1 / 22

GRECCAR 1 prospective muticentric randomised trial

Sphincter preserving surgery after preoperative treatment for ultra-low rectal carcinoma. A French multicenter prospective trial: GRECCAR 1. P Rouanet, M Rivoire, B Lelong, E Rullier, L Vanseymortier, L Mineur, P Lasser, M Pocard, JC Ollier, JL Faucheron, F Dravet, D Pezet,

mervyn
Download Presentation

GRECCAR 1 prospective muticentric randomised trial

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Sphincter preserving surgery after preoperative treatment for ultra-low rectal carcinoma. A French multicenter prospective trial: GRECCAR 1 P Rouanet, M Rivoire, B Lelong, E Rullier, L Vanseymortier, L Mineur, P Lasser, M Pocard, JC Ollier, JL Faucheron, F Dravet, D Pezet, JM Fabre, J Balosso, C Lemanski, S Gourgou, B Saint Aubert. GRECCAR (French surgical research group of rectal carcinoma).

  2. GRECCAR 1prospective muticentric randomised trial Inclusion: LRC which requires APR TIP - LA < 2 cm / UT2-T3 HDR (45 Gy + 18 Gy) LRC R Surg CT if pN+ RCT (45 Gy + 5FU continuous) PA : Incidence of conservative surgery SA : - Oncological and functional results - Down staging impact on survival - Quality of life

  3. CISR PISR M ISR complete ISR partial Mucosectomy Classification of Anoproctectomy Based on : - mucosal resection - endoanal resection Intersphincteric Resection

  4. Ano-Proctectomy Mucosectomy Partial ISR Complete ISR

  5. 80 40 70 35 60 30 50 25 40 HDR 20 RCT 30 15 20 10 10 5 0 0 VA CLB 2001 IPC StA 2002 COL CSC 2003 IGR CRG CPS Gren CF Mtpl CAV 2005 2004 GRECCAR 1 : inclusion curves 4/2001 – 4/2005 : 207 patients in 13 centers

  6. Effectives n: 100 n: 96

  7. Patient characteristics Results at 23 months Data base ended Feb 06 *median

  8. Tumor characteristics RE Colo USR *Median in centimetres

  9. RE USR Evaluation of neoadjuvant treatments *Median in centimetres

  10. Treatment toxicities Grade 3-4 HDR RCT • Peri anal Dermititis 75% 44% p : 0.21 • Diarrhea 53% 40% p : 0.51 • Prostatitis 25% 20% p : 0.74 • Nausea 4% 8% p : 0.49 • Cystitis 18% 28% p : 0.34 • Failure to continue TTT 7% 0 average 5 d (2-15)

  11. 72% Surgery: Conservative rate 85%

  12. TIP-LA Cons rate 0 very low 76 84% ≤ 2 cm low 120 84% Incidence of Conservation in relation to Topography

  13. Incidence and distribution of APR by center

  14. Operative morbidity • According to pre op TTT HDR RCT Fistula 9% 3% p : 0.13 Pelvic abscess 2% 4 % p : 0.40 Colonic necrosis 3% 3% p : 0.99 Anastomotic stenosis 5% 4% p : 0.75 • According to type of surgery APR M P ISR C ISR Fistula 1 (3%) 4 (19%) 4 (6.9%) 2 (2.6%) p:0.06 Pelvic abscess 1 (3%) 2 (9.5%) 1 (1.7%) 2 (2.6%)p:0.36 Colonic necrosis 1 (3%) 0 2 (3.5%) 1 (1.3%) p:0.09 Anastomotic stenosis 0 2 (9.5%) 6 (10.3%) 1 (1.3%) p:0.06

  15. Anatomical pathology *median

  16. RO Patients : 78% Classical R1 patients n: 44 22% • CRM • = 0 n: 4 3 APR 1st, 1 APR 2nd • <1 n: 9 9 AP 1st , 1 APR 2nd • = 1 n : 29 • DM • = 0 n : 2 2 AP 1st , 1 APR 2nd "Real" R1 patients n: 15 7.6% ?

  17. Relation between pT and pN staging pN+ => pT0-pT1 : 2/38 – 5.2% , pT2: 19/67 – 28% , pT3-4: 53/91 – 59%

  18. Oncologic results HDR RCT 2-year OS 93% 95% p: 0.69 2-year DFS 78% 76% p: 0.70 2-year LR 6% 5% p: 0.94 2-year Mt 17% 21% p: 0.53 Stoma closure 90% 94%p: 0.40 Median FU : 23 months

  19. Overall survival

  20. Survival according to the type of surgery

  21. Survival without local relapse

  22. Preliminary conclusions of GRECCAR 1 • 85% of sphincter conservation in respect with the oncological quality criteria. • No significant statistical difference between HDR and RCT arms • Possible standardization of the surgery: the crucial impact of the surgical technique (72% of ISR). • Tumoral Down staging is an excellent prognostic factor : It can modify an initial surgical indication of APR into conservative surgery. • More follow-up is needed in order to analyse the oncological safety and the functional reliability of this treatment.

More Related