A Meta-analysis of Total Neoadjuvant Therapies Combining Chemoradiotherapy with Induction or Consolidated Chemotherapy for Locally Advanced Rectal Cancer

Nov, Pengkhun; Du, Kunpeng; Huang, Zegui; Li, Yanyang; Gong, Min; Liu, Xiang; Li, Chunhui; Li, Lilin; Wang, Duanyu; Zhang, Yangfeng; Wang, Changqian; Li, Jiqiang

doi:10.1007/s12029-022-00864-6

Cited by 2 publications

(1 citation statement)

References 24 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Randomized phase III trials examining the addition of oxaliplatin concurrently with LCCRT provided useful data for benchmarking [5][6][7][8][9][10]26,27]. We also considered several relevant randomized phase II trials investigating NACT [18,19,[28][29][30][31][32][33][34][35][36][37][38][39][40], prospective phase II trials, and metaanalyses of varying quality examining TNT [41][42][43][44][45][46][47][48][49][50].…”

Section: Search Strategy and Selection Criteriamentioning

confidence: 99%

Selecting a TNT Schedule in Locally Advanced Rectal Cancer: Can We Predict Who Actually Benefits?

Aschele¹,

Glynne‐Jones

2023

Cancers

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Many consider the standard of care for locally advanced rectal cancer (LARC) to be preoperative chemoradiotherapy, radical surgery involving a total mesorectal excision, and post-operative adjuvant chemotherapy based on the pathology of the specimen. The poor impact on distant control is a major limitation of this strategy, with metastasis rates remaining in the 25–35% range and recovery after radical surgery leading to reluctance with prescription and inconsistent patient compliance with adjuvant chemotherapy. A second limitation is the low rate of pathologic complete response (pCR) (around 10–15%) despite multiple efforts to potentiate preoperative chemoradiation regimens, which in turn means it is less effective at achieving non-operative management (NOM). Total neoadjuvant treatment (TNT) is a pragmatic approach to solving these problems by introducing systemic chemotherapy at an early timepoint. Enthusiasm for delivering TNT for patients with LARC is increasing in light of the results of published randomized phase III trials, which show a doubling of the pCR rate and a significant reduction in the risk of subsequent metastases. However, there has been no demonstrated improvement in quality of life or overall survival. A plethora of potential chemotherapy schedules are available around the radiotherapy component, which include preoperative induction or consolidation with a range of options (FOLFOXIRI, FOLFOX, or CAPEOX,) and a varying duration of 6–18 weeks, prior to long course chemoradiation (LCCRT) or consolidation NACT following short-course preoperative radiation therapy (SCPRT) using 5 × 5 Gy or LCCRT using 45–60 Gy, respectively. The need to maintain optimal local control is a further important factor, and preliminary data appear to indicate that the RT schedule remains a crucial issue, especially in more advanced tumors, i.e., mesorectal fascia (MRF) invasion. Thus, there is no consensus as to the optimum combination, sequence, or duration of TNT. The selection of patients most likely to benefit is challenging, as clear-cut criteria to individuate patients benefiting from TNT are lacking. In this narrative review, we examine if there are any necessary or sufficient criteria for the use of TNT. We explore potential selection for the individual and their concerns with a generalized use of this strategy.

show abstract