Clinical and genetic factors associated with tumor response to neoadjuvant (chemo)radiotherapy, survival and recurrence risk in rectal cancer
Klara Hammarström,Luís Nunes,Lucy Mathot,Artur Mezheyeuski,Emma Lundin,Nafsika Korsavidou Hult,Israa Imam,Emerik Osterlund,Tobias Sjöblom,Bengt Glimelius
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/ijc.34880
2024-02-22
International Journal of Cancer
Abstract:What's new? The response to preoperative radiotherapy or chemoradiotherapy in rectal cancer is highly heterogeneous, with up to 30% of patients showing a complete pathological response at surgery. This large study combining clinical and sequencing data from a cohort of patients with locally advanced rectal cancer found that mutations in SMAD4 and SYNE1 were associated with higher complete response rates. However, inclusion of mutation status for specific genes only marginally improved complete response prediction models. The findings may pave the way for personalised interventions, optimising outcomes and addressing current challenges in rectal cancer pre‐operative treatment. Rectal cancer poses challenges in preoperative treatment response, with up to 30% achieving a complete response (CR). Personalized treatment relies on accurate identification of responders at diagnosis. This study aimed to unravel CR determinants, overall survival (OS), and time to recurrence (TTR) using clinical and targeted sequencing data. Analyzing 402 patients undergoing preoperative treatment, tumor stage, size, and treatment emerged as robust response predictors. CR rates were higher in smaller, early‐stage, and intensively treated tumors. Targeted sequencing analyzed 216 cases, while 120 patients provided hotspot mutation data. KRAS mutation dramatically reduced CR odds by over 50% (odds ratio [OR] = 0.3 in the targeted sequencing and OR = 0.4 hotspot cohorts, respectively). In contrast, SMAD4 and SYNE1 mutations were associated with higher CR rates (OR = 6.0 and 6.8, respectively). Favorable OS was linked to younger age, CR, and low baseline carcinoembryonic antigen levels. Notably, CR and an APC mutation increased TTR, while a BRAF mutation negatively affected TTR. Beyond tumor burden, SMAD4 and SYNE1 mutations significantly influenced CR. KRAS mutations independently correlated with radiotherapy resistance, and BRAF mutations heightened recurrence risk. Intriguingly, non‐responding tumors with initially small sizes carried a higher risk of recurrence. The findings, even if limited in addition to the imperfect clinical factors, offer insights into rectal cancer treatment response, guiding personalized therapeutic strategies. By uncovering factors impacting CR, OS, and TTR, this study underscores the importance of tailored approaches for rectal cancer patients. These findings, based on extensive analysis and mutation data, pave the way for personalized interventions, optimizing outcomes in the challenges of rectal cancer preoperative treatment.
oncology