achieved high reliability and accuracy in diagnosing cystic fibrosis in human blastomeres. This study confirms earlier reports of both allelic drop-out and preferential amplification in single cell analysis. We demonstrate that both allelic drop-out and preferential amplification occur in somatic cells and suggest these are separate phenomena. Preferential amplification appeared common in single cell PCR while allelic drop-out apparently occurred at random in each allele. Preferential amplification was mainly amplification of the larger allele. We suggest that some inaccuracy/misdiagnosis may be due to both preferential amplification as well as allelic drop-out. Other findings were variability in drop-out between PCR and that amplification of signals from human blastomeres may be linked to embryo quality. We suggest that allelic drop-out is dependent on the number of cells within the sample.

Impact of Short-Course Preoperative Radiotherapy for Rectal Cancer on Patients' Quality of Life: Data From the Medical Research Council CR07/National Cancer Institute of Canada Clinical Trials Group C016 Randomized Clinical Trial

PURPOSEnThe Medical Research Council CR07/National Cancer Institute of Canada Clinical Trials Group C016 (MRC CR07/NCIC CTG C016) trial showed that, in patients with operable rectal cancer, short-course preoperative radiotherapy (PRE) reduced the rate of local recurrence compared with surgery followed by selective postoperative chemoradiotherapy for patients with a positive circumferential resection margin. However, the advantages of giving PRE to all patients needs to be balanced against any negative impact on patients quality of life.nnnPATIENTS AND METHODSnAll 1,350 patients were asked to complete the Medical Outcomes Study Short-Form 36-item (MOS SF-36) and the European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Questionnaire Colorectal 38-item (EORTC QLQ-CR38) questionnaires. A priori hypotheses related to the impact of treatment on sexual, bowel, and physical function and general health.nnnRESULTSnMale sexual dysfunction was significantly increased following surgery (P < .001), although there was no difference between treatment arms. However, a treatment difference had emerged at 6 months (PRE patients reporting significantly greater dysfunction; P = .004), which persisted out to at least 2 years (an insufficient number of female patients completed the sexual dysfunction questions to draw firm conclusions). Both treatment groups reported similar levels of decreased physical function at 3 months, but thereafter it returned to baseline levels. There was no evidence of any major changes between treatments or time points in terms of general health or bowel function, but exploratory analysis indicated a significant (P = .006 at 2 years) increase in the level of fecal incontinence with PRE.nnnCONCLUSIONnThese results from a large randomized trial using validated patient-completed questionnaires show that, for males, the main adverse effect was sexual dysfunction, and the main cause of this was surgery, but that PRE also affected sexual and some aspects of bowel functioning.

Unacceptable variation in abdominoperineal excision rates for rectal cancer: time to intervene?

Objective: To determine the variation in the rates of use of abdominoperineal excision (APE) by cancer network, hospital trust and surgeon across England between 1998 and 2004 and determine if any variation could be explained by differences in patient characteristics such as stage of disease, age, gender or socioeconomic deprivation. Design: Retrospective study of a population-based dataset comprised of cancer registry and hospital episode statistics data. Setting: All NHS providers of rectal cancer surgery within England. Patients: 31u2009223 patients diagnosed with rectal cancer and receiving a major abdominal procedure within the NHS in England between 1998 and 2004. Main outcome measure: Rates and odds of use of APE were determined in relation to patient case-mix and each patient’s managing surgeon, trust and cancer network. Results: The rate of use of APE decreased from 30.5% in 1998 to 23.0% in 2004. Males, the economically deprived and those managed by surgeons operating on fewer than seven rectal cancer cases per year were all significantly more likely to receive an APE. There were also significant variations in the odds of receiving an APE over time and between individual surgeons and hospital trusts independently of patient case-mix. Conclusions: Over the study period the use of APE decreased but statistically significant variation was observed in its application independently of case mix. Reducing this variation will remove inequalities, reduce colostomy rates, and improve outcomes in rectal cancer. Rates of APE use could be a national performance measure.