Kawai Kazushige, Ishihara Soichiro, Nozawa Hiroaki, Hata Keisuke, Kiyomatsu Tomomichi, Morikawa Teppei, Fukayama Masashi, Watanabe Toshiaki
1 Department of Surgical Oncology, Faculty of Medicine, The University of Tokyo, Tokyo, Japan 2 Department of Pathology, Faculty of Medicine, The University of Tokyo, Tokyo, Japan.
Dis Colon Rectum. 2017 Apr;60(4):368-375. doi: 10.1097/DCR.0000000000000742.
Nonoperative management for patients with rectal cancer who have achieved a clinical complete response after chemoradiotherapy is becoming increasingly important in recent years. However, the definition of and modality used for patients with clinical complete response differ greatly between institutions, and the role of endoscopic assessment as a nonoperative approach has not been fully investigated.
This study aimed to investigate the ability of endoscopic assessments to predict pathological regression of rectal cancer after chemoradiotherapy and the applicability of these assessments for the watchful waiting approach.
This was a retrospective comparative study.
This study was conducted at a single referral hospital.
A total of 198 patients with rectal cancer underwent preoperative endoscopic assessments after chemoradiotherapy. Of them, 186 patients underwent radical surgery with lymph node dissection.
The histopathological findings of resected tissues were compared with the preoperative endoscopic findings. Twelve patients refused radical surgery and chose watchful waiting; their outcomes were compared with the outcomes of patients who underwent radical surgery.
The endoscopic criteria correlated well with tumor regression grading. The sensitivity and specificity for a pathological complete response were 65.0% to 87.1% and 39.1% to 78.3%. However, endoscopic assessment could not fully discriminate pathological complete responses, and the outcomes of patients who underwent watchful waiting were considerably poorer than the patients who underwent radical surgery. Eventually, 41.7% of the patients who underwent watchful waiting experienced uncontrollable local failure, and many of these occurrences were observed more than 3 years after chemoradiotherapy.
The number of the patients treated with the watchful waiting strategy was limited, and the selection was not randomized.
Although endoscopic assessment after chemoradiotherapy correlated with pathological response, it is unsuitable for surveillance of patients treated via a nonoperative approach. Incorporation of a "watchful waiting" strategy without establishing proper surveillance protocols and salvage strategies might result in poor local control.
近年来,对经放化疗后获得临床完全缓解的直肠癌患者进行非手术治疗变得越来越重要。然而,各机构对临床完全缓解患者的定义和采用的治疗方式差异很大,且内镜评估作为一种非手术方法的作用尚未得到充分研究。
本研究旨在探讨内镜评估预测直肠癌放化疗后病理退缩的能力,以及这些评估在观察等待治疗方法中的适用性。
这是一项回顾性比较研究。
本研究在一家单一的转诊医院进行。
共有198例直肠癌患者在放化疗后接受了术前内镜评估。其中,186例患者接受了根治性手术及淋巴结清扫。
将切除组织的组织病理学结果与术前内镜检查结果进行比较。12例患者拒绝根治性手术而选择观察等待;将他们的结局与接受根治性手术的患者的结局进行比较。
内镜标准与肿瘤退缩分级相关性良好。病理完全缓解的敏感性和特异性分别为65.0%至87.1%和39.1%至78.3%。然而,内镜评估不能完全区分病理完全缓解情况,且观察等待患者的结局明显比接受根治性手术的患者差。最终,41.7%的观察等待患者出现了无法控制的局部复发,其中许多情况发生在放化疗后3年以上。
采用观察等待策略治疗的患者数量有限,且选择并非随机。
尽管放化疗后的内镜评估与病理反应相关,但它不适用于对采用非手术方法治疗的患者进行监测。在未建立适当监测方案和挽救策略的情况下采用“观察等待”策略可能导致局部控制不佳。