Efficacy and safety of neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy versus chemotherapy alone in locally advanced rectal cancer

The neoadjuvant chemotherapy (nCT) could achieve outcomes comparable to neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy (nCRT) and reduced radiation toxicity, radiotherapy is questioned. Comparing nCRT and nCT in locally advanced rectal cancer (LARC) in the real world to identify patient subgroups that may benefit most from each approach. This retrospective study included patients with rectal cancer located within 10 cm from the anal verge and clinical staging of T2N + M0 or T3-4NanyM0. Patients were stratified into the nCRT group, which received radiotherapy (45.0 to 50.4 Gy/25 or 28 fractions) with concurrent Capecitabine chemotherapy, or the nCT group which received chemotherapy alone. In total, 380 patients (nCRT, n = 196, nCT, n = 184) were recruited. The rate of pathologic complete response (pCR) in the nCRT and nCT group was 22.4% and 9.2%, T downstaging was 69.4% and 47.8%, and tumor regression grade (TRG) 1–2 was 59.7% and 24.5%, respectively. Similarly, The nCRT group also had a favorable pCR, T downstaging, and TRG 1–2 rate than the nCT group in the bad-risk, advanced-risk, and subgroup A (tumors located at < 8 cm from the anal verge). In contrast, outcomes were comparable for subgroup B (tumors located at ≥ 8 cm) between the two groups. Moreover, the nCRT had a better rate of 3-year locoregional relapse-free survival (LRFS) (98.1% vs. 88.0%, P = 0.031) in the bad-risk category compared with the nCT group. Conversely, the disease-free survival (DFS) and overall survival (OS) were similar. The nCRT was associated with a higher rate of grade 1–2 myelosuppression (69.9% vs. 37.0%), diarrhea (54.1% vs. 10.3%), preventive stoma (62.8% vs. 44.6%), postoperative bowel obstruction (9.2% vs. 1.1%), and postoperative anastomotic stenosis (4.1% vs. 0.5%) (all P < 0.05). Tumor location and risk category may serve as a practical index for clinical decision-making on neoadjuvant therapy strategies in LARC. Patients with bad-risk or tumors located at < 8 cm from the anal verge may be benefited from nCRT.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
BMC Cancer
Published
2025-11-11
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1186/s12885-025-14616-9
Citations
1
Primary Topic
Colorectal and Anal Carcinomas
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
2.01

Funders

Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Efficacy and safety of neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy versus chemotherapy alone in locally advanced rectal cancer

Chun‐Dong Zhang, Yanli Qu, Fuyu Zhang, Hujian Hong
1 citations
BMC Cancer
Colorectal and Anal Carcinomas
2.01
article

Efficacy and safety of neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy versus chemotherapy alone in locally advanced rectal cancer

Chun‐Dong Zhang, Yanli Qu, Fuyu Zhang, Hujian Hong
article en
1 citations

Abstract

The neoadjuvant chemotherapy (nCT) could achieve outcomes comparable to neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy (nCRT) and reduced radiation toxicity, radiotherapy is questioned. Comparing nCRT and nCT in locally advanced rectal cancer (LARC) in the real world to identify patient subgroups that may benefit most from each approach. This retrospective study included patients with rectal cancer located within 10 cm from the anal verge and clinical staging of T2N + M0 or T3-4NanyM0. Patients were stratified into the nCRT group, which received radiotherapy (45.0 to 50.4 Gy/25 or 28 fractions) with concurrent Capecitabine chemotherapy, or the nCT group which received chemotherapy alone. In total, 380 patients (nCRT, n = 196, nCT, n = 184) were recruited. The rate of pathologic complete response (pCR) in the nCRT and nCT group was 22.4% and 9.2%, T downstaging was 69.4% and 47.8%, and tumor regression grade (TRG) 1–2 was 59.7% and 24.5%, respectively. Similarly, The nCRT group also had a favorable pCR, T downstaging, and TRG 1–2 rate than the nCT group in the bad-risk, advanced-risk, and subgroup A (tumors located at < 8 cm from the anal verge). In contrast, outcomes were comparable for subgroup B (tumors located at ≥ 8 cm) between the two groups. Moreover, the nCRT had a better rate of 3-year locoregional relapse-free survival (LRFS) (98.1% vs. 88.0%, P = 0.031) in the bad-risk category compared with the nCT group. Conversely, the disease-free survival (DFS) and overall survival (OS) were similar. The nCRT was associated with a higher rate of grade 1–2 myelosuppression (69.9% vs. 37.0%), diarrhea (54.1% vs. 10.3%), preventive stoma (62.8% vs. 44.6%), postoperative bowel obstruction (9.2% vs. 1.1%), and postoperative anastomotic stenosis (4.1% vs. 0.5%) (all P < 0.05). Tumor location and risk category may serve as a practical index for clinical decision-making on neoadjuvant therapy strategies in LARC. Patients with bad-risk or tumors located at < 8 cm from the anal verge may be benefited from nCRT.

BMC CancerVol. 25(1)
Liaoning University (CN), Dalian Medical University (CN), Fourth Affiliated Hospital of China Medical University (CN), Liaoning Cancer Hospital & Institute (CN), Jinzhou Medical University (CN), China Medical University (CN)
Dalian University of Technology
Openalex Percentile: Top 10%
Colorectal and Anal Carcinomas
2.01
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.