Download T M E

Survey
yes no Was this document useful for you?
   Thank you for your participation!

* Your assessment is very important for improving the workof artificial intelligence, which forms the content of this project

Document related concepts
no text concepts found
Transcript
Multimodality therapy
for rectal cancer
Carlo Aschele
Oncologia Medica B
Istituto Nazionale per la Ricerca sul Cancro - Genova
Highlights in the management of gastrointestinal cancer
Roma - May 21-22, 2010
LOCAL FAILURE AND SITE
OF RECTAL CANCER
tumor
site
odds
ratio
upper
third
0.43
middle/
lower
third
1.0
95%
c.i.
0.24-0.77
p=0.004
Hermanek, 1995
EFFECT OF RT ON LOCAL FAILURE
AND SITE OF RECTAL CANCER
Dutch TME trial
cm from
anal verge
2-y LR, %
RT+TME
TME
p
0-5
5.8
10
0.05
5-10
1.0
10.1
<0.001
10-15
1.3
3.8
0.17
NEJM, 2001
CHI?
• SOTTO LA RIFLESSIONE PERITONEALE
• ENTRO 12 CM DALLA RIMA ANALE
INTERVENTO- RETTOSCOPIA (STR RIGIDO)-RMN
età-sesso-altezza-peso-condizioni
ginecologiche ed ostetriche
(nord vs sud europa)
anteriore vs posteriore
Locally advanced rectal cancer
• perirectal fat penetration
• adjacent organ invasion
• lymphnode infiltration
• mesorectal fascia (CRM) involvement
TRUS - CT scan - MRI
Tx neoadiuvante del carcinoma del retto
Patient selection
- tumor location
- tumor stage
Standard treatment
Chemotherapy
– role (concomitant and adjuvant)
– simplification / potentiation
Surgery / pathology
Standard vs selective approach
Tx neoadiuvante del carcinoma del retto
Patient selection
- tumor location
- tumor stage
Standard treatment
Chemotherapy
– role (concomitant and adjuvant)
– simplification / potentiation
Surgery / pathology
Standard vs selective approach
IMPACT OF POST-OP CMT
T3 and/or N+
local failure, %
5-y survival, %
GITSG 7175
Mayo/NCCTG
79-47-51
86-47-51
11
INT 0114
14
64
NSABP R-02
9
62-65
Compared
to surgery alone:
~ 50
~ 15-25
14
9-11
54
53
60-70 (4-y)
LOCALLY ADVANCED RECTAL CANCER.
IMPACT OF ADJUVANT CMT ON SURVIVAL
(NCCTG 794751, 864751; NSABP R01, R02; INT 0114. N=3791)
Gunderson, L. L. et al. J Clin Oncol; 22:1785-1796 2004
Copyright © American Society of Clinical Oncology
Post-op chemoradiation
Compliance
46-76 %
Acute toxicity
(grade III-IV)
Long-term toxicity
26-53 %
46-56 %
NCCTG 79-4751 / 86-4751; GITSG 7175 ; NSABP R02; CAO/ARO/AIO 94
CAO/ARO/AIO-94
50.4 Gy
CI FU
TME
FU x 4 cy
TME
50.4 Gy
CI FU
FU x 4 cy
R
CAO/ARO/AIO-94
TME SURGERY
5-y outcome
Post-op
(n=394)
Pre-op
(n=405)
p
Survival %
LF %
74
13
76
6
0.80
0.006
acute toxicity
chronic toxicity
40
24
27
14
0.001
0.01
NEJM 2004
PRE-OP CHEMORADIATION:
IMPACT ON SPHINCTER SAVING
CAO/ARO/AIO-94
declared to
require APR
sphincter-saving
surgery
Post
78
19 % (15/78)
Pre
116
39 % (45/116)
p
0.004
NEJM 2004
Standard treatment of locally
advanced rectal cancer
T3-4 and/or N+
RT
CT
45-50.4
Gy
T
M
E
Pre-op RT vs. surgery alone:
Risk of local recurrence in phase III trials
Role of chemotherapy
PRE-OP RT +/- CONCOMITANT CT
pCR, %
RT
RT + CT
EORTC
5
14
FFCD
3
10
Bosset, NEJM 2006; Gerard, JCO 2006
Role of chemotherapy
PRE-OP RT +/- CONCOMITANT CT
5-y LR, %
RT
RT + CT
EORTC
17
8
FFCD
16
8
Bosset, NEJM 2006; Gerard, JCO 2006
NSABP R-04
RT + Capecitabine +/- oxaliplatin
R
S
RT + CI 5-FU +/- oxaliplatin
N=1460
STAR-01
R
n=747
ypT0(N0)
RT 50.4 Gy
FU 225 mg/m2/day PVI
16%
6-8
wks
RT 50.4 Gy
FU 225 mg/m2/day PVI
OXA 60 mg/m2 weekly x 6
T
M
E
p=0.94
16%
ACCORD
R
n=598
RT 45 Gy
CAPE 1600 mg/m2/day
14%
6-8
wks
RT 50 Gy
CAPE 1600 mg/m2/day
OXA 50 mg/m2 weekly x 5
T
M
E
p=0.11
19%
ASCO ‘09
Standard treatment of locally
advanced rectal cancer
T3-4 and/or N+
RT
CT
45-50.4
Gy
T
M
E
Blunt dissection
LR
20–40%
TME
5–10%
Fascial plane
In mesorectum
In/on muscularis
Dataset for colorectal cancer (2° edition), RCOP, 2007
SURGERY QUALITY:
EFFECT OF THE PLANE OF SURGERY ON
LOCAL RECURRENCE
Circumferential resection margin
LOCAL RECURRENCE AND CRM
Nagtegaal, I. D. et al. J Clin Oncol; 26:303-312 2008
Copyright © American Society of Clinical Oncology
Standard treatment of locally
advanced rectal cancer
T3-4 and/or N+
RT
CT
45-50.4
Gy
T
M
E
FU-based adjuvant chemotherapy in rectal
cancer patients. QUASAR study (n=948).
survival
Effect of FU-based adjuvant chemotherapy in
colon and rectal cancer patients. QUASAR study
Recurrence
n = 3239
Effect of adjuvant FU-based chemotherapy
in rectal cancer patients included in the
QUASAR study
Recurrence at any time
n = 948
Lancet 2008; 371: 1503
CAO/ARO/AIO-94
50.4 Gy
CI FU
TME
FU x 4 cy
TME
50.4 Gy
CI FU
FU x 4 cy
R
LOCALLY ADVANCED RECTAL CANCER.
IMPACT OF ADJUVANT CMT ON SURVIVAL
(NCCTG 794751, 864751; NSABP R01, R02; INT
0114. N=3791)
+ Adj Chemo
Surg +/- RT
Gunderson, L. L. et al. J Clin Oncol; 22:1785-1796 2004
ECOG 5204
* RT + bolus or CI FU ± LV, or Cape
or NSABPR 04
Effect of adjuvant chemotherapy in pts with good
and poor response to pre-op treatment
DFS
JCO, 2007
Tx neoadiuvante del carcinoma del retto
Patient selection
- tumor location
- tumor stage
Standard treatment
Chemotherapy
– role (concomitant and adjuvant)
– simplification / potentiation
Surgery / pathology
Standard vs selective approach
Standard treatment of locally
advanced rectal cancer
RT
CT
45-50.4
Gy
T
M
E
Optimal for every LARC patient?
n=188 (TRUS 130 / MRI 58)
22 % node + after pre-op CRT
n
3-y LR
5-y LR
routine pre
674
4%
5%
selective post
676
11%
12 %
HR=0.39 (95% CI 0.27-0.58); p<0.0001
•pT3<5mm, N any
T2 and early T3
tumours <5mm
have 85-90% 5
year cancer
specific survival.
MERKEL et al 2001
STANDARD vs SELECTIVE
APPROACH
• almeno 7-8 cm dalla rima anale
• infiltrazione grasso < 5 mm (MERCURY)
• non evidenza di linfonodi patologici
• margine radiale atteso di almeno 2 mm
• chirurgo dedicato
• TME con mesoretto integro e CRM • pT3a-bN0 (almeno 12 linfonodi negativi)
• G1-G2
patients’ preference
Rectal cancer:
adjuvant / neoadjuvant treatment
STOMA THERAPIST
NURSE
RADIOTHERAPIST
SURGEON
CURE
QOL
RADIOLOGIST
PATHOLOGIST
MEDICAL ONCOLOGIST