Colectomy for malignant tumors or unresectable benign tumors requires preoperative planning based on cross-sectional imaging, consideration of neoadjuvant therapy, a decision on the extent of lymphadenectomy, and comprehensive knowledge of the relevant anatomy. Imaging review is critical for determining resectability and noting any aberrant anatomy. Based on the imaging, neoadjuvant therapy should be considered for bulky or locally advanced disease. The anatomical resection of the colon, mesentery, and lymph node basins is performed in accordance with the concept of complete mesocolic excision (CME), entailing the resection of the mesentery with visceral peritoneum intact, appropriate proximal and distal margins taken en bloc, and high ligation of the primary feeding vessels along which the lymph nodes are positioned. High ligation of the colic arteries is part of a standard lymphadenectomy and is intended to address possible micrometastatic nodal disease and proper staging for adjuvant therapy. Extended lymphadenectomy in the form of CME with central vascular ligation is indicated for patients with advanced T stage or clinical lymphadenopathy. Whether extended lymphadenectomy should be performed routinely is subject to debate. In this article, we review the indications and operative strategies for management of colon cancer in various locations in the colon, as well as key considerations for minimally invasive colectomy and advanced techniques such as CME with central vascular ligation.

Background and Objectives: The RAPIDO trial showed promising rates of pathologic complete response (pCR) after neoadjuvant short-course radiation with consolidation chemotherapy (total neoadjuvant therapy [SC TNT]) for rectal cancer. Only single-center reviews comparing tumor downstaging between SC TNT and long-course chemoradiation (LCRT) have been published in the United States. We reviewed our multi-institutional experience with both. Methods: The US Rectal Cancer Consortium database (2007-2018) including data from six high-volume rectal cancer care centers was reviewed. Patients with nonmetastatic, rectal adenocarcinoma who had neoadjuvant LCRT alone or SC TNT before excision or definitive nonoperative management were included. The primary outcome was the rate of complete response (CR), including pCR or durable (12 month) clinical complete response. Results: Of 857 included patients, 175 (20%) received SC TNT and 682 (80%) received LCRT. The LCRT group had more low tumors (51.8% vs. 37.1%, p < 0.0001) and more clinically node-negative disease (31.8% vs. 22.3%, p < 0.0001). The CR rate was higher after SC TNT (34.1% vs. 20.3%, p = 0.0001). SC TNT was a predictor of CR (OR: 2.52, CI: 1.68-3.78). SC TNT patients completing 5-6 months of consolidation chemotherapy had a CR rate of 42.9%. There was no difference in 3-year PFS. Conclusions: SC TNT increases CR rate when compared to LCRT. For patients seeking nonoperative options or fewer radiation treatments, SC TRT should be preferred over LCRT alone.

Purpose Anastomotic leak (AL) is a complication of low anterior resection (LAR) that results in substantial morbidity. There is immense interest in evaluating immediate postoperative and long-term oncologic outcomes in patients who undergo diverting loop ileostomies (DLI). The purpose of this study is to understand the relationship between fecal diversion, AL, and oncologic outcomes. Methods This is a retrospective multicenter cohort study using patient data obtained from the US Rectal Cancer Consortium database compiled from six academic institutions. The study population included patients with rectal adenocarcinoma undergoing LAR. The primary outcome was the incidence of AL among patients who did or did not receive DLI during LAR. Secondary outcomes included risk factors for AL, receipt of adjuvant therapy, 3-year overall survival, and 3-year recurrence. Results Of 815 patients, 38 (4.7%) suffered AL after LAR. Patients with AL were more likely to be male, have unintentional preoperative weight loss, and are less likely to undergo DLI. On multivariable analysis, DLI remained protective against AL ( p < 0.001). Diverted patients were less likely to undergo future surgical procedures including additional ostomy creation, completion proctectomy, or pelvic washout for AL. Subgroup analysis of 456 patients with locally advanced disease showed that DLI was correlated with increased receipt of adjuvant therapy for patients with and without AL on univariate analysis (SHR:1.59; [95% CI 1.19–2.14]; p = 0.002), but significance was not met in multivariate models. Conclusion Lack of DLI and preoperative weight loss was associated with anastomotic leak. Fecal diversion may improve the timely initiation of adjuvant oncologic therapy. The long-term outcomes following routine diverting stomas warrant further study.

BACKGROUND: Up to 10% of patients develop new, persistent opioid use after surgery. We aimed to assess our prescribing practices and patient utilization of opioids after colorectal surgery. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to implement an opioid-prescribing protocol that will minimize the number of postoperative opioids to decrease community circulation and persistent use by patients. DESIGN: This was a single-institution, prospective study based on questionnaires of postoperative patients in 2019 and 2020 to determine opioid prescribing and usage patterns. Based on these preliminary results, a protocol was implemented in which patients were discharged with 5 or 15 oxycodone 5 mg equivalents based on opioid usage in the 24 hours before discharge. Patients were surveyed after protocol implementation. SETTINGS: Our institution is a large referral center for surgical treatment of colorectal disease. PATIENTS: Adults who underwent inpatient abdominal colorectal procedures. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: End points included the number of opioids prescribed, number of prescribed opioids taken, and refill rate. Nonparametric testing was used. RESULTS: Of 77 eligible patients, 61 were opioid naive. Preprotocol, opioid-naive patients (n = 29) were prescribed a median of 30 (interquartile range [IQR], 30–45) tablets but took only 10 (IQR, 0–10; p < 0.0001). Eighty-three percent took 20 or fewer tablets. After protocol implementation, opioid-naive patients (n = 32) were prescribed fewer tablets (median 15; IQR, 7–15; p < 0.0001) but took a similar number of tablets as the preprotocol group (median 10; IQR, 0–10; p = 0.21). The refill rate remained similar (13.8% vs 18.8%; p = 0.60). Protocol adherence was 90.6%. LIMITATIONS: This study is limited by sample size, cohort heterogeneity, and generalizability. CONCLUSIONS: Patients took significantly fewer opioids than were prescribed. Our protocol limited overprescribing and resulted in fewer opioids in the community without opportunity costs such as increased refills. Long-term studies are needed to assess the effects of persistent opioid use after surgery. See Video Abstract at http://links.lww.com/DCR/C93. EL PROTOCOLO DE PRESCRIPCIÓN DE ALTA REDUCE LOS OPIOIDES EN CIRCULACIÓN Y NO AUMENTA LOS REABASTECIMIENTOS DESPUÉS DE LA CIRUGÍA COLORECTAL ANTECEDENTES: Hasta el 10% de los pacientes desarrollan un nuevo uso persistente de opioides después de la cirugía. Nuestro objetivo fue evaluar nuestras prácticas de prescripción y la utilización de opioides por parte de los pacientes después de la cirugía colorrectal. OBJETIVO: Nuestro objetivo es implementar un protocolo de prescripción de opioides que minimice la cantidad de opioides posoperatorios para disminuir la circulación en la comunidad y el uso persistente por parte de los pacientes. DISEÑO: Estudio prospectivo, de una sola institución, basado en cuestionarios de pacientes postoperatorios en 2019 y 2020 para determinar los patrones de prescripción y uso de opioides. Con base en estos resultados preliminares, se implementó un protocolo en el que los pacientes eran dados de alta con 5 o 15 equivalentes de oxicodona de 5 mg según el uso de opioides en las 24 horas previas al alta. Los pacientes fueron encuestados después de la implementación del protocolo. AJUSTES: Nuestra institución es un gran centro de referencia para el tratamiento quirúrgico de la enfermedad colorrectal. PACIENTES: Adultos que se sometieron a procedimientos colorrectales abdominales con hospitalización. PRINCIPALES MEDIDAS DE RESULTADO: Los criterios de valoración incluyeron el número de opioides recetados, el número de opioides recetados tomados y la tasa de reabastecimiento. Se utilizaron pruebas no paramétricas. RESULTADOS: De 77 pacientes elegibles, 61 no habian recibido opioides. A los pacientes sin tratamiento previo con opioides antes del protocolo (n = 29) se les prescribió una mediana de 30 (rango intercuartilico [RIC] 30–45) comprimidos, pero solo tomaron 10 (RIC 0.10, p < 0,0001). El ochenta y tres por ciento tomo ≤20 comprimidos. Despues de la implementacion del protocolo, a los pacientes sin tratamiento previo con opioides (n = 32) se les prescribieron menos comprimidos (15; RIC 7.15, p < 0,0001), pero tomaron un numero similar antes de la intervención (10; RIC 0–10, p = 0,21). La tasa de reabastecimiento se mantuvo similar (13,8% frente a 18,8%, p = 0,60). La adherencia al protocolo fue del 90,6%. LIMITACIONES: Este estudio está limitado por el tamaño de la muestra, la heterogeneidad de la cohorte y la generalización. CONCLUSIONES: Los pacientes tomaron significativamente menos opioides de los prescritos. Nuestro protocolo limitó la prescripción excesiva y dio como resultados menos opioides en la comunidad sin costos de oportunidad, como el aumento de reabastecimiento. Se necesitan estudios a largo plazo para evaluar los efectos sobre el uso persistente de opioides después de la cirugía. Consulte Video Resumen en http://links.lww.com/DCR/C93. (Traducción—Dr. Francisco M. Abarca-Rendon)

Background and ObjectivesNeoadjuvant short-course radiation and consolidation chemotherapy (SC TNT) remains less widely used for rectal cancer in the United States than long-course chemoradiation (LCRT). SC TNT may improve compliance and downstaging; however, a longer radiation-to-surgery interval may worsen pelvic fibrosis and morbidity with total mesorectal excision (TME). A single, US-center retrospective analysis has shown comparable risk of morbidity after neoadjuvant short-course radiation with consolidation chemotherapy (SC TNT) and long-course chemoradiation (LCRT). Validation by a multi-institutional study is needed.MethodsThe US Rectal Cancer Consortium database (2010-2018) was retrospectively reviewed for patients with nonmetastatic, rectal adenocarcinoma treated with neoadjuvant LCRT or SC TNT before TME. The primary endpoint was severe postoperative morbidity. Cohorts were compared by univariate analysis. Multivariable logistic regression modeled the odds of severe complication.ResultsOf 788 included patients, 151 (19%) received SC TNT and 637 (81%) LCRT. The SC TNT group had fewer distal tumors (33.8% vs. 50.2%, p < 0.0001) and more clinical node-positive disease (74.2% vs. 47.6%, p < 0.0001). The intraoperative complication rate was similar (SC TNT 5.3% vs. 4.4%, p = 0.65). There was no difference in overall postoperative morbidity (38.4% vs. 46.3%, p = 0.08). Severe morbidity was similar with low anterior resection (9.1% vs. 15.3%, p = 0.10) and abdominoperineal resection (24.4% vs. 29.7%, p = 0.49). SC TNT did not increase the odds of severe morbidity relative to LCRT on multivariable analysis (OR 0.64, 95% CI 0.37-1.10).ConclusionsSC TNT does not increase morbidity after TME for rectal cancer relative to LCRT. Concern for surgical complications should not discourage the use of SC TNT when aiming to increase the likelihood of complete clinical response.

INTRODUCTION:Management of retroperitoneal and lateral pelvic lymph nodes (RLPN) in rectal cancer remains unclear. With total neoadjuvant therapy (TNT), more patients have radiologic complete clinical response (rCR). We sought to evaluate the impact of radiographic persistent RLPN after neoadjuvant therapy on survival. MATERIALS AND METHODS:Patients with rectal adenocarcinoma with isolated RLPN metastasis, who received neoadjuvant therapy before surgery were included from the United States Rectal Cancer Consortium database. Primary outcomes were recurrence-free survival (RFS) and overall survival (OS). RESULTS:Of 77 patients, all received neoadjuvant therapy, with 35 (46%) receiving TNT. Posttreatment, 33 (43%) had rCR while 44 (57%) had radiographic persistent RLPN. Median number of radiographic positive RLPN was 1 (IQR 1-2). Receipt of TNT was associated with radiographic RLPN rCR (OR 4.77, 95% CI 1.81-12.60, p < .01). However, there was no difference in RFS and OS between patients who achieved rCR or with persistent RLPN (all p > .05). CONCLUSIONS:Radiographic persistence of RLPN was not associated with worse survival in well-selected patients and may not be a reliable indicator of pathological response. TNT may be the preferred management strategy to select patients given its association with rCR. Radiographic persistence of RLPN after preoperative therapy should not necessarily preclude surgery.

PURPOSE Clinical calculators and nomograms have been endorsed by the American Joint Committee on Cancer (AJCC), as they provide the most individualized and accurate estimate of patient outcome. Using molecular and clinicopathologic variables, a third-generation clinical calculator was built to predict recurrence following resection of stage I-III colon cancer. METHODS Prospectively collected data from 1,095 patients who underwent colectomy between 2007 and 2014 at Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center were used to develop a clinical calculator. Discrimination was measured with concordance index, and variability in individual predictions was assessed with calibration curves. The clinical calculator was externally validated with a patient cohort from Washington University's Siteman Cancer Center in St Louis. RESULTS The clinical calculator incorporated six variables: microsatellite genomic phenotype; AJCC T category; number of tumor-involved lymph nodes; presence of high-risk pathologic features such as venous, lymphatic, or perineural invasion; presence of tumor-infiltrating lymphocytes; and use of adjuvant chemotherapy. The concordance index was 0.792 (95% CI, 0.749 to 0.837) for the clinical calculator, compared with 0.708 (95% CI, 0.671 to 0.745) and 0.757 (0.715 to 0.799) for the staging schemes of the AJCC manual's 5th and 8th editions, respectively. External validation confirmed robust performance, with a concordance index of 0.738 (95% CI, 0.703 to 0.811) and calibration plots of predicted probability and observed events approaching a 45° diagonal. CONCLUSION This third-generation clinical calculator for predicting cancer recurrence following curative colectomy successfully incorporates microsatellite genomic phenotype and the presence of tumor-infiltrating lymphocytes, resulting in improved discrimination and predictive accuracy. This exemplifies an evolution of a clinical calculator to maintain relevance by incorporating emerging variables as they become validated and accepted in the oncologic community.

BACKGROUND: The National Accreditation Program for Rectal Cancer (NAPRC) emphasizes a multidisciplinary approach for treating rectal cancer and has developed performance measures to ensure that patients receive standardized care. We hypothesized that rectal cancer patients receiving care at multiple centers would be less likely to receive timely and appropriate care. STUDY DESIGN: A single institution retrospective review of a prospectively maintained database was performed. All patients undergoing proctectomy and <= 1 other treatment modality (eg radiation and/or chemotherapy) for Stage II/III rectal adenocarcinoma were included. Unified care was defined as receiving all modalities of care at our institution, and fragmented care was defined as having at least 1 treatment modality at another institution. RESULTS: From 2009 to 2019, 415 patients met inclusion criteria, with 197 (47.5%) receiving fragmented care and 218 (52.5%) receiving unified care. The unified cohort patients were more likely to see a colorectal surgeon before starting treatment (89.0% vs 78.7%, p < 0.01) and start definitive treatment within 60 days of diagnosis (89.0% vs 79.7%, p = 0.01). On adjusted analysis, unified care patients were 2.78 times more likely to see a surgeon before starting treatment (95% CI 1.47-5.24) and 2.63 times more likely to start treatment within 60 days (95% CI 1.35-5.13). There was no difference in 90-day mortality or 5-year disease-free survival. CONCLUSIONS: This retrospective cohort study suggests patients with rectal cancer receiving fragmented care are at an increased risk of delays in care without any impact on disease-free survival. These findings need to be considered within the context of ongoing regionalization of rectal cancer care to ensure all patients receive optimal care, irrespective of whether care is delivered across multiple institutions. (C) 2020 by the American College of Surgeons. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

BACKGROUND: Preoperative staging of clinical stage I rectal cancer can fail to diagnose T3 or nodal disease. Adjuvant treatment of these upstaged patients remains controversial. OBJECTIVE: The objective was to identify predictors of clinical stage I rectal cancer upstaging and quantify rates of local and systemic recurrence. DESIGN: This was a retrospective cohort study. SETTINGS: The study was conducted using data from the United States Rectal Cancer Consortium, a registry of 1881 rectal cancer resections performed at 6 academic medical centers. PATIENTS: There were a total of 94 clinical stage I rectal cancer patients who underwent proctectomy without preoperative therapy. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The primary measures were incidence of pathologic upstaging, recurrence (local and systemic), and overall survival. RESULTS: Among 94 clinical stage I patients who underwent proctectomy without preoperative therapy, 23 (24.5%) were upstaged by surgical pathology. There were 6 pT3N0 patients, 8 pT1-2N+ patients, and 9 pT3N+ patients. There were no significant differences in demographic or clinical characteristics between upstaged and nonupstaged patients. Of the 6 patients who were upstaged to T3N0 disease, none received adjuvant therapy and none developed recurrence. Of the 17 patients who were upstaged to N+ disease, 14 (82%) received adjuvant chemotherapy and 6 (35%) received adjuvant chemoradiation. None developed a local recurrence, but 4 (24%) developed systemic recurrence, and 2 (12%) died of disease over a mean of 36 months of follow-up. Among the 9 pT3N+ patients, the systemic recurrence rate was 33%, despite 8 of 9 patients receiving adjuvant fluorouracil, leucovorin, and oxaliplatin. LIMITATIONS: Small sample size hinders the ability to draw significant conclusions. CONCLUSIONS: One in 4 patients with stage I rectal cancer had unrecognized T3 or nodal disease found on operative pathology. Occult nodal disease was associated with worse outcomes, despite receiving adjuvant therapy. Systemic recurrence was more common than local recurrence. See Video Abstract at http://links.lww.com/DCR/B885. MANEJO Y RESULTADOS DEL AUMENTO DEL ESTADIO PATOLÓGICO DE LOS CÁNCERES DE RECTO EN ESTADIO CLÍNICO I: UN ANÁLISIS EXPLORATORIO ANTECEDENTES: El estadiaje pre-operatorio del cáncer de recto en fase clínica I puede ser erróneo en el diagnóstico T3 o en la diseminación ganglionar. El tratamiento adyuvante de estos pacientes sobre-estadificados ​​sigue siendo controvertido. OBJETIVO: El identificar los factores predictivos en fase clínica I del cáncer de recto y cuantificar las tasas de recurrencia local y sistémica. DISEÑO: Estudio de cohortes retrospectivo. AJUSTE: El estudio se realizó utilizando los datos del Consorcio del Cáncer de Recto de los Estados Unidos, con un registro de 1.881 resecciones oncológicas rectales realizadas en seis centros médicos académicos. PACIENTES: Un total de 94 pacientes con cáncer de recto en fase clínica I fueron sometidos a proctectomía sin terapia preoperatoria. PRINCIPALES MEDIDAS DE RESULTADO: Las medidas primarias fueron la incidencia del sobre-estadiaje histopatológico, la recurrencia (local y sistémica) y la sobrevida general. RESULTADOS: De 94 pacientes en fase clínica I que se sometieron a una proctectomía sin terapia preoperatoria, 23 (24,5%) fueron sobre-estadiados ​​por la histopatología quirúrgica. Hubieron 6 pacientes pT3N0, 8 pT1-2N + y 9 pT3N +. No hubo diferencias significativas en las características demográficas o clínicas entre los pacientes sobre-estadiados ​​y los no sobre-estadiados. De los 6 pacientes que fueron sobre-estadiados en la enfermedad T3N0, ninguno de ellos recibió terapia adyuvante y ninguno recidivó. De los 17 pacientes que fueron sobre-estadiados a la enfermedad N +, 14 (82%) recibieron quimioterapia adyuvante y 6 (35%) recibieron quimio-radioterapia adyuvante. Ninguno desarrolló recidiva local, pero 4 (24%) desarrollaron recidiva sistémica y 2 (12%) murieron a causa de la enfermedad durante el seguimiento medio de 36 meses. Entre los 9 pacientes con pT3N +, la tasa de recidiva sistémica fue del 33%, a pesar de que 8 de 9 pacientes recibieron fluorouracilo, leucovorina y oxaliplatino como quimio-adyuvantes. LIMITACIONES: El tamaño pequeño de la muestra dificulta la capacidad de obtener conclusiones significativas. CONCLUSIONES: Uno de cada cuatro pacientes con cáncer de recto en estadío I presentaba enfermedad ganglionar o T3 no descrita en la histopatología operatoria. La enfermedad ganglionar oculta se asoció con peores resultados, a pesar de recibir terapia adyuvante. La recidiva sistémica fue más común que la recidiva local. Consulte Video Resumen en http://links.lww.com/DCR/B885. (Traducción—Dr. Xavier Delgadillo)

BACKGROUND:Regionalization of rectal cancer surgery may lead to worse disease free survival owing to longer travel time to reach a high volume center yet no study has evaluated this relationship at a single high volume center volume center. MATERIALS AND METHODS:This was a retrospective review of rectal cancer patients undergoing surgery from 2009 to 2019 at a single high volume center. Patients were divided into two groups based on travel time. The primary outcome was disease-free survival (DFS). Additional outcomes included treatment within 60 d of diagnosis, completeness of preoperative staging, and evaluation by a colorectal surgeon prior to initiation of treatment. RESULTS:A lower proportion of patients with long travel time began definitive treatment within 60 d of diagnosis (74.0% versus 84.0%, P= 0.01) or were seen by the treating colorectal surgeon before beginning definitive treatment (74.8% versus 85.4%, P < 0.01). On multivariable logistic regression analysis, patients with long travel time were significantly less likely to begin definitive treatment within 60 d of diagnosis (OR = 0.54; 95% CI = 0.31-0.93) or to be evaluated by a colorectal surgeon prior to initiating treatment (OR = 0.45; 95% CI = 0.25-0.80). There were no significant differences in DFS based on travel time. CONCLUSIONS:Although patients with long travel times may be vulnerable to delayed, lower quality rectal cancer care, there is no difference in DFS when definitive surgery is performed at a high volume canter. Ongoing research is needed to identify explanations for delays in treatment to ensure all patients receive the highest quality care.

Importance Predicting outcomes in patients receiving neoadjuvant therapy for rectal cancer is challenging because of tumor downstaging. Validated clinical calculators that can estimate recurrence-free survival (RFS) and overall survival (OS) among patients with rectal cancer who have received multimodal therapy are needed. Objective To develop and validate clinical calculators providing estimates of rectal cancer recurrence and survival that are better for individualized decision-making than the American Joint Committee on Cancer (AJCC) staging system or the neoadjuvant rectal (NAR) score. Design, Setting, and Participants This prognostic study developed risk models, graphically represented as nomograms, for patients with incomplete pathological response using Cox proportional hazards and multivariable regression analyses with restricted cubic splines. Because patients with complete pathological response to neoadjuvant therapy had uniformly favorable outcomes, their predictions were obtained separately. The study included 1400 patients with stage II or III rectal cancer who received treatment with chemotherapy, radiotherapy, and surgery at 2 comprehensive cancer centers (Memorial Sloan Kettering [MSK] Cancer Center and Siteman Cancer Center [SCC]) between January 1, 1998, and December 31, 2017. Patients from the MSK cohort received chemoradiation, surgery, and adjuvant chemotherapy from January 1, 1998, to December 31, 2014; these patients were randomly assigned to either a model training group or an internal validation group. Models were externally validated using data from the SCC cohort, who received either chemoradiation, surgery, and adjuvant chemotherapy (chemoradiotherapy group) or short-course radiotherapy, consolidation chemotherapy, and surgery (total neoadjuvant therapy with short-course radiotherapy group) from January 1, 2009, to December 31, 2017. Data were analyzed from March 1, 2020, to January 10, 2021. Exposures Chemotherapy, radiotherapy, chemoradiotherapy, and surgery. Main Outcomes and Measures Recurrence-free survival and OS were the outcome measures, and the discriminatory performance of the clinical calculators was measured with concordance index and calibration plots. The ability of the clinical calculators to predict RFS and OS was compared with that of the AJCC staging system and the NAR score. The models for RFS and OS among patients with incomplete pathological response included postoperative pathological tumor category, number of positive lymph nodes, tumor distance from anal verge, and large- and small-vessel venous and perineural invasion; age was included in the risk model for OS. The final clinical calculators provided RFS and OS estimates derived from Kaplan-Meier curves for patients with complete pathological response and from risk models for patients with incomplete pathological response. Results Among 1400 total patients with locally advanced rectal cancer, the median age was 57.8 years (range, 18.0-91.9 years), and 863 patients (61.6%) were male, with tumors at a median distance of 6.7 cm (range, 0-15.0 cm) from the anal verge. The MSK cohort comprised 1069 patients; of those, 710 were assigned to the model training group and 359 were assigned to the internal validation group. The SCC cohort comprised 331 patients; of those, 200 were assigned to the chemoradiotherapy group and 131 were assigned to the total neoadjuvant therapy with short-course radiotherapy group. The concordance indices in the MSK validation data set were 0.70 (95% CI, 0.65-0.76) for RFS and 0.73 (95% CI, 0.65-0.80) for OS. In the external SCC data set, the concordance indices in the chemoradiotherapy group were 0.71 (95% CI, 0.62-0.81) for RFS and 0.72 (95% CI, 0.59-0.85) for OS; the concordance indices in the total neoadjuvant therapy with short-course radiotherapy group were 0.62 (95% CI, 0.49-0.75) for RFS and 0.67 (95% CI, 0.46-0.84) for OS. Calibration plots confirmed good agreement between predicted and observed events. These results compared favorably with predictions based on the AJCC staging system (concordance indices for MSK validation: RFS = 0.69 [95% CI, 0.64-0.74]; OS = 0.67 [95% CI, 0.58-0.75]) and the NAR score (concordance indices for MSK validation: RFS = 0.56 [95% CI, 0.50-0.63]; OS = 0.56 [95% CI, 0.46-0.66]). Furthermore, the clinical calculators provided more individualized outcome estimates compared with the categorical schemas (eg, estimated RFS for patients with AJCC stage IIIB disease ranged from 7% to 68%). Conclusions and Relevance In this prognostic study, clinical calculators were developed and validated; these calculators provided more individualized estimates of the likelihood of RFS and OS than the AJCC staging system or the NAR score among patients with rectal cancer who received multimodal treatment. The calculators were easy to use and applicable to both short- and long-course radiotherapy regimens, and they may be used to inform surveillance strategies and facilitate future clinical trials and statistical power calculations.

SC-TNT demonstrated a greater rate of cCR compared to LC-TNT, without DFS difference on MVA. Although future studies are warranted to compare SC-TNT with a CRT and consolidative chemotherapy TNT approach, our data support SC-TNT as a suitable regimen for LARC NOM.

Bauer, Philip S. MD; Otegbeye, Ebunoluwa E. MD; Silviera, Matthew L. MD; Hunt, Steven R. MD FACS; Mutch, Matthew G. MD, FACS; Wise, Paul E. MD, FACS Author Information

Background: Preference for a gender concordant surgeon has been demonstrated when the chief complaint is perceived as private. We aimed to investigate this phenomenon among colorectal patients. Methods: A 3-week prospective, observational, quality improvement study was performed. Schedulers recorded all new patient calls and factors influencing patient selection of surgeon. Demographic information was obtained. Descriptive statistics were performed. Results: There were 60 new patients scheduled; 35 (58.3%) female. Ten(16.7%) chose a surgeon based on gender; 70% of those with gender requests (GR) were female (70%), and 80% were gender-concordant. Seven (70%) of those with GR had anorectal complaints. Of all patients with anorectal complaints, 20.6% had a GR vs. 11.5% non-anorectal (p = 0.49). Conclusions: A considerable percentage of patients make a GR when seeking treatment, especially for anorectal disease. Departments should be mindful of the sensitive nature of many colorectal diseases and strive to diversify accordingly in order to create safe environments for the optimal delivery of patient-centered care. (C) 2020 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.