Abstract:We congratulate Serra-Aracil and colleagues1Serra-Aracil X. Pericay C. Badia-Closa J. et al.Short-term outcomes of chemoradiotherapy and local excision versus total mesorectal excision in T2-T3ab,N0,M0 rectal cancer: a multicentre randomised, controlled, phase III trial (the TAU-TEM study).Ann Oncol. 2023; 34: 78-90Abstract Full Text Full Text PDF PubMed Scopus (18) Google Scholar on the completion of the clinical trial that compared chemoradiotherapy (CRT) and transanal endoscopic microsurgery (TEM) versus total mesorectal excision (TME) among patients with T2-T3ab,N0,M0 rectal cancer. However, the findings raise several crucial concerns and should be interpreted carefully. First, one of the most essential advantages of combining preoperative CRT with TEM surgery is preserving the rectum as well as obtaining similar oncological results. The inclusion criteria of the participant in this study required rectal adenocarcinomas located up to 10 cm from the anal verge. Actually, the median distance from the anal verge of the included population was 6.6 cm. In the present clinical guideline, height from the anal margin plays a crucial role in the decision making of the range of surgical resection. For patients with rectal cancer with a distance from the anal verge >5 cm, TEM surgery does not necessarily require anal resection. Therefore we recommend that the authors conduct a subgroup analysis by distance from the anal verge, the results of which are essential for interpreting the clinical practice meaning of this study. Second, some patients in this study may have been undertreated. In this study, 21% (17/81) of patients had positive lymph nodes after surgery in the TME group, which represents the counterfactual of the treatment group in a setting of a randomized control trial.2Hernán M.A. Robins J.M. Causal Inference. CRC, Boca Raton, FL2010Google Scholar This would imply that there was also ∼21% probability of positive lymph nodes in the CRT-TEM group. We wonder if the authors considered that patients in the CRT-TEM group might require further postoperative adjuvant chemotherapy. Third, adverse event assessment is an essential aspect of treatment evaluation among patients with rectal cancer. However, the reporting of adverse effects in this study is not yet comprehensive, such as bone marrow suppression, not listed in Table 4, which is a common adverse effect of CRT. We suggest the authors disclose more detailed information on adverse events to improve the comprehensive evaluation between the two groups. Finally, this study design of time interval between CRT and TEM surgery might be problematic. A longer interval between the end of CRT and surgery is associated with a better pathological complete response (pCR) rate via a series of prospective and retrospective studies; that is, surgery at week 12 after CRT had better oncological results than surgery at week 8 after CRT.3Lefevre J.H. Mineur L. Kotti S. et al.Effect of interval (7 or 11 weeks) between neoadjuvant radiochemotherapy and surgery on complete pathologic response in rectal cancer: a multicenter, randomized, controlled trial (GRECCAR-6).J Clin Oncol. 2016; 34: 3773-3780Crossref PubMed Scopus (346) Google Scholar We recommend that future studies should take time interval into consideration in the of design. None declared.

Organ preservation in rectal cancer: have all questions been answered?

Pre-operative radiochemotherapy of locally advanced rectal cancer.

Treatment Options for Distal Rectal Cancer in the Era of Organ Preservation

Organ Preservation in MSS Rectal Cancer.

Pros and cons of perioperative therapy in the protection of organ function in rectal cancer

Outcome of watch and wait strategy or organ preservation for rectal cancer following neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy: report of 35 cases from a single cancer center

International consensus recommendations on key outcome measures for organ preservation after (chemo)radiotherapy in patients with rectal cancer

Organ preservation in patients with rectal cancer with clinical complete response after neoadjuvant therapy.

The Role of Chemoradiotherapy in Organ Preservation for Rectal Cancer

Surgical Outcomes after Radiotherapy in Rectal Cancer

Organ Preservation in Locally Advanced Colorectal Cancer with Microsatellite Instability-High after Immunotherapy

Organ preservation after neoadjuvant long-course chemoradiotherapy versus short-course radiotherapy

Intentional Watch and Wait or Organ Preservation Surgery Following Neoadjuvant Chemoradiotherapy Plus Consolidation CAPEOX for MRI-defined Low-risk Rectal Cancer

Recent advances in rectal cancer treatment – are we on the right track?

Changing Patterns of Neoadjuvant Therapy for Locally Advanced Rectal Cancer: A Narrative Review

Organ-preservation in rectal cancer: What is at risk when offering watch and wait for a clinical complete response? Data from 2 international registries in rectal cancer.

Long-Term Results of Organ Preservation in Patients With Rectal Adenocarcinoma Treated With Total Neoadjuvant Therapy: The Randomized Phase II OPRA Trial

Adjuvant radiotherapy after local excision of rectal cancer

Comparative analysis of organ preservation attempt and radical surgery in clinical T2N0 mid to low rectal cancer

Long-term prognostic analysis on complete / near-complete clinical remission for mid-low rectal cancer after neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy

[Current Status and Perspectives on "watch and Wait" Strategy for Rectal Cancer Patients after Clinical Complete Response Following Neoadjuvant Chemoradiation].