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
Review
. 2025 Apr 9;29(1):99.
doi: 10.1007/s10151-025-03114-6.

Prognostic impact of tumor location after abdominoperineal resection of rectal cancer: A single-center propensity score matching analysis based on 1806 cases

Zixing Zhu #  1 , Chunbing Wang #  2 , Dedi Jiang #  1 , Zhixun Zhao  1 , Jianjun Bi  1 , Qiang Feng  1 , Wei Pei  1 , Haitao Zhou  1 , Zhaoxu Zheng  1 , Qian Liu  1 , Jichuan Quan  3 , Jianwei Liang  4
Affiliations
Review

Prognostic impact of tumor location after abdominoperineal resection of rectal cancer: A single-center propensity score matching analysis based on 1806 cases

Zixing Zhu et al. Tech Coloproctol. .

Abstract

Background: Randomized controlled trials have revealed that abdominoperineal resection leads to inferior oncological outcomes compared with low anterior resection, especially regarding local recurrence rates (LRRs). While neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy can lower LRRs, it is linked to potential short- and long-term radiation-induced adverse effects. Consequently, meticulous patient selection for neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy is imperative to balance benefits and risks.

Methods: This research encompassed individuals with rectal cancer (RC) who underwent abdominoperineal resection (APR) from January 2006 to December 2017. The cohort was categorized into two cohorts on the basis of tumor location: the anterior cohort and the nonanterior cohort. Propensity score matching (PSM) was employed to mitigate selection bias, and this resulted in 767 patients in both cohorts. The primary endpoint assessed was survival without local recurrence (LR).

Results: Of the 2025 cases examined, 1806 were deemed eligible for inclusion. In the entire cohort, the incidence of LR was 9.9% (178/1806); the anterior cohort exhibited a higher rate of LR (15.2% versus 5.9%, p < 0.001). Multivariate examination revealed that anterior location was an independent risk factor (IRF) for LR (hazard ratio [HR] = 2.503, p < 0.001). In patients with stage II/III or T3/4, anterior location persisted as a predictor of increased LR. Neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy for stage II and III tumors diminished the LR rate in anterior tumor locations (p = 0.017) but not in nonanterior locations (p = 0.390).

Conclusion: Anterior tumor location is an IRF for LR in RC patients. Tumor location can serve as a criterion for patient selection in neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy.

Trial registration: The studies involving human participants were reviewed and approved by the National Cancer Center's Institute Research Medical Ethics Committee (23/180-3922, 11 May 2023). A copy of the written consent is available for review by the Editor-in-Chief of this journal on request.

Keywords: Abdominoperineal resection; Neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy; Rectal cancer; Tumor location.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

Declarations. Conflict of interest: The authors declare no competing interests. Ethics approval and consent to participate: The studies involving human participants were reviewed and approved by the National Cancer Center’s Institute Research Medical Ethics Committee (23/180-3922, 11 May 2023). Prior written informed consent was obtained from all study participants. Consent to publish: Not applicable. Informed consent: All participants provided informed consent prior to their participation.

Figures

Fig. 1
Fig. 1
Flow chart of patient selection. APR abdominoperineal resection, ASA American Society of Anesthesiologists, PSM propensity score matching
Fig. 2
Fig. 2
Kaplan–Meier curve of overall survival, disease-free survival, and local recurrence. PSM propensity score matching
Fig. 3
Fig. 3
Kaplan–Meier curve of overall survival, disease-free survival, and local recurrence according to TNM stage
Fig. 4
Fig. 4
Kaplan–Meier curve of overall survival, disease-free survival, and local recurrence according to T stage
Fig. 5
Fig. 5
Kaplan–Meier subgroup analysis of local recurrence in patients with AJCC stage II and III rectal cancer following APR
See this image and copyright information in PMC

Similar articles

See all similar articles

References

    1. Heald RJ, Moran BJ, Ryall RD, Sexton R, MacFarlane JK (1998) Rectal cancer: the Basingstoke experience of total mesorectal excision, 1978–1997. Arch surg 133(8):894–9 - PubMed
    1. Kapiteijn E, Putter H, van de Velde CJ (2002) Impact of the introduction and training of total mesorectal excision on recurrence and survival in rectal cancer in the Netherlands. Br J Surg 89(9):1142–1149 - PubMed
    1. Banwell VC, Phillips HA, Duff MJ, Speake D, McLean C, Williams LJ et al. (2019) Five-year oncological outcomes after selective neoadjuvant radiotherapy for resectable rectal cancer. Acta oncologica (Stockholm, Sweden) 58(9):1267–1272 - PubMed
    1. Dassanayake BK, Samita S, Deen RY, Wickramasinghe NS, Hewavisenthi J, Deen KI (2011) Local recurrence of rectal cancer in patients not receiving neoadjuvant therapy—the importance of resection margins. Ceylon Med J 56(4):159–161 - PubMed
    1. Augestad KM, Lindsetmo RO, Stulberg J, Reynolds H, Senagore A, Champagne B et al. (2010) International preoperative rectal cancer management: staging, neoadjuvant treatment, and impact of multidisciplinary teams. World J Surg 34(11):2689–2700 - PMC - PubMed

MeSH terms

LinkOut - more resources