Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2024 Dec 2;7(12):e2448682.
doi: 10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2024.48682.

Challenges of Surveillance in Implementing Nonoperative Management for Rectal Cancer

Affiliations

Challenges of Surveillance in Implementing Nonoperative Management for Rectal Cancer

Bailey K Hilty Chu et al. JAMA Netw Open. .

Abstract

Importance: Close surveillance for detection of local tumor regrowth is critical for patients opting for nonoperative management after neoadjuvant therapy for rectal cancer. However, there are minimal data regarding the feasibility and adherence to National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN) surveillance guidelines for these patients.

Objective: To determine adherence rates to NCCN-recommended surveillance in patients undergoing nonoperative management for rectal cancer.

Design, setting, and participants: This retrospective cohort study included patients treated at a single academic center (University of Rochester, Rochester, New York) from 2012 to 2023, with analysis completed from March through May 2024. Patients with clinical stage I to III rectal cancer who underwent treatment with neoadjuvant therapy, achieved a clinical complete response (or initially near complete clinical response), and elected for nonoperative management were enrolled.

Exposure: Achievement of recommended surveillance.

Main outcomes and measures: The primary outcome was adherence to surveillance guidelines for patients undergoing nonoperative management for rectal cancer. Secondary outcomes included assessment of oncologic outcomes stratified by adherence to surveillance.

Results: Eighty-five patients (54 male [63.5%]; median [IQR] age, 63.0 [54.0-73.0] years) were managed nonoperatively and followed for a median of 4.04 years (95% CI, 3.17-4.58 years). The 5-year overall survival was 82.3% (95% CI, 71.8%-94.5%), the 5-year disease-specific survival was 95.1% (95% CI, 89.6%-100.0%), the rate of local regrowth was 24.7% (21 patients), and the rate of distant metastases was 12.9% (11 patients). Among the 77 patients with more than 6 months of follow-up in their first year of surveillance, only 39.0% of patients (30 patients) achieved NCCN-recommended surveillance in the first year, and this decreased to 15.0% (3 patients) by year 5. However, the time to local regrowth and distant metastasis were similar regardless of the level of surveillance.

Conclusions and relevance: In this cohort study of patients with rectal cancer undergoing surveillance after nonoperative management, most did not achieve NCCN-recommended guidelines, although outcomes were not associated with surveillance intensity. This highlights the need for prospective evaluation of a surveillance regimen that is both feasible for patients and health care systems increasingly using nonoperative management. In addition, studies are warranted to explore patient preferences in rectal cancer care and to identify barriers to optimal surveillance.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

Conflict of Interest Disclosures: Dr Fleming reported receiving royalties from UpToDate outside the submitted work. No other disclosures were reported.

Figures

Figure 1.
Figure 1.. Oncologic Outcomes
Graphs show oncologic outcomes for the cohort at 5 years. Overall survival was 82.3% (A), disease-specific survival was 95.1% (B), and the estimated rate of local regrowth at 3 years was 28.3% (C), with an estimated rate of distant metastases at 5 years of 18.2% (D). Time to local regrowth (E) and distant metastasis (F) are shown by adherence to surveillance (ideal, adequate, and inadequate).
Figure 2.
Figure 2.. Concordance with Surveillance Guidelines
Graphs show overall adherence to National Comprehensive Cancer Network–recommended screening guidelines in 77 eligible patients. Overall, ideal adherence to guidelines declined by year (A). Patients did not necessarily fall into a single category for adherence by year, and instead often transitioned between ideal and inadequate levels of surveillance (B).
Figure 3.
Figure 3.. Percentage of Patients Who Satisfied National Comprehensive Cancer Network Guidelines by Imaging Modality
Graphs show percentages of patients with ideal, adequate, and inadequate surveillance by year and by surveillance modality, including endoscopy (A), computed tomography (CT; B), magnetic resonance imaging (MRI; C), and carcinoembryonic antigen (CEA; D).

References

    1. Loria A, Tejani MA, Temple LK, et al. Practice patterns for organ preservation in US patients with rectal cancer, 2006-2020. JAMA Oncol. 2024;10(1):79-86. doi: 10.1001/jamaoncol.2023.4845 - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Couwenberg AM, Intven MPW, Burbach JPM, Emaus MJ, van Grevenstein WMU, Verkooijen HM. Utility scores and preferences for surgical and organ-sparing approaches for treatment of intermediate and high-risk rectal cancer. Dis Colon Rectum. 2018;61(8):911-919. doi: 10.1097/DCR.0000000000001029 - DOI - PubMed
    1. van der Valk MJM, Hilling DE, Bastiaannet E, et al. ; IWWD Consortium . Long-term outcomes of clinical complete responders after neoadjuvant treatment for rectal cancer in the International Watch & Wait Database (IWWD): an international multicentre registry study. Lancet. 2018;391(10139):2537-2545. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(18)31078-X - DOI - PubMed
    1. Garcia-Aguilar J, Patil S, Gollub MJ, et al. Organ preservation in patients with rectal adenocarcinoma treated with total neoadjuvant therapy. J Clin Oncol. 2022;40(23):2546-2556. doi: 10.1200/JCO.22.00032 - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Smith JJ, Strombom P, Chow OS, et al. Assessment of a watch-and-wait strategy for rectal cancer in patients with a complete response after neoadjuvant therapy. JAMA Oncol. 2019;5(4):e185896. doi: 10.1001/jamaoncol.2018.5896 - DOI - PMC - PubMed

Publication types