NCCN Guidelines® Insights: Rectal Cancer, Version 3.2024

The determination of an optimal treatment plan for an individual patient with rectal cancer is a complex process. In addition to decisions relating to the intent of rectal cancer surgery (ie, curative or palliative), consideration must also be given to the likely functional results of treatment, including the probability of maintaining or restoring normal bowel function/anal continence and preserving genitourinary functions. Particularly for patients with distal rectal cancer, finding a balance between curative-intent therapy while having minimal impact on quality of life can be challenging. Furthermore, the risk of pelvic recurrence is higher in patients with rectal cancer compared with those with colon cancer, and locally recurrent rectal cancer is associated with a poor prognosis. Careful patient selection and the use of sequenced multimodality therapy following a multidisciplinary approach is recommended. These NCCN Guidelines Insights detail recent updates to the NCCN Guidelines for Rectal Cancer, including the addition of endoscopic submucosal dissection as an option for early-stage rectal cancer, updates to the total neoadjuvant therapy approach based on the results of recent clinical trials, and the addition of a "watch-and-wait" nonoperative management approach for clinical complete responders to neoadjuvant therapy.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Journal of the National Comprehensive Cancer Network
Published
2024-08-01
DOI
https://doi.org/10.6004/jnccn.2024.0041
Citations
168
Primary Topic
Colorectal Cancer Surgical Treatments
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
47.47
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

NCCN Guidelines® Insights: Rectal Cancer, Version 3.2024

Katrina S. Pedersen, Smitha Krishnamurthi, Christina Wu, Aparna Parikh et al.
168 citations
Journal of the National Comprehensive Cancer Network
Colorectal Cancer Surgical Treatments
47.47
article

NCCN Guidelines® Insights: Rectal Cancer, Version 3.2024

Katrina S. Pedersen, Smitha Krishnamurthi, Christina Wu, Aparna Parikh, Benjamin D. Shogan, Hitendra Patel, Christopher G. Willett, David Shibata, Jeffrey A. Meyerhardt, Ignacio Garrido‐Laguna, Al B. Benson, Natalie Kirilcuk, Sarah E. Hoffe, Mary F. Mulcahy, Leonard B. Saltz, Alan P. Venook, Anna Tavakkoli, Eric David Miller, Jean L. Grem, Dustin A. Deming, George J. Chang, Mohamed A. Adam, Kristen K. Ciombor, Midhun Malla, Kimberly L. Johung, Charles Schneider, Steven Nurkin, Stacey A. Cohen, Hisham Hussan, Constantinos T. Sofocleous, Wells A. Messersmith, Paul Haste, Jennifer K. Maratt, Harry S. Cooper, Steven R. Hunt, Nora Joseph, Lisa A. Gurski, Yi-Jen Chen, J. Randolph Hecht, John M. Skibber, Frankie Jones
article en
168 citations

Abstract

The determination of an optimal treatment plan for an individual patient with rectal cancer is a complex process. In addition to decisions relating to the intent of rectal cancer surgery (ie, curative or palliative), consideration must also be given to the likely functional results of treatment, including the probability of maintaining or restoring normal bowel function/anal continence and preserving genitourinary functions. Particularly for patients with distal rectal cancer, finding a balance between curative-intent therapy while having minimal impact on quality of life can be challenging. Furthermore, the risk of pelvic recurrence is higher in patients with rectal cancer compared with those with colon cancer, and locally recurrent rectal cancer is associated with a poor prognosis. Careful patient selection and the use of sequenced multimodality therapy following a multidisciplinary approach is recommended. These NCCN Guidelines Insights detail recent updates to the NCCN Guidelines for Rectal Cancer, including the addition of endoscopic submucosal dissection as an option for early-stage rectal cancer, updates to the total neoadjuvant therapy approach based on the results of recent clinical trials, and the addition of a "watch-and-wait" nonoperative management approach for clinical complete responders to neoadjuvant therapy.

Journal of the National Comprehensive Cancer NetworkVol. 22(6)
Fox Chase Cancer Center (US), Roswell Park Comprehensive Cancer Center (US), Barnes-Jewish Hospital (US), City Of Hope National Medical Center (US), Cleveland Clinic (US), Cape Town HVTN Immunology Laboratory / Hutchinson Centre Research Institute of South Africa (ZA), Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center (US), The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center (US), University of Tennessee Health Science Center (US), Breast Cancer Research Foundation (US), University of Utah (US), The Ohio State University Comprehensive Cancer Center – Arthur G. James Cancer Hospital and Richard J. Solove Research Institute (US), UC San Diego Health System (US), Huntsman Cancer Institute (US), Cancer Institute (WIA) (IN), Susan Thompson Buffett Foundation (US), WinnMed (US), Yale Cancer Center (US), Moffitt Cancer Center (US), Massachusetts General Hospital (US), Fred Hutch Cancer Center (US), Southwestern Medical Center (US), Jewish Hospital (US), University of Wisconsin Carbone Cancer Center (US), Dana-Farber Cancer Institute (US), University Hospitals Seidman Cancer Center (US), Duke Medical Center (US), University of Colorado Cancer Center (US), Smilow Cancer Hospital (US), UCSF Helen Diller Family Comprehensive Cancer Center (US), Robert H. Lurie Comprehensive Cancer Center of Northwestern University, Indiana University Melvin and Bren Simon Comprehensive Cancer Center, Moores Cancer Center, University of Chicago Medicine Comprehensive Cancer Center, UCLA Jonsson Comprehensive Cancer Center, Vanderbilt-Ingram Cancer Center, Stanford Cancer Institute, Duke Cancer Institute, Fred and Pamela Buffett Cancer Center, UC Davis Comprehensive Cancer Center, Harold C. Simmons Comprehensive Cancer Center, O'Neal Comprehensive Cancer Center, National Comprehensive Cancer Network, Indiana University (US), University of Pennsylvania (US), University of California, Davis (US), The University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center (US), University of Colorado Denver (US)
No poverty
Openalex Percentile: Top 0%
Colorectal Cancer Surgical Treatments
47.47
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.