Rectosigmoid Cancer-Rectal Cancer or Sigmoid Cancer?

OBJECTIVES

We aimed to determine the optimal treatment for patients with locally advanced rectosigmoid cancers, and to determine whether this can be guided by distance from anal verge (AV) and/or anatomic landmarks such as the sacral promontory and peritoneal reflection (PR).

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We retrospectively reviewed patients with T3-T4 and/or node-positive rectosigmoid cancers who underwent surgery from 2006 to 2018 with available pelvic imaging. We included tumors at 9 to 20 cm from the AV on either staging imaging, or colonoscopy. Patients were stratified into those who received neoadjuvant therapy, and those who underwent upfront surgery. Comparisons of characteristics were performed using χ 2 test and Fischer exact test. Locoregional failure (LRF) and overall survival were compared using Cox regressions and Kaplan-Meier analysis.

RESULTS

One hundred sixty-one patients were included. Ninety-seven patients had neoadjuvant therapy, and 64 patients had upfront surgery. Median follow-up time was 45.1 months. Patients who had neoadjuvant therapy had tumors that were higher cT stage ( P <0.01) with more positive/close circumferential resection margins seen on imaging by radiologists (28.9% vs. 1.6% , P =0.015). The 2-year rate of LRF, distant metastases, or overall survival was not significantly different between the 2 groups. None of 15 patients with tumors below the PR treated with neoadjuvant therapy had LRF, but 1 (25%) of 4 patients with tumors below the PR treated with adjuvant therapy experienced LRF ( P =0.05).

CONCLUSIONS

Patients with tumors below the PR may benefit more from neoadjuvant therapy. The PR on imaging may be a reliable landmark in addition to the distance from the AV to determine the most appropriate treatment option.