Proton beam therapy in rectal cancer: A systematic review and meta-analysis

2021 ◽  
pp. 101638
Author(s):  
Matthew Fok ◽  
Steven Toh ◽  
Jeremy Maducolil ◽  
Hayley Fowler ◽  
Rachael Clifford ◽  
...  
2021 ◽  
Vol 108 (Supplement_2) ◽  
Author(s):  
M Fok ◽  
S Toh ◽  
J E Maducolil ◽  
H Fowler ◽  
R Clifford ◽  
...  

Abstract Introduction Radiotherapy for locally advanced rectal cancer is conventionally performed using photon-based radiotherapy (PBR), carrying significant risk of toxicity to organs at risk (OAR). Proton beam therapy (PBT) potentially delivers equivalent dosimetric radiation to the targeted tissue with improved sparing of OAR. We aimed to compare dosimetric irradiation of OAR for PBT versus PBR in patients with rectal cancer and assess any oncological outcomes. Method An extensive electronic literature search was performed from inception till April 2020 and subsequent meta-analysis performed. Results Six articles met the inclusion criteria. Dosimetric data of irradiation delivered to OAR for PBT and PBR were calculated for the same patients. PBT had significantly less irradiated small bowel compared to 3DCRT and IMRT, (MD -16.95, 95% CI [-24.03, -9.88], p < 0.00001) and (MD -6.96, 95% CI [-12.99, -0.94], p = 0.02) respectively. Similar results were observed for bladder and pelvic bone marrow. Two studies reported clinical and oncological results for PBT in recurrent rectal cancer with overall survival reported as 43% and 68%. Conclusions Dosimetric treatment plans have less irradiation of OAR for rectal cancer with PBT compared to PBR. There is a need for further research in PBT and rectal cancer, as promising results have been shown in recurrent rectal cancer.


2021 ◽  
Vol 99 (2) ◽  
pp. 89-107
Author(s):  
Ignacio Aguirre-Allende ◽  
Jose Maria Enriquez-Navascues ◽  
Garazi Elorza-Echaniz ◽  
Ane Etxart-Lopetegui ◽  
Nerea Borda-Arrizabalaga ◽  
...  

Author(s):  
Gabriele Anania ◽  
Richard Justin Davies ◽  
Alberto Arezzo ◽  
Francesco Bagolini ◽  
Vito D’Andrea ◽  
...  

Abstract The role of lateral lymph node dissection (LLND) during total mesorectal excision (TME) for rectal cancer is still controversial. Many reviews were published on prophylactic LLND in rectal cancer surgery, some biased by heterogeneity of overall associated treatments. The aim of this systematic review and meta-analysis is to perform a timeline analysis of different treatments associated to prophylactic LLND vs no-LLND during TME for rectal cancer. Methods A literature search was performed in PubMed, SCOPUS and WOS for publications up to 1 September 2020. We considered RCTs and CCTs comparing oncologic and functional outcomes of TME with or without LLND in patients with rectal cancer. Results Thirty-four included articles and 29 studies enrolled 11,606 patients. No difference in 5-year local recurrence (in every subgroup analysis including preoperative neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy), 5-year distant and overall recurrence, 5-year overall survival and 5-year disease-free survival was found between LLND group and non LLND group. The analysis of post-operative functional outcomes reported hindered quality of life (urinary, evacuatory and sexual dysfunction) in LLND patients when compared to non LLND. Conclusion Our publication does not demonstrate that TME with LLND has any oncological advantage when compared to TME alone, showing that with the advent of neoadjuvant therapy, the advantage of LLND is lost. In this review, the most important bias is the heterogeneous characteristics of patients, cancer staging, different neoadjuvant therapy, different radiotherapy techniques and fractionation used in different studies. Higher rate of functional post-operative complications does not support routinely use of LLND.


2020 ◽  
pp. 030089162097586
Author(s):  
Pratik Tripathi ◽  
Zhen Li ◽  
Yaqi Shen ◽  
Xuemei Hu ◽  
Daoyu Hu

Background: The impact of magnetic resonance imaging–detected extramural vascular invasion (mrEMVI) in distant metastasis is well known but its correlation with prevalence of lymph node metastasis is less studied. The aim of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to assess the prevalence of nodal disease in mrEMVI–positive and negative cases in rectal cancer. Methods: Following guidelines of Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses, a systematic literature search in PubMed, Web of Science, Cochrane Library, and EMBase was carried out to identify relevant studies published up to May 2019. Results: Our literature search generated 10 studies (863 and 1212 mrEMVI–positive and negative patients, respectively). The two groups (mrEMVI–positive and negative) were significantly different in terms of nodal disease status (odds ratio [OR] 3.15; 95% confidence interval [CI] 2.12–4.67; p < 0.001). The prevalence of nodal disease was 75.90% vs 52.56% in the positive mrEMVI vs negative mrEMVI group, respectively ( p < 0.001). The prevalence of positive lymph node in positive mrEMVI patients treated with neoadjuvant/adjuvant chemoradiotherapy (nCRT/CRT) (OR 2.47; 95% CI 1.65–3.69; p < 0.001) was less compared with the patients who underwent surgery alone (OR 6.25; 95% CI 3.74–10.44; p < 0.001). Conclusion: The probability of positive lymph nodes in cases of positive mrEMVI is distinctly greater compared with negative cases in rectal cancer. Positive mrEMVI indicates risk of nodal disease prevalence increased by threefold in rectal cancer.


2008 ◽  
Vol 16 (2) ◽  
pp. 254-265 ◽  
Author(s):  
Srinivas R. Puli ◽  
Matthew L. Bechtold ◽  
Jyotsna B. K. Reddy ◽  
Abhishek Choudhary ◽  
Mainor R. Antillon ◽  
...  

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document