Abstract:Objective: To understand the perceptions, attitudes and treatment selection of Chinese surgeons on the "watch and wait" strategy for rectal cancer patients after achieving a clinical complete response (cCR) following neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy (nCRT). Methods: A cross-sectional survey was used in this study. Selection of subjects: (1) Domestic public grade III A (provincial and prefecture-level) oncology hospitals or general hospitals possessing the radiotherapy department and the diagnosis and treatment qualifications for colorectal cancer. (2) Surgeons of deputy chief physician or above. Using the "Questionnaire Star" online survey platform to create a questionnaire about cognition, attitude and treatment choice of the "watch and wait" strategy after cCR following nCRT for rectal cancer. The questionnaire contained 32 questions, such as the basic information of doctor, the current status of rectal cancer surgery, the management of pathological complete remission (ypCR) after nCRT for rectal cancer, the selection of examination items for diagnosis of cCR, the selection of suitable people undergoing "watch and wait" approach, the nCRT mode for promotion of cCR, the choice of evaluation time point, the willingness to perform "watch and wait" approach and the treatment choice, and the risk and monitoring of "watch and wait" approach. A total of 116 questionnaires were sent to the respondents via WeChat between January 31 and February 19, 2019. Statistical analysis was performed using Fisher's exact test for categorical variables. Results: Forty-eight hospitals including 116 surgeons meeting criteria were enrolled, of whom 77 surgeons filled the questionnaire with a response rate of 66.4%. "Watch and wait" strategy was carried out in 76.6% (59/77) of surgeons. Seventy surgeons (90.9%) were aware of the ypCR rate of rectal cancer after preoperative nCRT and 49 surgeons (63.6%) knew the 3-year disease-free survival of patients with ypCR in their own hospitals. Fifty-five surgeons (71.4%) believed that patients with ypCR undergoing radical surgery met the treatment criteria and were not over-treated. Three most necessary examinations in diagnosing cCR were colonoscopy (96.1%, 74/77), digital rectal examination (DRE) (90.9%,70/77) and DWI-MRI (83.1%, 64/77). Responders preferred to consider a "watch and wait" strategy for patients with baseline characteristics as mrN0 (77.9%, 60/77), mrT2 (68.8%, 53/77) and well-differentiated adenocarcinoma (68.8%, 53/77). Sixty-six surgeons (85.7%) believed that long-term chemoradiotherapy (LCRT) with combination or without combination of induction and/or consolidation of the CapeOX regimen (capecitabine + oxaliplatin) should be the first choice as a neoadjuvant therapy to achieve cCR. Forty-one surgeons (53.2%) believed that a reasonable interval of judging cCR after nCRT should be ≥ 8 weeks. Forty-four surgeons (57.1%) routinely, or in most cases, informed patient the possibility of cCR and proposed to "watch and wait" strategy in the initial diagnosis of patients with non-metastatic rectal cancer. Thirteen surgeons (16.9%) would take the "watch and wait" strategy as the first choice after the patient having cCR. Fifty-two surgeons (67.5%) would be affected by the surgical method, that was to say, "watch and wait" approach would only be recommended to those patients who would achieve cCR and could not preserve the anus or underwent difficult anus-preservation surgery. Sixteen surgeons (20.8%) demonstrated that "watch and wait" strategy would not be recommended to patients with cCR regardless of whether the surgical procedure involved anal sphincter. Eleven surgeons (14.3%) believed that the main risk of "watch and wait" approach came from distant metastasis rather than local recurrence or regrowth. Twenty-nine of surgeons (37.7%) did not understand the difference between "local recurrence" and "local regrowth" during the period of "watch and wait". Twenty-six surgeons (33.8%) thought that the monitoring interval for the first 3 years of "watch and wait" strategy was 3 months, and the follow-up monitoring interval could be 6 months to 5 years. Surgeons from cancer specialist hospitals had higher approval rate, notification rate, and referral rate of "watch and wait" strategy than those from general hospitals. Thirty-one surgeons (42.5%) considered that the difficulty and concern of carrying out "watch and wait" approach in the future was the disease progress leading to medical disputes. Twenty-six surgeons (35.6%) demonstrated that their concern was lack of uniform evaluation standard for cCR. Conclusions: Chinese surgeons seem to have inadequate knowledge of non-operative management for rectal cancer patients achieving cCR after nCRT and show relatively conservative attitudes toward the strategy. Chinese consensus needs to be formed to guide the non-operative management in selected patients. Chinese Watch & Wait Database (CWWD) is also needed to establish and provide more evidence for the use of alternative procedure after a cCR following nCRT.

Operative trends following the adoption of nonoperative management of rectal cancer

Long Term Outcome of Patients with Rectal Cancer with Complete Clinical Response or Near Complete Clinical Response after Neoadjuvant Therapy: A Multicenter Registry Study by Chinese Watch and Wait Database.

Nonoperative Management for Rectal Cancer

Outcomes of rectal cancer patients who refuse surgery after incomplete clinical response to neoadjuvant therapy

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

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

Predictors and Risk Factors of Pathologic Complete Response Following Neoadjuvant Chemoradiotherapy for Rectal Cancer: A Population-Based Analysis

Assessment of a Watch-and-Wait Strategy for Rectal Cancer in Patients With a Complete Response After Neoadjuvant Therapy

Does complete pathological response increase perioperative morbidity risk in rectal cancer?

The Ongoing Development of Watch and Wait

A Review of Neoadjuvant Therapy and the Watch-and-Wait Protocol in Rectal Cancer: Current Evidence and Future Directions

Is there an increase in elective utilization of non-operative management for rectal cancer?

Diagnostic performance of endoscopy and MRI in identifying true response among patients with rectal cancer treated with total neoadjuvant therapy and selective watch and wait or TME.

‘Watch and wait’ in rectal cancer: summary of the current evidence

Transanal Endoscopic Microsurgery Vs. Radical Surgery for Mid-Low Rectal Cancer in Patients with Clinical Complete or Near-Complete Response after Neoadjuvant Chemoradiotherapy.

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

["Watch and Wait" Strategy after Neoadjuvant Therapy for Rectal Cancer: Status Survey of Perceptions, Attitudes and Treatment Selection in Chinese Surgeons].

Influence of neoadjuvant treatment strategy on perioperative outcomes in locally advanced rectal cancer

The Watch-and-wait Strategy Versus Surgical Resection for Rectal Cancer Patients with a Clinical Complete Response after Neoadjuvant Chemoradiotherapy

[Long-term outcome of patients with rectal cancer who achieve complete or near complete clinical responses after neoadjuvant therapy: a multicenter registry study of data from the Chinese Watch and Wait Database]

Analysis of long-term oncological results of clinical versus pathological responses after neoadjuvant treatment in locally advanced rectal cancer