Oops, you're using an old version of your browser so some of the features on this page may not be displaying properly.

MINIMAL Requirements: Google Chrome 24+Mozilla Firefox 20+Internet Explorer 11Opera 15–18Apple Safari 7SeaMonkey 2.15-2.23

Poster Display session

264P - Real-life data on the use of CRT and SCRT for patients with locally advanced rectal cancer

Date

27 Jun 2024

Session

Poster Display session

Presenters

Carlos De Zea Luque

Citation

Annals of Oncology (2024) 35 (suppl_1): S106-S118. 10.1016/annonc/annonc1480

Authors

C. De Zea Luque1, A.M. Martin Fernandez de Soignie1, I. Solana Lopez1, F. Escalona Martín1, I. Santana Gómez1, D. Gutierrez Abad1, M.V. De Torres Olombrada1, I. Juez1, E. Martinez Moreno1, J.A. Guerra Martínez2, C. Pantin2, L. Rodriguez Lajusticia1, B. Losada Vila1, R. Hernandez López1, J. Calzas Rodriguez1

Author affiliations

  • 1 Hospital Universitario de Fuenlabrada, Fuenlabrada/ES
  • 2 Hospital Universitario de Fuenlabrada, 28942 - Fuenlabrada/ES

Resources

Login to get immediate access to this content.

If you do not have an ESMO account, please create one for free.

Abstract 264P

Background

The standard treatment of locally advanced rectal cancer (RC) (stage II and III) has been the long-cycle chemoradiotherapy (CRT) with 5-FU/Capecitabine with preoperative RT 45-50.4 Gy in 25-28 fractions, having demonstrated in several randomized clinical trials improvements in local recurrence (LR) rates, sphincter-sparing surgery and treatment-related toxicity with preoperative therapy. Short-cycle radiotherapy (SCRT) 25 Gy in 5 days in a hypofractionated manner has become an equivalent therapy to CRT in terms of local recurrence, survival, and toxicity. They are currently considered interchangeable, with a preference for CRT in cases where substantial downstaging is needed to achieve clear margins or to allow sphincter-sparing surgery.

Methods

Retrospective study was conducted at the University Hospital of Fuenlabrada, Madrid, analyzing real-life data on the treatment of locally advanced RC between 2011 and 2023 with RT in our center. A total of 187 patients receiving CRT and 43 receiving SCRT between 2018 and 2023. Degree of tumor regression (DTR) was evaluated with Ryan classification system.

Results

In the table, a comparison between CRT and SCRT is performed based on sex, tumor staging and use of complementary chemotherapy. Regarding DTR, complete pathological response (CPR) has been analyzed in both groups (CRT: 27% and SCRT: 23%), as well as major pathological response (Ryan classification with a score of 0 or 1) (CRT: 54% and SCRT: 39%). Chi2 test has been applied to both comparisons with no statistically significant difference between two groups (p=0.05). Table: 264P

Demographic characteristics

SCRT CRT
Male 65% (28) 66% (123)
Female 35% (15) 34% (64)
Stage IIA 9% (4) 8% (14)
Stage IIIA 2% (1) 6% (11)
Stage IIIB 60% (26) 75% (141)
Stage IIIC 9% (4) 10% (18)
Stage IV 19% (8) 2% (3)
Chemotherapy with RT 70% 84%
N (Total) 43 187

Conclusions

Unlike data from previous randomized clinical trials, our real-life data results, with the limitations it may have, does not show significant differences in the DTR between CRT and SCRT. This discrepancy could be attributed to several reasons (variability in patient selection, differences in the chemoradiotherapy regimens and characteristics of the study population).

Legal entity responsible for the study

The authors.

Funding

Has not received any funding.

Disclosure

All authors have declared no conflicts of interest.

This site uses cookies. Some of these cookies are essential, while others help us improve your experience by providing insights into how the site is being used.

For more detailed information on the cookies we use, please check our Privacy Policy.

Customise settings
  • Necessary cookies enable core functionality. The website cannot function properly without these cookies, and you can only disable them by changing your browser preferences.