PURPOSE: To ascertain if preoperative short-term radiotherapy followed by chemotherapy is not inferior to a standard schedule of long-term chemoradiotherapy in patients with locally advanced rectal cancer. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Patients with distal or middle-third, clinical primary tumor stage 3-4 and/or regional lymph node–positive rectal cancer were randomly assigned (1:1) to short-term radiotherapy (25 Gy in five fractions over 1 week) followed by four cycles of chemotherapy (total neoadjuvant therapy [TNT]) or chemoradiotherapy (50 Gy in 25 fractions over 5 weeks, concurrently with capecitabine [chemoradiotherapy; CRT]). Total mesorectal excision was undertaken 6-8 weeks after preoperative treatment, with two additional cycles of CAPOX (intravenous oxaliplatin [130 mg/m², once a day] on day 1 and capecitabine [1,000 mg/m², twice a day] from days 1 to 14) in the TNT group and six cycles of CAPOX in the CRT group. The primary end point was 3-year disease-free survival (DFS). RESULTS: Between August 2015 and August 2018, a total of 599 patients were randomly assigned to receive TNT (n = 302) or CRT (n = 297). At a median follow-up of 35.0 months, 3-year DFS was 64.5% and 62.3% in TNT and CRT groups, respectively (hazard ratio, 0.883; one-sided 95% CI, not applicable to 1.11; P < .001 for noninferiority). There was no significant difference in metastasis-free survival or locoregional recurrence, but the TNT group had better 3-year overall survival than the CRT group (86.5% v 75.1%; P = .033). Treatment effects on DFS and overall survival were similar regardless of prognostic factors. The prevalence of acute grade III-V toxicities during preoperative treatment was 26.5% in the TNT group versus 12.6% in the CRT group ( P < .001). CONCLUSION: Short-term radiotherapy with preoperative chemotherapy followed by surgery was efficacious with acceptable toxicity and could be used as an alternative to CRT for locally advanced rectal cancer.

Objective & Background Total neoadjuvant therapy (TNT) is a novel approach for locally advanced rectal cancer (LARC), which attempts to deliver both systemic chemotherapy and neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy prior to surgery. However, its efficacy and safety remain controversial in randomized controlled trials (RCTs). We conducted this meta‐analysis to assess such concerns. Methods Head‐to‐head phase II/III RCTs were searched in Embase, PubMed, Web of Science and the Cochrane Library, as well as other sources. The primary endpoint was pathologic complete response (pCR). Secondary endpoints were disease‐free survival (DFS), overall survival (OS), local recurrence‐free survival (LRFS), distant metastasis‐free survival (DMFS) and the R0 resection rate. Results Eight phase II/III RCTs involving 2,196 LARC patients were assessed. The primary analysis demonstrated a statistically significant improvement in the pCR rate for TNT treatment (OR = 1.77, 95% CI: 1.28 to 2.45, P = 0.0005). TNT treatment also showed improvements in DFS and OS outcomes compared with standard CRT (HR=0.83, 95% CI: 0.72 to 0.96, P = 0.03; HR=0.88, 95% CI:0.74 to 1.05, P = 0.15). In addition, TNT treatment showed significant efficacy in reducing the risk of distant metastasis (HR=0.81, 95% CI: 0.68 to 0.95, P = 0.012). Conclusion The overall pCR rate may be improved with TNT compared with standard treatment. The TNT strategy may also improve DFS and OS, and reduce the risk of distant metastasis. Implications for Practice Locally advanced rectal cancer (LARC) is a relatively common disease, with a poor prognosis due to its high metastatic potential. The role of total neoadjuvant therapy (TNT) has always been controversial. This meta‐analysis found that TNT in LARC is associated with a significant improvement in overall pCR rate, DFS, OS, and DMFS compared with standard treatment. TNT is a promising strategy for LARC, especially for patients who have little desire for surgery.

Objective: To compare neoadjuvant chemotherapy (nCT) with CAPOX alone versus neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy (nCRT) with capecitabine in locally advanced rectal cancer (LARC) with uninvolved mesorectal fascia (MRF). Background Data: nCRT is associated with higher surgical complications, worse long-term functional outcomes, and questionable survival benefits. Comparatively, nCT alone seems a promising alternative treatment in lower-risk LARC patients with uninvolved MRF. Methods: Patients between June 2014 and October 2020 with LARC within 12 cm from the anal verge and uninvolved MRF were randomly assigned to nCT group with 4 cycles of CAPOX (Oxaliplatin 130 mg/m2 IV day 1 and Capecitabine 1000 mg/m2 twice daily for 14 d. Repeat every 3 wk) or nCRT group with Capecitabine 825 mg/m² twice daily administered orally and concurrently with radiation therapy (50 Gy/25 fractions) for 5 days per week. The primary end point is local-regional recurrence-free survival. Here we reported the results of secondary end points: histopathologic response, surgical events, and toxicity. Results: Of the 663 initially enrolled patients, 589 received the allocated treatment (nCT, n=300; nCRT, n=289). Pathologic complete response rate was 11.0% (95% CI, 7.8-15.3%) in the nCT arm and 13.8% (95% CI, 10.1-18.5%) in the nCRT arm (P=0.33). The downstaging (ypStage 0 to 1) rate was 40.8% (95% CI, 35.1-46.7%) in the nCT arm and 45.6% (95% CI, 39.7-51.7%) in the nCRT arm (P=0.27). nCT was associated with lower perioperative distant metastases rate (0.7% vs. 3.1%, P=0.03) and preventive ileostomy rate (52.2% vs. 63.6%, P=0.008) compared with nCRT. Four patients in the nCT arm received salvage nCRT because of local disease progression after nCT. Two patients in the nCT arm and 5 in the nCRT arm achieved complete clinical response and were treated with a nonsurgical approach. Similar results were observed in subgroup analysis. Conclusions: nCT achieved similar pCR and downstaging rates with lower incidence of perioperative distant metastasis and preventive ileostomy compared with nCRT. CAPOX could be an effective alternative to neoadjuvant therapy in LARC with uninvolved MRF. Long-term follow-up is needed to confirm these results.

Background: The watch-and-wait strategy offers a non-invasive therapeutic alternative for rectal cancer patients who have achieved a clinical complete response (cCR) after chemoradiotherapy. This study aimed to investigate the long-term clinical outcomes of this strategy in comparation to surgical resection.Methods: Stage II/III rectal adenocarcinoma patients who received neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy and achieved a cCR were selected from the databases of three centers. cCR was evaluated by findings from digital rectal examination, colonoscopy, and radiographic images. Patients in whom the watch-and-wait strategy was adopted were matched with patients who underwent radical resection through 1:1 propensity score matching analyses. Survival was calculated and compared in the two groups using the Kaplan–Meier method with the log rank test.Results: A total of 117 patients in whom the watch-and-wait strategy was adopted were matched with 354 patients who underwent radical resection. After matching, there were 94 patients in each group, and no significant differences in term of age, sex, T stage, N stage or tumor location were observed between the two groups. The median follow-up time was 38.2 months. Patients in whom the watch-and-wait strategy was adopted exhibited a higher rate of local recurrences (14.9% vs. 1.1%), but most (85.7%) were salvageable. Three-year non-regrowth local recurrence-free survival was comparable between the two groups (98% vs. 98%,P = 0.506), but the watch-and-wait group presented an obvious advantage in terms of sphincter preservation, especially in patients with a tumor located within 3 cm of the anal verge (89.7% vs. 41.2%,P < 0.001). Three-year distant metastasis-free survival (88% in the watch-and-wait group vs. 89% in the surgical group,P = 0.874), 3-year disease-specific survival (99% vs. 96%,P = 0.643) and overall survival (99% vs. 96%,P = 0.905) were also comparable between the two groups, although a higher rate (35.7%) of distant metastases was observed in patients who exhibited local regrowth in the watch-and-wait group.Conclusion: The watch-and-wait strategy was safe, with similar survival outcomes but a superior sphincter preservation rate as compared to surgery in rectal cancer patients achieving a cCR after neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy, and could be offered as a promising conservative alternative to invasive radical surgery.