BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE

With the advent of more intensive chemotherapy regimens, neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy (NACRT) for patients with locally advanced rectal cancer (LARC) has always been questioned due to its inevitable radiation toxicity. Hence, we conducted a meta-analysis to compare the clinical efficacy of neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NAC) and NACRT.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Eligible studies were searched using PubMed, MEDLINE, Embase, the Cochrane Library, and Web of Science up to 31 July 2020, comparing the clinical efficacy of NAC versus NACRT for LARC. Short- and long-term outcomes were determined using the odds ratio (OR) with 95% confidence interval (CI).

RESULTS

Six studies with 12,812 patients were eligible for this meta-analysis, including 677 patients in the NAC group and 12,135 patients in the NACRT group. There were no significant differences between the two groups in terms of pathological complete response rate (OR=0.62, 95%CI=0.271.41), N down-staging rate (OR=1.20, 95%CI=0.255.79), R0 resection rate (OR=1.24, 95%CI=0.781.98), and local relapse rate (OR=1.12, 95%CI=0.582.14). The pooled OR for the total response rate and T down-staging were in favor of NACRT (OR=0.41, 95%CI=0.220.76 versus OR=0.67 95%CI=0.520.87). However, the pooled OR for the sphincter preservation rate favored NAC compared with NACRT (OR=1.87, 95%CI=1.242.81). Moreover, NAC was found to be superior to NACRT in terms of distant metastasis (14.3% vs. 20.4%), but the difference was not significant (OR=0.84, 95%CI=0.312.27).

CONCLUSION

We concluded that NAC was superior to NACRT in terms of the sphincter preservation rate, and non-inferior to NACRT in terms of pCR, N down-staging, R0 resection, local relapse, and distant metastasis. However, the conclusion warrants further validation.