{"title":"Usefulness of close surveillance for rectal cancer patients after neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy.","authors":"Yu-Jen Hsu, Yih-Jong Chern, I-Li Lai, Sum-Fu Chiang, Chun-Kai Liao, Wen-Sy Tsai, Hsin-Yuan Hung, Pao-Shiu Hsieh, Chien-Yuh Yeh, Jy-Ming Chiang, Yen-Lin Yu, Jeng-Fu You","doi":"10.1515/med-2022-0555","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>It is controversial whether patients who achieve clinical complete remission (cCR) of rectal cancer should be treated with the \"watch and wait\" (W&W) or radical resection (RR) strategy. Our study aimed to compare the survival outcomes and ostomy rate of the W&W and RR strategies. Between January 2008 and December 2015, we investigated 26 patients who achieved pathologic complete remission after undergoing RR and 36 patients who adopted the W&W strategy because of cCR. The tumor regrowth, salvage surgery, recurrence, disease-free, and overall survival (OS) rates were assessed. In our study, recurrences occurred in nine and two patients from the W&W and RR groups, respectively. Each patient in the RR group had a temporary or permanent ostomy, but only three (8.3%) had an ostomy in the W&W group. The 5-year recurrence rate was 25.0% in the W&W group and 7.7% in the RR group. Six patients (16.7%) had tumor regrowth in the W&W group, and all were resectable when regrowth. The 5-year OS rates between the two groups were nonsignificant. There is no specific risk factor for recurrence and OS. Under close surveillance, the W&W group achieved similar OS to the RR group and benefited from a lower ostomy rate.</p>","PeriodicalId":520729,"journal":{"name":"Open medicine (Warsaw, Poland)","volume":" ","pages":"1438-1448"},"PeriodicalIF":1.6000,"publicationDate":"2022-09-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9449684/pdf/","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Open medicine (Warsaw, Poland)","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1515/med-2022-0555","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2022/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1
Abstract
It is controversial whether patients who achieve clinical complete remission (cCR) of rectal cancer should be treated with the "watch and wait" (W&W) or radical resection (RR) strategy. Our study aimed to compare the survival outcomes and ostomy rate of the W&W and RR strategies. Between January 2008 and December 2015, we investigated 26 patients who achieved pathologic complete remission after undergoing RR and 36 patients who adopted the W&W strategy because of cCR. The tumor regrowth, salvage surgery, recurrence, disease-free, and overall survival (OS) rates were assessed. In our study, recurrences occurred in nine and two patients from the W&W and RR groups, respectively. Each patient in the RR group had a temporary or permanent ostomy, but only three (8.3%) had an ostomy in the W&W group. The 5-year recurrence rate was 25.0% in the W&W group and 7.7% in the RR group. Six patients (16.7%) had tumor regrowth in the W&W group, and all were resectable when regrowth. The 5-year OS rates between the two groups were nonsignificant. There is no specific risk factor for recurrence and OS. Under close surveillance, the W&W group achieved similar OS to the RR group and benefited from a lower ostomy rate.