In recent years, new therapeutic approaches have emerged in addition to classical neoadjuvant (chemo)radiotherapy for the treatment of locally advanced rectal cancer (LARC): total neoadjuvant treatment, non-operative management, and radiotherapy-free strategy. While the introduction of these approaches in a relatively short timeframe has quickly increased our therapeutic armamentarium, on the other hand it has complicated the decision-making process regarding the choice of the most appropriate treatment strategy for each patient with LARC. Therefore, a tool to interpret the evidence from clinical trials and to translate them into daily practice is highly demanded. In the present review, we address how these new developments are changing the multimodal treatment of LARC and offer an algorithm to integrate them into clinical practice.

With the results of several recently published clinical trials, this guideline focused update provides evidence-based recommendations for the indications and dose-fractionation regimens for neoadjuvant radiation therapy (RT), optimal sequencing of RT and systemic therapy in the context of total neoadjuvant therapy (TNT), and considerations for selective omission of RT and surgery for rectal cancer.

The American Society for Radiation Oncology convened a multidisciplinary task force to update 3 key questions that focused on the role of RT for patients with operable rectal cancer. The key questions addressed (1) indications for neoadjuvant RT, (2) selection of neoadjuvant regimens, and (3) indications for consideration of a nonoperative management (NOM) or local excision approach after definitive/preoperative chemoradiation. Recommendations were based on a systematic literature review and created using a predefined consensus-building methodology and system for quality of evidence grading and strength of recommendation.

For patients with stage II-III rectal cancer, neoadjuvant RT was strongly recommended; however, among patients deemed at lower risk of locoregional recurrence, consideration of omission of neoadjuvant RT was conditionally recommended in favor of neoadjuvant chemotherapy with a favorable treatment response or upfront surgery. For patients with T3-T4 and node-positive rectal cancer undergoing neoadjuvant RT, a TNT approach was strongly recommended. Among patients with higher risk of locoregional recurrence, TNT with chemotherapy before or after long-course chemoradiation was strongly recommended, whereas TNT with short-course RT followed by chemotherapy was conditionally recommended. For patients with rectal cancer for whom NOM is a priority, concurrent chemoradiation followed by consolidation chemotherapy was strongly recommended. Selection of RT dose-fractionation regimen, sequencing of therapies, and consideration of NOM should be determined by multidisciplinary consensus and based on disease extent, disease location, patient preferences, and quality of life considerations.

The task force proposed recommendations to inform best clinical practices on the use of RT for rectal cancer with strong emphasis on multidisciplinary care. Future studies should focus on further addressing optimal treatment regimens to allow for more personalized recommendations based on individual risk stratification and patient priorities regarding quality of life.

Neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy followed by radical surgery is the common treatment for patients with locally advanced rectal cancer. Presently, for patients with complete clinical response after neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy, organ preservation ("watch-and-wait" and local excision strategies) has been increasingly favored. However, the optimal treatment for patients with complete clinical response remains unclear.

This study aimed to use Bayesian meta-analysis to determine the best treatment for patients with locally advanced rectal cancer with complete clinical response among radical surgery, local excision, and watch-and-wait strategies.

PubMed, Web of Science, Cochrane Library, and Embase (Ovid) databases were searched for literature published through December 31, 2023.

Studies that compared 2 or more treatments for patients with complete clinical response were included.

The analysis was completed via Bayesian meta-analysis using a random-effects model.

Surgery-related complications, local recurrence, distant metastasis, and 5-year overall and disease-free survival rates.

Eleven articles met the inclusion criteria. The watch-and-wait group and local excision group exhibited a higher rate of tumor recurrence compared to the radical surgery group (watch-and-wait vs radical surgery: OR, 9.10 [95% CI, 3.30-32.3]; local excision vs radical surgery: OR, 2.93 [95% CI, 1.05-9.95]). The distant metastasis, overall survival, and disease-free survival rates of the 3 treatments were not statistically different. The radical surgery group had the most number of stomas and had the greatest risk of morbidity than the watch-and-wait group (watch-and-wait vs radical surgery: OR, 0.00 [95% CI, 0.00-0.12]).

The study included only 1 randomized controlled trial compared to 10 observational studies, which could affect overall quality. Funnel plots of disease-free survival rates and stoma suggest significant publication bias among studies that compared radical surgery with the watch-and-wait strategy.

The watch-and-wait strategy could be optimal for patients with locally advanced rectal cancer with complete clinical response after neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy.

To explore the safety and efficacy of neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy (nCRT) combined with a PD-1 antibody in improving complete clinical response (cCR) and organ preservation in patients with ultra-low rectal cancer.

This was a prospective phase II, single-arm, open-label trial. Patients with confirmed pMMR status T 1-3a N 0-1 M 0 retcal adenocarcinoma were included. Long-course chemoradiotherapy was delivered to a dose of 50 Gy. A PD-1 antibody was added 2 weeks after the first radiotherapy session, and two courses were administered. After chemoradiotherapy, CapeOX plus PD-1 antibody was administered to patients for two cycles. After evaluation, patients with cCR were managed with a watch-and-wait (W&W) approach. Local excision or a W&W approach was performed for patients with near complete clinical response (ncCR) as per multidisciplinary team decision. Radical surgery was recommended for poorly regressed or progressed tumors.

Twenty-five patients were enrolled, but two patients withdrew from the study. A total of 23 patients completed the entire neoadjuvant therapy. Ten and five patients achieved cCR and ncCR, respectively, and the rest had a partial clinical response. Patients with cCR were managed with W&W. Four patients with ncCR underwent local excision and were managed using W&W. Eight patients with partial clinical response underwent anus-preserving surgery. At the last follow-up, the rectum and anus preservation rates were 63.4% (14/22) and 95.5% (21/22), respectively.

nCRT combined with immunotherapy tended to achieve better cCR and rectum preservation rates with good tolerance in patients.

The adoption of a watch and wait (W&W) approach in patients with rectal cancer, and a complete clinical response (cCR) following neoadjuvant therapy, is increasing worldwide. Despite this, pragmatic unbiased outcome data is limited. This study aimed to investigate national outcomes associated with W&W in Aotearoa New Zealand (AoNZ).

A national retrospective study of patients with adenocarcinoma of the rectum managed with a W&W approach between January 2015 and December 2022 in AoNZ was performed by STRATA, a student and trainee led collaborative network. The Cancer Registry and the New Zealand Ministry of Health National Minimum Data Set were linked to identify patients who had rectal cancer and who were treated with neoadjuvant therapy but not rectal resection. Research teams across 17 AoNZ hospitals then screened these patients for inclusion and data collection.

One thousand five hundred and eighteen patients were screened across 17 hospitals, 133 met inclusion criteria. Median age was 71 years. Median follow-up was 2.2 years. The 2-year cumulative incidence of local regrowth was 18.2% (95% CI 10.7%-25.1%), of which 92% was present in the bowel wall, and 68% underwent surgery, all with curative intent. The 2-year cumulative distant metastasis rate was 8.8% (95% CI 3.0%-14.2%) and the 2-year overall survival was 94.8% (95% CI 90.4%-99.4%).

This nationwide study of a W&W approach has clinical outcomes similar to the international literature. This data will help guide further implementation of a W&W approach in the management of patients with rectal cancer and inform both clinicians and patients.

Rectal cancer is a significant global health concern, particularly amongst the elderly population, with rectal cancer accounting for approximately one-third of cancer cases in this population. Older adults often present with advanced disease stages and unique clinical manifestations, such as tumors closer to the anal verge and with greater size. Diagnosis typically involves a series of screening and imaging strategies, culminating in accurate staging through pelvic MRI, endoscopic ultrasound, and CT scan. Management of rectal cancer in older adults emphasizes individualized treatment plans that consider both the cancer stage and the patient's overall health status, including frailty and comorbidities. A multidisciplinary approach, including a mandatory geriatric assessment, is essential for optimizing outcomes, in order to improve survival and quality of life for elderly patients with rectal cancer.

Total mesorectal excision is the standard surgery for locally advanced rectal cancer (LARC) after neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy (nCRT), but it may lead to high complication rates and poor quality of life. This study evaluates whether transanal endoscopic microsurgery (TEM), as a partial resection procedure, can enhance quality of life for clinical complete response (cCR) or near-cCR patients without compromising survival.

Between May 2017 to September 2021, 80 patients with T3-4N0M0 or TanyN+M0 mid-low rectal cancer achieving cCR or near-cCR post-nCRT were prospectively included at 6 Chinese centers. Patients underwent either TEM (Group A, n = 38) or radical surgery (Group B, n = 41). Clinicopathological, oncological, and functional outcomes were analyzed.

Postoperative histology revealed 22 ypT0 (57.9 %), 5 ypT1 (13.2 %), 10 ypT2 (26.3 %), and 1 ypT3 (2.6 %) cases in group A and 20 pCR (48.8 %), 1 T0N1 (2.4 %), 5 T1N0 (12.2 %), 12 T2-3N0 (29.3 %), 3 T2-3N1 (7.3 %) cases in group B. After a 60-month median follow-up, local recurrence occurred in 2 patients (5.26 %) in Group A and none in Group B. Distant metastases occurred in 8 patients (21.05 %) in group A and 7 (17.07 %) in group B. There was no significant difference between the two groups in 5-year disease-free survival (P = 0.658) or 5-year overall survival (P = 0.465). Group A showed significantly faster recovery (P < 0.001) and better sphincter function per Wexner (1 vs. 4, P = 0.001) and LARS (0 vs. 17, P < 0.001) scores than Group B.

TEM may be an effective approach for assessing residual tumors in LARC patients with cCR or near-cCR. This approach offers an option for those requiring sphincter preservation, with no significant compromise in long-term oncological outcomes observed in our study.

As part of an organ sparing strategy, a surgical local excision may be performed in patients with early-stage rectal cancer or following neoadjuvant (chemo)radiotherapy. In selected cases, a completion total mesorectal excision may be recommended which can be more complex because of the preceding local excision. A transanal approach to perform completion total mesorectal excision may offer an advantage through the better visualization of the surgical field in the distal rectum and less forceful retraction for exposure. However, the oncologic safety and technical feasibility of this approach have yet to be demonstrated in these patients. Therefore, the aim of this study was to evaluate the oncological and technical safety of completion transanal total mesorectal excision following a local excision in patients with rectal cancer.

Patients from the prospective International Transanal Total Mesorectal Excision Registry who underwent a surgical local excision prior to completion transanal total mesorectal excision were retrospectively analyzed.

In total, 189 patients were included of which 22% received neoadjuvant radiotherapy. In 94% of the patients, a low anterior resection was performed. A primary anastomosis was constructed in 91% (n = 171/189) of the patients, with the majority also receiving a defunctioning stoma (84%, n = 144/171), of which 69% (n = 100/144) were reversed. Within 30 days, 7% developed an anastomotic leakage. The two-year local recurrence rate was 5% (n = 5/104) with an estimated rate of 3% (95% CI 0-7%). Two-year disease-free survival was 85% (n = 88/104) and overall survival was 95% (n = 99/104).

Transanal completion total mesorectal excision following local excision for rectal cancer is oncologically safe, with low complication rates and high restorative rates.

Organ preservation (OP) strategies are gaining interest in improving the quality of life in the management of rectal cancer, particularly for tumors located in the distal or middle rectum. The optimal OP protocol is still not standardized and relies on randomized trials. This review summarizes past and ongoing studies on OP protocols for adenocarcinoma of the distal and middle rectum.

We searched for articles and abstracts on randomized clinical trials investigating OP approaches for rectal cancer, including data presented at the LUCARRE Congress held in Nice on November 25, 2023, covering ongoing and recently published trials on rectal preservation.

Our review's findings are presented in four tables: the first evaluates key trials with overall survival (OS) as the primary endpoint; the second provides an overview of past Phase III trials; the third reviews Phase II/III trials that specifically focus on local excisions (LE); and finally, the fourth summarizes ongoing trials. Each table is accompanied by detailed comments elucidating the significance and implications of the presented data, alongside a review of current guidelines.

We highlight the growing interest in OP strategies for rectal cancer management to enhance patients' quality of life. Despite the lack of international consensus on the optimal OP protocol, past and ongoing randomized trials provide valuable findings into the evolving management strategies of rectal cancer treatment. The presented data supports the role of randomized phase III trials to provide evidence for a change in clinical practice.

Local resection (LR) in rectal cancer is indicated in stage T1N0M0 without unfavorable pathological factors, achieving oncologically satisfactory outcomes through transanal endoscopic surgery techniques. However, the initial step involves accurate staging and selection of these tumors through specific tests conducted in specialized colorectal units. For T2N0M0 tumors and T1 tumors with poor prognostic factors, the standard treatment is total mesorectal excision (TME), a procedure associated with high postoperative morbidity and mortality, functional impairments, and reduced quality of life. Therefore, new organ-preservation strategies are being explored as alternatives to TME. These include neoadjuvant therapy combined with LR, which has shown promising results, and neoadjuvant therapy followed by a "Watch and Wait" approach -where patients with complete clinical response are selected for strict surveillance- as an ideal future treatment, although there are still current challenges to be addressed.

Neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy (nCRT) followed by total mesorectal excision (TME) and selective use of adjuvant chemotherapy is currently considered the standard of care for locally advanced rectal cancer (LARC). Despite this, the concept of organ preservation is gradually challenging this approach. The management of complete clinical remission (cCR) lacks international consensus, leading scholars to develop their own perspectives based on well-designed studies and long-term data from large multicenter cohorts. To ensure appropriate treatment, this review focuses on the choice of neoadjuvant therapy, criteria for defining cCR, and treatment strategies for patients who achieve cCR after neoadjuvant therapy. By providing guidance on the accurate management of LARC patients after cCR, this review aims to prevent over- or under-treatment.

Rectal cancer has become one of the leading malignancies threatening people's health. For locally advanced rectal cancer (LARC), the comprehensive strategy combining neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy (NCRT), total mesorectal excision (TME), and adjuvant chemotherapy has emerged as a standard treatment regimen, leading to favorable local control and long-term survival. However, in recent years, an increasing attention has been paid on the exploration of organ preservation strategies, aiming to enhance quality of life while maintaining optimal oncological treatment outcomes. Local excision (LE), compared with low anterior resection (LAR) or abdominal-perineal resection (APR) was introduced dating back to 1970's. LE has historically been linked to a heightened risk of recurrence compared to TME, potentially due to occult lymph node metastasis and intraluminal recurrence. Recent evidence has demonstrated that LE might be an alternative approach, instead of LAR or APR, in cases with favorable tumor regression after NCRT with potentially better quality of life. Therefore, a retrospective analysis of clinicopathological data from mid-low LARC patients who underwent LE after NCRT was conducted, aiming to evaluate the treatment's efficacy, safety, and oncologic prognosis.

To explore the safety, efficacy, and long-term prognosis of LE in patients with mid-low rectal cancer who had a good response to NCRT.

Patients with LE between 2012 to 2021 were retrospectively collected from the rectal cancer database from Gastro-intestinal Ward III in Peking University Cancer Hospital. The clinicopathological features, postoperative complications, and long-term prognosis of these patients were analyzed. The Kaplan-Meier method was used to create cancer-specific survival curve, and the log-rank test was used to compare the differences regarding outcomes.

A total of 33 patients were included in this study. The median interval between NCRT and surgery was 25.4 (range: 8.7-164.4) weeks. The median operation time was 57 (20.0-137.0) minutes. The initial clinical T staging (cT): 9 (27.3%) patients were cT2, 19 (57.6%) patients were cT3, and 5 (15.2%) patients were cT4; The initial N staging (cN): 8 patients (24.2%) were cN negative, 25 patients (75.8%) were cN positive; The initial M stage (cM): 2 patients (6.1%) had distant metastasis (ycM1), 31 (93.9%) patients had no distant metastasis (cM0). The pathological results: 18 (54.5%) patients were pathological T0 stage (ypT0), 6 (18.2%) patients were ypT1, 7 (21.2%) patients were ypT2, and 2 (6.1%) patients were ypT3. For 9 cT2 patients, 5 (5/9, 55.6%) had a postoperative pathological result of ypT0. For 19 cT3 patients, 11 (57.9%) patients were ypT0, and 2 (40%) were ypT0 in 5 cT4 patients. The most common complication was chronic perineal pain (71.4%, 5/7), followed by bleeding (43%, 3/7), stenosis (14.3%, 1/7), and fecal incontinence (14.3%, 1/7). The median follow-up time was 42.0 (4.0-93.5) months. For 31 patients with cM0, the 5-year disease-free survival (DFS) rate, 5-year local recurrence-free survival (LRFS) rate, and 5-year overall survival (OS) rate were 88.4%, 96.7%, and 92.9%, respectively. There were significant differences between the ycT groups concerning either DFS (P = 0.042) or OS (P = 0.002) in the Kaplan-Meier analysis. The LRFS curve of ycT ≤ T1 patients was better than that of ycT ≥ T2 patients, and the P value was very close to 0.05 (P = 0.070). The DFS curve of patients with ypT ≤ T1 was better than that of patients with ypT ≥ T2, but the P value was not statistically significant (P = 0.560). There was a significant difference between the ypT groups concerning OS (P = 0.014) in the Kaplan-Meier analysis. The LRFS curve of ypT ≤ T1 patients was better than that of ypT ≥ T2 patients, and the P value was very close to 0.05 (P = 0.070). Two patients with initial cM1 were alive at the last follow-up.

LE for rectal cancer with significant tumor regression after NCRT can obtain better safety, efficiency, and oncological outcome. Minimally invasive or nonsurgical treatment with patient participation in decision-making can be performed for highly selected patients. Further investigation from multiple centers will bring better understanding of potential advantages regarding local resection.

Radical surgery following neoadjuvant therapy is the standard of care for locally advanced rectal cancer. A contact x-ray brachytherapy (CXB) boost can alternatively be used to treat residual disease postneoadjuvant (chemo)radiation, especially in patients who are not suitable for or do not wish to have surgery. Its role has mostly been studied to date in low- to intermediate-risk patients. We have now evaluated the utility of CXB boost in high-risk rectal cancers after their tumors have been significantly downstaged by neoadjuvant (chemo)radiation.

Oncological outcomes and treatment tolerability were evaluated in 328 patients based on rectal cancer treatment risk stratification: low-/intermediate-risk (cT1-3ab, N0-1, M0, no extramural venous invasion, mesorectal fascia involvement >1 mm) and high-risk (cT3cd-4/N2, M0, mesorectal fascia ≤1 mm, and/or extramural venous invasion positive).

With a median follow-up of 33 (IQR, 15-54) months and a median age of 73 (IQR, 62-80) years, no significant differences were found between low/intermediate and high-risk groups in clinical complete response (78% vs. 73%, P = .32), local regrowth (16.6% vs. 22.4%, P = .41), nodal (1.8% vs. 5.8%, P = .051) or regional (1.3% vs. 2.9%, P = .33) relapse, or postradiation toxicities (P = .16). However, the high-risk group had a higher distant relapse rate (21.2% vs. 10.7%, P = .01), with no significant differences in 3-year organ preservation (80% vs. 87%, P = .25), 5-year disease-free survival (62% vs. 64%, P = .46), or overall survival (67% vs. 64%, P = .88). Longer treatment time, treatment gap >24 weeks between therapies, and administration of a higher than standard CXB dose were newly identified factors that negatively impacted outcomes.

High-risk patients with rectal cancer treated with CXB boost had more distant relapses, but comparable locoregional tumor control, organ preservation, disease-free survival, and overall survival to lower risk patients, with acceptable toxicities. CXB boost is, therefore, a viable option for selected high-risk patients with rectal cancer. Timely reassessment, prompt referral, and CXB dose optimization are crucial for improving outcomes.

Non-radical management is an option for good responders to neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy in mid-to-low rectal cancer. This study aimed to analyze risk factors for lymph node metastasis in patients with ypT2 rectal cancer, exploring the possibility of non-radical management.

We included patients with ypT2 rectal cancer who received neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy followed by total mesorectal excision between January 2004 and December 2022. Clinicopathological parameters were evaluated to identify risk factors for lymph node metastasis.

Among the 198 patients, 158 (79.8%) had ypT2N0 and 40 (20.2%) had ypT2N+. In univariable analyses, the risk factors of lymph node metastasis were perineural invasion (48.0% vs. 16.3% without perineural invasion, P < 0.001), female sex (30.0% vs. 14.8% with male sex, P = 0.011), and clinically positive nodes after neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy (32.6% vs. 16.4% with negative nodes, P = 0.017). These factors were confirmed as independent risk factors in multivariable analyses: perineural invasion (odds ratio [OR]: 4.50; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.79-11.29; P < 0.001), female sex (OR: 2.62; 95% CI: 1.24-5.52; P = 0.012) and clinical node involvement after neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy (OR: 2.28; 95% CI: 1.03-5.05; P = 0.012). The rate of lymph node metastasis in patients with ypT2 rectal cancer without any of these three risk factors was 12.5%.

This study revealed a high probability of lymph node metastasis in patients with ypT2 rectal cancer, even in the absence of identifiable risk factors. We confirm that lymph node metastasis should be considered in ypT2 rectal cancer.

The management of locally advanced rectal cancer has changed drastically in the last few decades due to improved surgical techniques, development of multimodal treatment approaches and the introduction of a watch and wait (WW) strategy. For patients with a complete response to neoadjuvant treatment, WW offers an opportunity to avoid the morbidity associated with total mesorectal excision in favor of organ preservation. Despite growing interest in WW, prospective data on the safety and efficacy of nonoperative management are limited. Challenges remain in optimizing multimodal treatment regimens to maximize tumor regression and in improving the accuracy of patient selection for WW. This review summarizes the history of treatment for rectal cancer and the development of a WW strategy. It also provides an overview of clinical considerations for patients interested in nonoperative management, including restaging strategies, WW selection criteria, surveillance protocols and long-term oncologic outcomes.

Domestic and international guidelines recommend endoscopic resection for stage T1 colorectal adenocarcinoma with indications. However, completion surgery remains imperative for patients exhibiting high-risk factors subsequent to endoscopic procedures.

To investigate the evidence, pathological features, and surgical outcomes of completion surgery in patients with T1 colorectal adenocarcinoma following endoscopic resection.

We retrospectively collect data on the clinical features and treatment outcomes of patients with stage T1 colorectal adenocarcinoma who underwent endoscopic resection followed by surgical resection and those who initially completed surgical intervention at Peking University International Hospital between January 2019 and October 2022, with the aim of assessing the necessity and feasibility of surgical intervention.

Seventeen patients (Group A) with high-risk factors following endoscopic procedure, especially with deep submucosal invasion and vascular or lymphatic invasion, experienced further surgical resection. The median interval between endoscopic resection and completion surgery was 23.71 days ± 15.89. Sixteen patients (Group B) underwent radical resection without any prior interventions. The surgical approach involves integration of laparoscopy and colonoscopy for precise localization and quantitative diagnosis, followed by radical surgery. The two groups demonstrated significant differences statistically with reference to tumor diameter (1.65 cm ± 0.77 vs 3.36 cm ± 1.39, P = 0.000) and the attainment of standard lymph node count (cases of detected lymph nodes larger than or equal to 12, 5 vs 12, P = 0.015). Postoperative complications and hospital stay manifested no significant disparity statistically in two groups. Patients who underwent completion surgery had no inferior outcomes compared with those who underwent direct surgery in terms of 5-year disease-free survival (Log rank test: P = 0.083, Breslow test: P = 0.089). The two groups also exhibited no significant differences statistically in the context of overall survival (Log rank test: P = 0.652, Breslow test: P = 0.758).

Completion surgery is a safe and feasible treatment option for T1 colorectal adenocarcinoma patients with high-risk factors, particularly those with deep submucosal invasion and vascular or lymphatic invasion following endoscopic treatment. Furthermore, subsequent treatment should be chosen based on a comprehensive analysis of the patient's history of abdominal surgery, willingness, and pathological features.

Background: Resected rectal polyps with deep invasion into the submucosa (pT1b-sm2,3) or the muscle layer (pT2) are currently confronted with surgery due to non-curative resection. Aims: We evaluated the efficacy, safety, and locoregional control of adjuvant radiotherapy (RT) and/or chemotherapy (CT) following endoscopic KAR (knife-assisted resection) in patients with invasive early rectal cancers who are unwilling or unsuitable for additional surgical resection. Methods: Fifty-one patients with early rectal cancers, pT1b or pT2, underwent post-resection adjuvant RT and/or CT in 15 centers worldwide. "En bloc" macroscopic resection, R0 resection, recurrence rate, and adverse events following resection and adjuvant therapy were recorded in a multicenter retrospective cohort study. Results: Diagnostic staging (38/51, 75%) was the main reason for ELE. Macroscopic "en bloc" resection was demonstrated in 50/51 (98%), with an average follow-up of 20.6 months. Endoscopic recurrence occurred in 7/51 (13.7%) of patients, with mean time for diagnosis of recurrence at 8.9 months. Adjuvant therapy consisted of RT in 49.0% (25/51), CT in 11.8% (6/51), and combined CRT in 39.2% (20/51) of the cases. Perforation, severe post-procedural bleeding, and incontinence were the most frequent complications. The absence of superficial ulceration was associated with macroscopic complete resection, while the lesions with lower budding stage, clear lateral margins, lesion size < 40 mm, and needle-type knife used were associated with less endoscopic recurrencies. Conclusions: Our data investigated adjuvant RT and/or CT after endoscopic KAR of infiltrative rectal cancers (pT1bsm2,3-pT2) as being safe and effective for locoregional control and providing a non-surgical treatment option for patients with a non-curative resection.

For patients with rectal cancer, the standard approach of chemotherapy, radiation therapy, and surgery (trimodality therapy) is associated with significant long-term toxicity and/or colostomy for most patients. Patient options focused on quality of life (QOL) have dramatically improved, but there remains limited guidance regarding comparative effectiveness. This systematic review and associated guidelines evaluate how various treatment strategies compare to each other in terms of oncologic outcomes and QOL. Cochrane and Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) methodology were used to search for prospective and retrospective trials and meta-analyses of adequate quality within the Ovid Medline database between January 1, 2012, and June 15, 2023. These studies informed the expert panel, which rated the appropriateness of various treatments in 6 clinical scenarios through a well-established consensus methodology (modified Delphi). The search process yielded 197 articles that advised voting. Increasing data have shown that nonoperative management (NOM) and primary surgery result in QOL benefits noted over trimodality therapy without detriment to oncologic outcomes. For patients with rectal cancer for whom total mesorectal excision would result in permanent colostomy or inadequate bowel continence, NOM was strongly recommended as usually appropriate. Restaging with tumor response assessment approximately 8 to 12 weeks after completion of radiation therapy/chemoradiation therapy was deemed a necessary component of NOM. The panel recommended active surveillance in the setting of a near-complete or complete response. In the setting of NOM, 54 to 56 Gy in 27 to 31 fractions concurrent with chemotherapy and followed by consolidation chemotherapy was recommended. The panel strongly recommends primary surgery as usually appropriate for a T3N0 high rectal tumor for which low anterior resection and adequate bowel function is possible, with adjuvant chemotherapy considered if N+. Recent data support NOM and primary surgery as important options that should be offered to eligible patients. Considering the complexity of multidisciplinary management, patients should be discussed in a multidisciplinary setting, and therapy should be tailored to individual patient goals/values.

In the last decade, the Netherlands has implemented various diagnostic and treatment strategies to enhance rectal cancer outcomes. This study, using data from the Prospective Dutch ColoRectal Cancer (PLCRC) cohort, investigates whether these multidisciplinary advancements have translated into improved health-related quality of life (HRQoL) and functional outcomes for the general Dutch rectal cancer population.

Patients with Stage I-III rectal cancer enrolled in the PLCRC cohort were included. HRQoL and functional outcomes were assessed 1 and 2 years after diagnosis using the European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Questionnaire Core 30 (EORTC QLQ-C30), EORTC QLQ Colorectal Cancer 29 and the Low Anterior Resection Syndrome score. HRQoL and functional outcomes were compared based on year of diagnosis (2014-2019).

A total of 1294 patients were included. Two years after diagnosis, patients diagnosed in 2019 (n = 392) had a clinically relevant higher score on physical (8.2, 95% CI 4.1-12.3), role (13.5, 95% CI 7.3-19.7) and social functioning (5.8, 95% CI 0.3-11.2) compared to those diagnosed in 2014 (n = 65). Additionally, patients diagnosed in 2019 experienced less fatigue 2 years after diagnosis compared to those diagnosed in 2014 (-8.6, 95% CI -14.1 to -3.0). The Low Anterior Resection Syndrome score showed no differences.

The findings of this study suggest that over the past decade rectal cancer patients in the Netherlands have witnessed improvements in HRQoL across various domains. Most probably, the improvement is due to a combination of implementation of population screening, a more restrictive neoadjuvant radiotherapy policy and advances in minimally invasive surgery and organ preserving treatment options.

Local excision is an effective approach for managing rectal cancer exhibiting substantial regression after neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy. The purpose of this study is to compare the outcomes between local excision and total mesorectal excision in rectal cancer patients achieving clinical complete or near-complete response after neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy.

This is a retrospective cohort study that includes a consecutive series of rectal cancer patients who responded well to neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy followed by surgery. A total of 180 rectal cancer patients at a single institution during a 12-year period are included. The main outcomes include short-term outcomes, oncological outcomes, and functional outcomes between the two groups.

A total of 180 patients were included in the study. Sixty-one (33.9%) received local excision and 119 (66.1%) received total mesorectal excision. The baseline characteristics were generally balanced between the two groups. The local excision group demonstrated a significantly shorter operative time, less blood loss, and shorter hospital stay (p < 0.001). 3-year overall survival rates were 97.5% (95% CI, 0.93-1.00) and 95.5% (95% CI, 0.91-1.00) between the two groups (p = 0.38). The local excision group exhibited significantly higher 3-year local recurrence rates 15.7% (95% CI, 0.74-0.97) vs 4.2% (95% CI, 0.92-1.00) (p = 0.017), yet lower 3-year distant metastasis rates 9.6% (95% CI, 0.82-1.00) vs 12.6% (95% CI, 0.81-0.94) (p = 0.33) and lower 3-year disease-free survival rates 76.8% (95% CI, 0.64-0.92) vs 84.7% (95% CI, 0.78-0.92) (p = 0.56) comparing with the total mesorectal excision group. The local excision group demonstrated significantly better functional outcomes compared with the total mesorectal excision group (p < 0.001).

Patients who achieve either clinical complete or near-complete response after neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy are suitable candidates for local excision. The local excision group demonstrated superior short-term and functional outcomes, and the oncological outcomes were not compromised.

Prospective randomized trials have not yet identified baseline features predictive of organ preservation in locally advanced rectal cancers treated with total neoadjuvant therapy and a selective watch-and-wait strategy.

This was a secondary analysis of the OPRA trial, which randomized patients with stage II-III rectal adenocarcinoma to receive either induction or consolidation total neoadjuvant therapy. Patients were recommended for total mesorectal excision, or watch and wait based on clinical response at 8 ± 4 weeks after completing treatment. Standardized baseline clinical and radiological variables were collected prospectively. Survival outcomes, including total mesorectal excision-free survival, disease-free survival, and overall survival, were assessed by intention-to-treat analysis. Cox proportional hazards models were used to evaluate associations between baseline variables and survival outcomes.

Of the 324 patients randomized for the OPRA trial, 38 (11.7%) had cT4 tumours, 230 (71.0%) cN-positive disease, 101 (32.5%) mesorectal fascia involvement, and 64 (19.8%) extramural venous invasion. Several baseline features were independently associated with recommendation for total mesorectal excision on multivariable analysis: nodal disease (HR 1.66, 95% c.i. 1.12 to 2.48), extramural venous invasion (HR 1.57, 1.07 to 2.29), mesorectal fascia involvement (HR 1.45, 1.01 to 2.09), and tumour length (HR 1.11, 1.00 to 1.22). Of these, nodal disease (HR 2.02, 1.15 to 3.53) and mesorectal fascia involvement (HR 2.02, 1.26 to 3.26) also predicted worse disease-free survival. Age (HR 1.03, 1.00 to 1.06) was associated with overall survival.

Baseline MRI features, including nodal disease, extramural venous invasion, mesorectal fascia involvement, and tumour length, independently predict the likelihood of organ preservation after completion of total neoadjuvant therapy. Mesorectal fascia involvement and nodal disease are associated with disease-free survival.

Rectal-sparing approaches for patients with rectal cancer who achieved a complete or major response following neoadjuvant therapy constitute a paradigm of a potential shift in the management of patients with rectal cancer; however, their role remains controversial. The aim of this study was to investigate the feasibility of rectal-sparing approaches to preserve the rectum without impairing the outcomes.

This prospective, multicenter, observational study investigated the outcomes of patients with clinical stage II-III mid-low rectal adenocarcinoma treated with any neoadjuvant therapy, and either transanal local excision or watch-and-wait approach, based on tumor response (major or complete) and patient/surgeon choice. The primary endpoint of the study was rectum preservation at a minimum follow-up of 2 years. Secondary endpoints were overall, disease-free, local and distant recurrence-free, and stoma-free survival at 3 years.

Of the 178 patients enrolled in 16 centers, 112 (62.9%) were managed with local excision and 66 (37.1%) with watch-and-wait. At a median (interquartile range) follow-up of 36.1 (30.6-45.6) months, the rectum was preserved in 144 (80.9%) patients. The 3-year rectum-sparing, overall survival, disease-free survival, local recurrence-free survival, and distant recurrence-free survival was 80.6% (95% CI 73.9-85.8), 97.6% (95% CI 93.6-99.1), 90.0% (95% CI 84.3-93.7), 94.7% (95% CI 90.1-97.2), and 94.6% (95% CI 89.9-97.2), respectively. The 3-year stoma-free survival was 95.0% (95% CI 89.5-97.6). The 3-year regrowth-free survival in the watch-and-wait group was 71.8% (95% CI 59.9-81.2).

In rectal cancer patients with major or complete clinical response after neoadjuvant therapy, the rectum can be preserved in about 80% of cases, without compromising the outcomes.

This manuscript offers a detailed description of our successful tips for mastering transanal robotic surgery. It covers various aspects, including patient positioning, management of abdominal pressures to maintain a stable pneumorectum, platform positioning, camera alignment, trocar positioning to minimize collisions, instruments used, and approaches to tumor resection.

Although total mesorectal excision (TME) remains the standard of care for rectal cancer, including early-stage T1/T2 rectal adenocarcinoma, local excision may be warranted for these early-stage tumors in a select group of patients who may decline surgery or may be nonoptimal surgical candidates. Operative approaches for transanal local excision include transanal endoscopic microsurgery or transanal minimally invasive surgery for tumors <4 cm, occupying <40% of the rectal circumference and <10 cm from the dentate line. The use of preoperative chemoradiation therapy may help to downstage tumors and allow for more limited resections, and chemoradiation may also be employed postoperatively. Local excision approaches appear to result in improved quality of life compared with TME, but limited resections may also compromise survival rates compared with TME. Multidisciplinary management and shared decision-making can allow for the desired patient outcomes.

Transanal minimally invasive surgery (TAMIS) is a surgical alternative to proctectomy in the management of complex rectal polyps and early rectal cancers. In 2016, our institution introduced a TAMIS programme. The purpose of this study was to evaluate changes in practice and outcomes in our institution in the 3 years before and after the implementation of TAMIS. We conducted a retrospective analysis of a prospective database of patients who underwent proctectomy or TAMIS for the management of complex rectal polyps or early rectal cancers at our institution between 2013 and 2018. 96 patients were included in this study (41 proctectomy vs 55 TAMIS). A significant reduction was noted in the number of proctectomies performed in the 3 years after the implementation of TAMIS as compared to the 3 years before (13 vs 28) ( P  < 0.001); 43% of patients ( n  = 12) who underwent proctectomy in the period prior to implementation of TAMIS were American Society of Anaesthesiologists grade III, as compared to only 15% ( n  = 2) of patients during the period following TAMIS implementation ( P  = 0.02). TAMIS was associated with a significant reduction in length of inpatient stay ( P  < 0.001). Oncological outcomes were comparable between groups (log rank P  = 0.83). Our findings support TAMIS as a safe and effective alternative to radical resection. The availability of TAMIS has resulted in a significant reduction in the number of comorbid patients undergoing proctectomy at our institution. Consequently, we have observed a significant reduction in postoperative complications over this time period.

The epidemiology of colorectal cancer (CRC) has changed rapidly over the years. The aim of this study was to assess the trends in incidence, treatment, and relative survival (RS) of patients diagnosed with CRC in the Netherlands between 2000 and 2021.

2 75667 patients diagnosed with CRC between 2000 and 2021 were included from the Netherlands Cancer Registry. Analyses were stratified for disease extent (localised: T1-3N0M0; regional: T4N0M0/T1-4N1-2M0; distant: T1-4N0-2M1) and localisation (colon; rectum). Trends were assessed with joinpoint regression.

CRC incidence increased until the mid-2010s but decreased strongly thereafter to rates comparable with the early 2000s. Amongst other trend changes, local excision rates increased for patients with localised colon (2021: 13.6 %) and rectal cancer (2021: 34.9 %). Moreover, primary tumour resection became less common in patients with distant colon (2000-2021: 60.9-12.5 %) or rectal cancer (2000-2021: 47.8-6.9 %), while local treatment of metastases rates increased. Five-year RS improved continuously for localised and regional colon (97.7 % and 72.0 % in 2017, respectively) and rectal cancer (95.2 % and 76.3 % in 2017, respectively). The rate of anti-cancer treatments decreased in distant colon (2010-2021: 80.3 % to 67.2 %; p < 0.001) and rectal cancer (2011-2021: 86.0 % to 77.0 %; p < 0.001). The improvement of five-year RS stagnated for distant colon (2010-2017: 11.2 % to 11.9 %; average percentage of change [APC]: 2.1, 95 % confidence interval [CI]: -7.6, 4.7) and rectal cancer (2009-2017: 12.7 % to 15.6 %; APC: 1.4, 95 % CI: -19.1, 5.5).

Major changes in the incidence and treatment of CRC between 2000 and 2021 were identified and quantified. Five-year RS increased continuously for patients with localised and regional CRC, but stagnated for patients with distant CRC, likely caused by decreased rates of anti-cancer treatment in this group.

T1 colorectal cancer (CRC), defined by tumor invasion confined to the submucosa, has historically been managed by surgery. Improved understanding of recurrence and lymph node metastases risk, coupled with advances in endoscopic resection techniques, have led to an increasing capacity for organ-sparing local excision. Minimally invasive management of T1 CRC begins with optical evaluation of the lesion to diagnose invasive disease and quantify depth of invasion, which informs therapeutic decision making. Modality selection between various available endoscopic resection techniques depends upon lesion characteristics, technique risk-benefit profiles, and location-specific implications. Following endoscopic resection, established histopathology features determine the risk of recurrence and subsequent management including surveillance or adjuvant surgical excision. The management of non-operative candidates deviates from conventional recommendations with emerging treatment strategies in select populations.

A variety of definitions for a clinical near-complete response after neoadjuvant (chemo) radiotherapy for rectal cancer are currently used. This variety leads to inconsistency in clinical practice, long-term outcome, and trial enrollment.

The aim of this study was to reach expert-based consensus on the definition of a clinical near-complete response after (chemo) radiotherapy.

A modified Delphi process, including a systematic review, 3 surveys, and 2 meetings, was performed with an international expert panel consisting of 7 surgeons and 4 radiologists. The surveys consisted of individual features, statements, and feature combinations (endoscopy, T2-weighted MRI, and diffusion-weighted MRI).

The modified Delphi process was performed in an online setting; all 3 surveys were completed online by the expert panel, and both meetings were hosted online.

The main outcome was to reach consensus (80% or more agreement).

The expert panel reached consensus on a 3-tier categorization of the near-complete response category based on the likelihood of the response to evolve into a clinical complete response after a longer waiting interval. The panelists agreed that a near-complete response is a temporary entity only to be used in the first 6 months after (chemo)radiotherapy. Furthermore, consensus was reached that the lymph node status should be considered when deciding on a near-complete response and that biopsies are not always needed when a near-complete response is found. No consensus was reached on whether primary staging characteristics have to be taken into account when deciding on a near-complete response.

This 3-tier subcategorization is expert-based; therefore, there is no supporting evidence for this subcategorization. Also, it is unclear whether this subcategorization can be generalized into clinical practice.

Consensus was reached on the use of a 3-tier categorization of a near-complete response, which can be helpful in daily practice as guidance for treatment and to inform patients with a near-complete response on the likelihood of successful organ preservation. See Video Abstract.

ANTECEDENTES:Actualmente, se utilizan una variedad de definiciones para una respuesta clínica casi completa después de quimioradioterapia neoadyuvante contra el cáncer de recto. Esta variedad resulta en inconsistencia en la práctica clínica, los resultados a largo plazo y la inscripción en ensayos.OBJETIVO:El objetivo de este estudio fue llegar a un consenso de expertos sobre la definición de una respuesta clínica casi completa después de quimioradioterapia.DISEÑO:Se realizó un proceso Delphi modificado que incluyó una revisión sistemática, 3 encuestas y 2 reuniones con un panel internacional de expertos compuesto por siete cirujanos y 4 radiólogos. Las encuestas consistieron en características individuales, declaraciones y combinaciones de características (endoscopía, T2W-MRI y DWI).AJUSTE:El proceso Delphi modificado se realizó en un entorno en línea; el panel de expertos completó las tres encuestas en línea y ambas reuniones se realizaron en línea.PRINCIPALES MEDIDAS DE RESULTADO:El resultado principal fue llegar a un consenso (≥80% de acuerdo).RESULTADOS:El panel de expertos llegó a un consenso sobre una categorización de tres niveles de la categoría de respuesta casi completa basada en la probabilidad de que la respuesta evolucione hacia una respuesta clínica completa después de un intervalo de espera más largo. Los panelistas coincidieron en que una respuesta casi completa es una entidad temporal que sólo debe utilizarse en los primeros 6 meses después de la quimioradioterapia. Además, se llegó a un consenso en que se debe considerar el estado de los nódulos linfáticos al decidir sobre una respuesta casi completa y que no siempre se necesitan biopsias cuando se encuentra una respuesta casi completa. No se llegó a un consenso sobre si se deben tener en cuenta las características primarias de estadificación al decidir una respuesta casi completa.LIMITACIONES:Esta subcategorización de 3 niveles está basada en expertos; por lo tanto, no hay evidencia que respalde esta subcategorización. Además, no está claro si esta subcategorización puede generalizarse a la práctica clínica.CONCLUSIONES:Se alcanzó consenso sobre el uso de una categorización de 3 niveles de una respuesta casi completa que puede ser útil en la práctica diaria como guía para el tratamiento y para informar a los pacientes con una respuesta casi completa sobre la probabilidad de una preservación exitosa del órgano. (Traducción - Dr. Aurian Garcia Gonzalez).

Age significantly affects the prognosis of patients with rectal cancer after radical excision (RE), and local excision (LE) is an alternative surgical procedure to RE. To compare the survival prognosis in different age groups of LE versus RE for rectal cancer. Patients diagnosed with rectal adenocarcinoma treated by LE or RE from 2010 to 2017 were obtained from the SEER database. The primary outcomes are 5-year OS and CSS. A total of 11,170 patients were eventually included, and there were 490 patients in LE and RE groups, respectively, after 1:1 propensity score matching. The 5-year OS and CSS after LE were significantly better in < 50 years and 50-66 years groups than in > 66 years group (5-year OS: 95.70% vs 88.40% vs 67.00%, P < 0.001; 5-year CSS: 95.70% vs 96.30% vs 82.60%, P < 0.001). No statistical significance was found for the differences in 5-year OS and CSS between LE and RE in < 50, 50-66, and > 66 years group (P > 0.05). Multivariate analysis showed age > 66 years, poorly differentiated or undifferentiated (Grade III/IV), and tumor size 3 to 5 cm was independent risk factors for 5-year OS after LE; age > 66 years, perineural invasion, and tumor size 3 to 5 cm were the 5-year CSS independent risk factors for after LE. We found that the survival prognosis of younger rectal cancer patients treated with LE was significantly better than older (> 66 years) patients, and the survival prognosis of rectal cancer patients in the three age groups was similar between LE and RE.

The aim of this study was to assess the significant risk factors that predict lymph node metastasis in ypT0 patients with locally advanced rectal cancer following chemoradiotherapy (CRT). Additionally, the study aimed to identify high-risk groups who would not be suitable candidates for a rectal-preserving strategy, despite achieving a complete tumour response.

Between 2013 and 2021, 226 ypT0 patients with stages II/III rectal cancer underwent CRT and radical surgery were enrolled. Two groups of patients were evaluated: those with lymph nodes metastasis and those without. The selection of variables for multivariable logistic regression was conducted through bivariate logistic regression analysis. Furthermore, the determination of optimal cutoff values for risk factors was achieved using ROC curve analysis.

Nearly 8% (18/226) of patients with ypT0 had positive lymph nodes (LN) on final pathology. Four variables resulted as being independent factors of LN metastasis: pre-CRT tumour movability (OR = 8.618, P = 0.003), pre-CRT maximal LN size (OR = 28.474, P = 0.004), post-CRT tumour vertical length (OR = 1.492, P = 0.050), post-CRT anaemia (OR = 10.288, P = 0.001). The optimal cutoff point of pre-CRT maximal LN size and post-CRT tumour vertical length was 7.50 mm and 3.05 cm, respectively.

The prevalence of lymph node metastasis remains at 8% among patients who achieve pathological complete regression of the primary tumour. In instances where patients are considered appropriate candidates for a rectal-preserving strategy after clinical complete remission, careful consideration should be given to the selection of this strategy if specific risk factors are present. These risk factors encompass a maximal LN size surpassing 7.50 mm prior to CRT, a fixed tumour prior to CRT, a tumour vertical length exceeding 3.05 cm after CRT, and the existence of anaemia subsequent to CRT.

A rise in the incidence of early rectal cancer consequent to bowel-screening programs around the world and an increase in the incidence in young adults has led to a growing interest in organ-sparing treatment options. The rectum, being the most distal portion of the large intestine, is a fertile ground for local excision techniques performed with endoscopic or surgical techniques. Moreover, the advancement in endoscopic optical evaluation and the better definition of imaging techniques allow for a more precise local staging of early rectal cancer. Although the local treatment of early rectal cancer seems promising, in clinical practice, a significant number of patients who could benefit from local excision techniques undergo total mesorectal excision (TME) as the first approach. All relevant prospective clinical trials were identified through a computer-assisted search of the PubMed, EMBASE, and Medline databases until January 2024. This review is dedicated to endoscopic and surgical local excision in the treatment of early rectal cancer and highlights its possible role in current and future clinical practice, taking into account surgical completion techniques and chemoradiotherapy.

Residual lymph node metastases (RLNM) remained a great concern in the implementation of organ-preserving strategies and led to poor prognosis in locally advanced rectal cancer (LARC). In this study, we aimed to identify the clinicopathological factors correlated with RLNM in LARC patients with ypT0-2 after neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy (NCRT).

We retrospectively analyzed 417 patients histologically diagnosed middle-low LARC after NCRT and total mesorectal excision (TME), whose pathological staging was ypT0-2. All patients received pelvic magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) before NCRT. The radiation doses were 50-50.6 Gy for the planning gross tumor volume and 41.8-45 Gy for the planning target volume, respectively. A nomogram for predicting RLNM was constructed using a binary logistic regression. Nomogram performance was assessed by receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve, calibration curve, decision curve analysis (DCA) and clinical impact curve (CIC).

After surgery, 191 patients (45.8%) were ypT0, 43 patients (10.3%) were ypT1 and 183 patients (43.9%) were ypT2, and a total of 49 patients (11.8%) were found the presence of RLNM. Multivariable analyses identified MRI-defined mesorectal fascia (MRF)-positive, high-grade histopathology at biopsy, advanced ypT-category, and the presence of perineural invasion (PNI) as the predictive factors. The nomogram, incorporating all these predictors, showed good discrimination and calibration efficacy, with the areas under the ROC curve of 0.690 (95% CI: 0.610-0.771). Both DCA and CIC demonstrated that this nomogram has good clinical usefulness.

The nomogram model can predict RLNM in patients with ypT0-2 tumors. It can help select suitable patients for performing organ-preserving strategies after NCRT.

The introduction of total mesorectal excision into the radical surgery of rectal cancer has significantly improved the oncological outcome with longer survival and lower local recurrence. Traditional treatment modalities of distal rectal cancer, relying on radical surgery, while effective, take their own set of risks, including surgical complications, potential damage to the anus, and surrounding structure owing to the pursuit of thorough resection. The progress of operating methods as well as the integration of systemic therapies and radiotherapy into the peri-operative period, particularly the exciting clinical complete response of patients after neoadjuvant treatment, have paved the way for organ preservation strategy. The non-inferiority oncological outcome of "watch and wait" compared with radical surgery underscores the potential of organ preservation not only to control local recurrence but also to reduce the need for treatments followed by structure destruction, hopefully improving the long-term quality of life. Radical radiotherapy provides another treatment option for patients unwilling or unable to undergo surgery. Organ preservation points out the direction of treatment for distal rectal cancer, while additional researches are needed to answer remaining questions about its optimal use.

The aim was to evaluate the efficacy and safety between the watch-and-wait strategy (WW), radical surgery (RS), and local excision (LE) for rectal cancer with clinical complete response (cCR) after neoadjuvant radiotherapy (nCRT). We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, the Cochrane Library, and clinical trials to compare WW with RS and LE for patients with cCR until March 2023 and collected the following data: local recurrence (LR), distant metastasis (DM), cancer-related death (CRD), overall survival (OS), and disease-free survival (DFS). In total, 2240 patients from 21 studies were included. Pairwise meta-analysis revealed no statistically significant differences between the three groups in terms of CRD and 2-, 3-, and 5-year OS (P < 0.05). The RS group was significantly better than the WW group in terms of the LR rate (odds ratio [OR] = 0.12, 95 % confidence interval [CI]: 0.06-0.21, P < 0.001, I2 = 0 %], 3-year DFS (OR = 1.56, 95 % CI: 1.10-2.21, P = 0.01, I2 = 38 %), and 5-year DFS (OR = 2.30, 95 % CI: 1.53-3.46, P < 0.001, I2 = 34 %). The results of network meta-analysis were also similar. After sensitivity analysis, the 5-year OS of the RS group was significantly better than that of the WW group (OR = 2.77, 95 % CI: 1.28-6.00, P = 0.009, I2 = 33 %). Nevertheless, neither regression analysis nor subgroup analysis provided meaningful results. However, the cumulative meta-analysis of LR, DM, and 3- and 5-year DFS revealed significant turning points (P < 0.05). Our meta-analysis recommends using the WW strategy for patients with cCR having poor underlying conditions and high surgical risk; however, there is a risk of higher LR and worse survival after 3 years.

Local excision (LE) in selected cases after neoadjuvant radiochemotherapy (RCT) for locally advanced rectal cancer in clinically complete or major responders has been recently reported as an alternative to standard radical resection. Completion total mesorectal excision (cTME) is generally performed when high-risk pathological features are found in LE surgical specimens. The aim of this study was to evaluate the incidence of residual tumour and lymph node metastases after cTME in patients previously treated by RCT + LE. The secondary aims were to quantify the rate of postoperative morbidity and mortality and to evaluate the long-term oncological outcome of this group of patients.

All patients treated from 2007 to 2020 by LE for locally advanced rectal cancer with a clinically complete or major response to RCT who had a subsequent cTME for high-risk pathological factors (ypT >1 and/or TRG >2 and/or positive margins) were included in this multicentre retrospective study. Pathological data, postoperative short-term morbidity (classified according to Clavien-Dindo) and mortality and oncological long-term outcome after cTME were recorded in a database. Statistical analysis was performed using Wizard for iOS version 1.9.31.

A total of 47 patients were included in the study. The rate of R0 resection was 95.7%, and a sphincter-saving procedure was performed in 37 patients (78.7%), with a protective stoma rate of 78.4%. In 28 cases (59.6%), it was possible to perform a minimally invasive approach. A residual tumour (pT and/or pN) on cTME specimens was found in 21 cases (44.7%). The rate of lymph node metastases was 12.8%. The overall short-term (within 30 days) postoperative morbidity was 34%, but grade >2 postoperative complications occurred in only nine patients (19.1%), with a reoperation rate of 6.4%. No short-term postoperative deaths occurred. At a median follow-up of 57 months (range: 21-174), the long-term stoma-free rate was 70.2%, and the actuarial 5-year overall survival (OS), disease-free survival (DFS) and local control (LC) were 86.7%, 88.9% and 95.7%, respectively.

When patients exhibit high-risk pathological factors after RCT + LE, cTME should be suggested due to the high risk of residual tumour or lymph node involvement (44.7%). The results after cTME in terms of the rate of R0 resection, sphincter-saving procedure, postoperative morbidity and mortality and long-term oncological outcome seem to be acceptable and do not represent a contraindication to use LE as a first-step treatment in patients with major or complete clinical response after RCT.

Since the response of patients with rectal cancer (RC) to neoadjuvant therapy is highly variable, there is an urgent need to develop accurate methods to predict the post-treatment T (pT) stage. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the utility of multi-parametric MRI radiomics models and identify the most accurate machine learning (ML) algorithms for predicting pT stage of RC.

This retrospective study analyzed pretreatment clinical features of 171 RC patients who underwent 3 T MRI prior to neoadjuvant therapy and subsequent total mesorectal excision. Tumors were manually drawn as regions of interest (ROI) layer by layer on high-resolution T2-weighted image (T2WI) and contrast-enhanced T1-weighted image (CE-T1WI) using ITK-SNAP software. The most relevant features of pT stage from CE-T1WI, T2WI, and fusion features (combination of clinical features, CE-T1WI, and T2WI radiomics features) were extracted by the Least Absolute Shrinkage and Selection Operator method. Clinical, CE-T1WI radiomics, T2WI radiomics, and fusion models were established by ML multiple classifiers.

In the clinical model, the LightGBM algorithm demonstrated the highest efficiency, with AUC values of 0.857 and 0.702 for the training and test cohorts, respectively. For the T2WI and CE-T1WI models, the SVM algorithm was the most efficient; AUC = 0.969 and 0.868 in the training cohort, and 0.839 and 0.760 in the test cohort, respectively. The fusion model yielded the highest predictive performance using the LR algorithm; AUC = 0.967 and 0.932 in the training and test cohorts, respectively.

Radiomics features extracted from CE-T1WI and T2WI images and clinical features were effective predictors of pT stage in patients with rectal cancer who underwent neoadjuvant therapy. ML-based multi-parameter MRI radiomics model incorporating relevant clinical features can improve the pT stage prediction accuracy of RC.