Association Between Adjuvant Chemotherapy and Outcome in Locally Advanced Rectal Cancer Patients with Pathologic Complete Response after Neoadjuvant Treatment and Surgery
Fang He,Huaiqiang Ju,Yi Ding,Zhiqiang Jiang,Zhenhui Li,Bo Huang,Xiuhong Wang,Yuanyuan Zhao,Yong Li,Bin Qi,Wenguang Luo,Haiyang Chen,Shuai Liu,Xiaolin Pang,Jian Zheng,Xiaojian Wu,Meijin Huang,Ping Lan,Jianping Wang,Xiang-Bo Wan,Jaffer A. Ajani
DOI: https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3471346
2019-01-01
SSRN Electronic Journal
Abstract:Background: Neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy induced pathologic complete response (pCR) is associated with an excellent outcome for locally advanced rectal cancer (LARC) patients. However, it is unclear if patients achieving a pCR could further benefit from adjuvant chemotherapy (ACT).Methods: This retrospective study recruited consecutive LARC patients who received neoadjuvant therapy and total mesorectal excision from 2010 to 2018. The pCR patients who received different ACT cycles were compared by propensity score matching. Overall survival (OS), disease free survival (DFS), local recurrence-free survival (LRFS), and distant metastasis-free survival (DMFS) were calculated by the Kaplan-Meier method and log-rank test.Findings: In total, 1041 consecutive pCR patients (median age, 55.0 years; 56.9% male) were included. Of whom, 303 (29.1%) patients received non-ACT treatment, and 738 patients (70.9%) received fluoropyrimidine-based ACT (range, 1-12 cycles; median, 4 cycles). Specifically, 57.6% of patients (425/738) received 1-4 cycles of ACT, and 42.4% of patients (313/738) received 5 or more cycles of ACT. After 1:3 propensity matching, 712 patients who received ACT were matched to 297 patients who did not receive ACT. The 3-year outcomes (OS, DFS, LRFS, and DMFS) of the ACT and non-ACT subgroups were similar (all P > 0.05). Moreover, the subsets of patients who received different ACT cycle(s) (0 vs. 1-4 cycles and 0 vs. ≥ 5 cycles) also had similar 3-year OS, DFS, LRFS, and DMFS (all P > 0.05). In a stratified analysis, ACT treatment did not improve the survival outcomes (OS, DFS, LRFS and DMFS) of the high-risk patients who with baseline cT3-4 and/or cN1-2 (all P > 0.05).Interpretation: ACT administration could not provide additional survival benefits for neoadjuvant treatment-induced pCR LARC patients, even if is given much more cycles. Particularly, for the baseline high-risk subset patients, a pCR status is a guarantee of excellent outcome and ACT would be unnecessary.Funding Statement: This study was supported by Natural Science Foundation of China (No. 81872188), International Centre for Genetic Engineering and Biotechnology Research Grant (No. CRP/CHN16-04_EC), Guangdong Natural Science Foundation for Distinguished Young Scholar (No. 2014A030306016), the Science and Technology Planning Project of Guangdong Province (No. 2017B090901065).Declaration of Interests: The authors declare that they have no conflicts of interest.Ethics Approval Statement: This study was approved by the Clinical Ethics Review Committee at the Sixth Affiliated Hospital of Sun Yat-sen University.