INTRODUCTION:The effect of neoadjuvant chemotherapy and chemoradiotherapy in patients with locally advanced rectal cancer, at increased risk of failing current treatment regimens, is unknown. This study compared the complete response rate and long-term survival of these patients treated with or without neoadjuvant chemotherapy prior to chemoradiotherapy. MATERIALS AND METHODS:Patients with high-risk locally advanced rectal cancer, who were surgically treated or entered a watch and wait approach after neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy with or without neoadjuvant chemotherapy in Erasmus Medical Centre or Catharina Hospital between 2016 and 2020, were retrospectively identified. High-risk was defined as the presence of tumour invasion into the mesorectal fascia, grade 4 extramural venous invasion, enlarged lateral lymph nodes, or tumour deposits. The primary endpoint was complete response rate, which was defined as a histopathological complete response or a sustained (during 12 months) clinical complete response. Long-term oncological outcomes were evaluated based on Kaplan-Meier and Cox regression survival analyses. RESULTS:The neoadjuvant chemotherapy group consisted of 64 patients, of whom 61 (95.3 %) were treated with chemotherapy prior to chemoradiotherapy, the chemoradiotherapy group of 194 patients. The complete response rates were 25.0 % and 9.8 %, respectively (P = 0.002). The estimated 3-year overall survival was 92.2 % in the neoadjuvant chemotherapy group versus 66.9 % in the chemoradiotherapy group. CONCLUSION:Excellent oncological outcomes were observed in patients with high-risk locally advanced rectal cancer selected during a multidisciplinary team (MDT) meeting for neoadjuvant chemotherapy and chemoradiotherapy. The actual difference with patients treated with chemoradiotherapy alone should be investigated in prospective trials. Pretreatment referral to expert MDTs is encouraged.

Introduction The empty pelvis syndrome is a significant source of morbidity following pelvic exenteration surgery. It remains poorly defined with research in this field being heterogeneous and of low quality. Furthermore, there has been minimal engagement with patient representatives following pelvic exenteration with respect to the empty pelvic syndrome. 'PelvEx-Beating the empty pelvis syndrome' aims to engage both patient representatives and healthcare professionals to achieve an international consensus on a core outcome set, pathophysiology and mitigation of the empty pelvis syndrome. Methods and analysis A modified-Delphi approach will be followed with a three-stage study design. First, statements will be longlisted using a recent systematic review, healthcare professional event, patient and public engagement, and Delphi piloting. Second, statements will be shortlisted using up to three rounds of online modified Delphi. Third, statements will be confirmed and instruments for measurable statements selected using a virtual patient-representative consensus meeting, and finally a face-to-face healthcare professional consensus meeting. Ethics and dissemination The University of Southampton Faculty of Medicine ethics committee has approved this protocol, which is registered as a study with the Core Outcome Measures in Effectiveness Trials Initiative. Publication of this study will increase the potential for comparative research to further understanding and prevent the empty pelvis syndrome.

Abstract Background The presence of mesorectal fascia (MRF) invasion, grade 4 extramural venous invasion (EMVI), tumour deposits (TD) or extensive or bilateral extramesorectal (lateral) lymph nodes (LLN) on MRI has been suggested to identify patients with indisputable, extensive locally advanced rectal cancer (LARC), at high risk of treatment failure. The aim of this study is to evaluate whether or not intensified chemotherapy prior to neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy improves the complete response (CR) rate in these patients. Methods This multicentre, single-arm, open-label, phase II trial will include 128 patients with non-metastatic high-risk LARC (hr-LARC), fit for triplet chemotherapy. To ensure a study population with indisputable, unfavourable prognostic characteristics, hr-LARC is defined as LARC with on baseline MRI at least one of the following characteristics; MRF invasion, EMVI grade 4, enlarged bilateral or extensive LLN at high risk of an incomplete resection, or TD. Exclusion criteria are the presence of a homozygous DPD deficiency, distant metastases, any chemotherapy within the past 6 months, previous radiotherapy within the pelvic area precluding standard chemoradiotherapy, and any contraindication for the planned treatment. All patients will be planned for six two-weekly cycles of FOLFOXIRI (5-fluorouracil, leucovorin, oxaliplatin and irinotecan) prior to chemoradiotherapy (25 × 2 Gy or 28 × 1.8 Gy with concomitant capecitabine). A resection will be performed following radiological confirmation of resectable disease after the completion of chemoradiotherapy. A watch and wait strategy is allowed in case of a clinical complete response. The primary endpoint is the CR rate, described as a pathological CR or a sustained clinical CR one year after chemoradiotherapy. The main secondary objectives are long-term oncological outcomes, radiological and pathological response, the number of resections with clear margins, treatment-related toxicity, perioperative complications, health-related costs, and quality of life. Discussion This trial protocol describes the MEND-IT study. The MEND-IT study aims to evaluate the CR rate after intensified chemotherapy prior to concomitant chemoradiotherapy in a homogeneous group of patients with locally advanced rectal cancer and indisputably unfavourable characteristics, defined as hr-LARC, in order to improve their prognosis. Trial registration Clinicaltrials.gov: NCT04838496 , registered on 02–04-2021 Netherlands Trial Register: NL9790. Protocol version Version 3 dd 11–4-2022.

BACKGROUND:This study aimed to investigate the agreement between magnetic resonance tumour regression grade (mrTRG) and pathological regression grade (pTRG) in patients with locally recurrent rectal cancer (LRRC). Also, the reproducibility of mrTRG was investigated.METHODS:All patients with LRRC who underwent a resection between 2010 and 2018 after treatment with induction chemotherapy and neoadjuvant chemo(re)irradiation in whom a restaging MRI was available were retrospectively selected. All MRI scans were reassessed by two independent radiologists using the mrTRG, and the pTRG was reassessed by an independent pathologist. The interobserver agreement between the radiologists as well as between the radiologists and the pathologist was assessed with the weighted kappa test. A subanalysis was performed to evaluate the influence of the interval between imaging and surgery.RESULTS:Out of 313 patients with LRRC treated during the study interval, 124 patients were selected. Interobserver agreement between the radiologists was fair (k = 0.28) using a two-tier grading system (mrTRG 1-2 versus mrTRG 3-5). For the lead radiologist, agreement with pTRG was moderate (k = 0.52; 95 per cent c.i. 0.36 to 0.68) when comparing good (mrTRG 1-2 and Mandard 1-2) and intermediate/poor responders (mrTRG 3-5 and Mandard 3-5), and the agreement was fair between the other abdominal radiologist and pTRG (k = 0.39; 95 per cent c.i. 0.22 to 0.56). A shorter interval (less than 7 weeks) between MRI and surgery resulted in an improved agreement (k = 0.69), compared with an interval more than 7 weeks (k = 0.340). For the lead radiologist, the positive predictive value for predicting good responders was 95 per cent (95 per cent c.i. 71 per cent to 99 per cent), whereas this was 56 per cent (95 per cent c.i. 44 per cent to 66 per cent) for the other radiologist.CONCLUSION:This study showed that, in LRRC, the reproducibility of mrTRG among radiologists is limited and the agreement of mrTRG with pTRG is low. However, a shorter interval between MRI and surgery seems to improve this agreement and, if assessed by a dedicated radiologist, mrTRG could predict good responders.

Purpose: Intra-operative radiotherapy (IORT) has been used as a tool to provide a high-dose radiation boost to a limited volume of patients with fixed tumors with a likelihood of microscopically involved resection margins, in order to improve local control. Two main techniques to deliver IORT include high-dose-rate (HDR) brachytherapy, termed 'intra-operative brachytherapy' (IOBT), and electrons, termed 'intra-operative electron radiotherapy' (IOERT), both having very different dose distributions. A recent paper described an improved local recurrence-free survival favoring IOBT over IOERT for patients with locally advanced or recurrent rectal cancer and microscopically irradical resections. Although several factors may have contributed to this result, an important difference between the two techniques was the higher surface dose delivered by IOBT. This article described an adaptation of IOERT technique to achieve a comparable surface dose as dose delivered by IOBT. Material and methods: Two steps were taken to increase the surface dose for IOERT: 1. Introducing a bolus to achieve a maximum dose on the surface, and 2. Re-normalizing to allow for the same prescribed dose at reference depth. Conclusions: We describe and propose an adaptation of IOERT technique to increase surface dose, decreasing the differences between these two techniques, with the aim of further improving local control. In addition, an alternative method of dose prescription is suggested, to consider improved comparison with other techniques in the future.

BACKGROUND:The optimal treatment for patients with locally recurrent rectal cancer (LRRC) is controversial. The aim of this study was to investigate different treatment strategies in two leading tertiary referral hospitals in Europe. METHODS:All patients who underwent curative surgery for LRRC between January 2003 and December 2017 in Catharina Hospital, Eindhoven, the Netherlands (CHE), or Karolinska University Hospital, Stockholm, Sweden (KAR), were studied retrospectively. Available MRIs were reviewed to obtain a uniform staging for optimal comparison of both cohorts. The main outcomes studied were overall survival (OS), local re-recurrence-free survival (LRFS), and metastasis-free survival (MFS). RESULTS:In total, 377 patients were included, of whom 126 and 251 patients came from KAR and CHE respectively. At 5 years, the LRFS rate was 62.3 per cent in KAR versus 42.3 per cent in CHE (P = 0.017), whereas OS and MFS were similar. A clear surgical resection margin (R0) was the strongest prognostic factor for survival, with a hazard ratio of 2.23 (95 per cent c.i. 1.74 to 2.86; P < 0.001), 3.96 (2.87 to 5.47; P < 0.001), and 2.00 (1.48 to 2.69; P < 0.001) for OS, LRFS, and MFS respectively. KAR performed more extensive operations, resulting in more R0 resections than in CHE (76.2 versus 61.4 per cent; P = 0.004), whereas CHE relied more on neoadjuvant treatment and intraoperative radiotherapy, to reduce the morbidity of multivisceral resections (P < 0.001). CONCLUSION:In radiotherapy-naive patients, neoadjuvant full-course chemoradiation confers the best oncological outcome. However, neoadjuvant therapy does not diminish the need for extended radical surgery to increase R0 resection rates.

Background: The multidisciplinary perioperative and anaesthetic management of patients undergoing pelvic exenteration is essential for good surgical outcomes. No clear guidelines have been established, and there is wide variation in clinical practice internationally. This consensus statement consolidates clinical experience and best practice collectively, and systematically addresses key domains in the perioperative and anaesthetic management.Methods: The modified Delphi methodology was used to achieve consensus from the PelvEx Collaborative. The process included one round of online questionnaire involving controlled feedback and structured participant response, two rounds of editing, and one round of web-based voting. It was held from December 2019 to February 2020. Consensus was defined as more than 80 per cent agreement, whereas less than 80 per cent agreement indicated low consensus.Results: The final consensus document contained 47 voted statements, across six key domains of perioperative and anaesthetic management in pelvic exenteration, comprising preoperative assessment and preparation, anaesthetic considerations, perioperative management, anticipating possible massive haemorrhage, stress response and postoperative critical care, and pain management. Consensus recommendations were developed, based on consensus agreement achieved on 34 statements.Conclusion: The perioperative and anaesthetic management of patients undergoing pelvic exenteration is best accomplished by a dedicated multidisciplinary team with relevant domain expertise in the setting of a specialized tertiary unit. This consensus statement has addressed key domains within the framework of current perioperative and anaesthetic management among patients undergoing pelvic exenteration, with an international perspective, to guide clinical practice, and has outlined areas for future clinical research.

Background: A resection with clear resection margins (R0 resection) is the single most important prognostic factor for overall and local recurrence free survival in patients with locally recurrent rectal cancer (LRRC). However, despite the use of neoadjuvant chemo(re)irradiation, an R0 resection is achieved in only ±60% of patients. Induction chemotherapy in addition to neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy is increasingly being used, as this combination may increase the R0 resection rate. Still, evidence for any beneficial effect of induction chemotherapy is lacking.

Purpose: Magnetic resonance imaging-detected extramural venous invasion (mrEMVI) and tumor deposits (TDs) are risk factors for the development of local recurrence and distant metastases (DMs) in rectal cancer. However, little is known about their response to neoadjuvant treatment and its relation to oncologic outcomes. This study evaluated the incidence and features of mrEMVI and TDs before and after neoadjuvant treatment in relation to the development of local recurrence and DMs. Methods and Materials: Patients with cT3/4 rectal cancer without synchronous metastases who underwent surgery in a tertiary referral hospital were retrospectively analyzed. MRI scans were re-evaluated for the presence of mrEMVI, the occurrence of TDs, and response to neoadjuvant therapy (mr-vTRG). Results: In total, 277 patients were included, of whom 163 (58.8%) presented with mrEMVI. TDs were present in 56.4% of mrEMVI-positive and 9.6% of mrEMVI-negative patients (P < .001). The 5-year DM rate was significantly higher in mrEMVI-positive patients with and without TDs (45.2% and 35.9%, respectively) compared with mrEMVI-negative patients (25.7%; P = .012). After neoadjuvant treatment, the 5-year DM rate of patients with mr-vTRG 3-5 was 46.1%, whereas good responders (mr-vTRG 1-2) had a DM rate similar to mrEMVI-negative patients (25.7% and 25.7%, respectively; P = .002). The occurrence of TDs and larger mrEMVI size resulted in a lower likelihood of regression of mrEMVI. Conclusions: The prevalence of mrEMVI and TDs in cT3-4 rectal cancer is high and is associated with worsened oncologic outcomes. mrEMVI regression (mr-vTRG 1-2), which occured in 25% of the cases, leads to oncologic outcomes similar to those in patients without mrEMVI on baseline MRI. (C) 2021 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier Inc.

recurrent rectal cancer (LRRC) is associated with severe morbidity and a poor prognosis, even after treatment with curative intent. This is caused by a high rate of locoregional recurrence and distant metastases. A resection with clear margins (R0) is the most important prognostic factor for survival

Aim Outcomes in elderly patients (>= 75 years) with non-advanced colorectal cancer have improved. It is unclear whether this is also true for elderly patients with clinical T4 rectal cancer (cT4RC) or locally recurrent rectal cancer (LRRC). We aimed to compare age-related differences in morbidity and mortality after curative treatment for cT4RC and LRRC. Methods All cT4RC and LRRC patients without distant metastasis who underwent curative surgery between 2005 and 2017 in the Catharina Hospital (Eindhoven, The Netherlands) were included. Morbidity and mortality were evaluated based on age (<75 and >= 75 years) and date of surgery (2005-2011 and 2012-2017). Results Overall, 72 of 474 (15.2%) cT4RC and 53 of 293 (18.1%) LRRC patients were >= 75 years. No significant differences in the incidence of Clavien-Dindo I-IV complications were observed between age groups. However, in elderly cT4RC patients, cerebrovascular accidents occurred more frequently (4.2% vs. 0.5%, P = 0.03). Between 2005-2011 and 2012-2017, 30-day mortality improved from 7.5% to 3.1% and from 10.0% to 0.0% in elderly cT4RC and LRRC patients, respectively. The 1-year mortality during 2012-2017 was worse in elderly than in younger patients (28.1% vs. 6.2%, P = 0.001 for cT4RC and 27.3% vs. 13.8%, P = 0.06 for LRRC). In elderly cT4RC and LRRC patients, 44.4% and 46.2% died due to non-cancer-related causes, while only 27.8% and 23.1% died due to disease recurrence, respectively. Conclusion Although the 30-day mortality in elderly cT4RC and LRRC patients improved after curative treatment, the 1-year mortality in elderly patients continued to be high, which requires more awareness for the elderly after hospitalization.

Surgical site infections (SSI) are the most common postoperative complications. To minimize the risk of SSI, there is a strict asepsis policy in the operating theatre. The aim of this study was to evaluate the risk and cost-saving benefit of performing perianal surgery in a non-sterile setting. All patients who had perianal surgery at our institution between January 2014 and December 2017 in a sterile (S) or non-sterile (NS) setting for an infectious or non-infectious cause were included. The primary outcome was the 30-day SSI rate. The secondary outcome was the reintervention rate. A questionnaire was sent to surgeons in the Netherlands to assess current policy with regard to asepsis in perianal procedures. Finally, a cost analysis was performed. In total, 376 patients were included. The rate of SSI in infectious procedures was 13% (S) versus 14% (NS, p = 0.853) and 5.1% (S) versus 0.9% (NS) in non-infectious procedures (p = 0.071). Reintervention rates in infectious procedures were 3.4% (S) versus 8.6% (NS, p = 0.187) and 1.3% (S) versus 0.0% (NS) in non-infectious procedures (p = 0.227). The questionnaire revealed that most surgeons perform perianal surgery in a sterile setting although they did not consider this useful. The potential national cost-saving benefit of a non-sterile setting is €124.61 per patient. This study suggests that it is safe to perform perianal surgery in a non-sterile setting with regard to the SSI and reintervention rate. Adjustment of the current practice will contribute to a reduction in healthcare expenses.

AIM:Positron emission tomography (PET)/CT can be used to monitor the metabolic changes that occur after intensified treatment with induction chemotherapy and chemo(re)irradiation for locally recurrent rectal cancer (LRRC). This study aimed to analyse the correlation between the PET/CT response and final histopathological outcomes.METHODS:All LRRC patients who underwent induction chemotherapy prior to surgery between January 2010 and July 2020 and were monitored with pretreatment and post-treatment PET/CT were included. Visual qualitative analysis was performed, and patients were scored as having achieved a complete metabolic response (CMR), partial metabolic response (PMR) or no response (NR). The histopathological response was assessed according to the Mandard tumour regression (TRG) score and categorized as major (TRG 1-2), partial (TRG 3) or poor (TRG 4-5). The PET/CT and TRG categories were compared, and possible confounders were analysed.RESULTS:A total of 106 patients were eligible for analysis; 24 (23%) had a CMR, 54 (51%) had a PMR and 28 (26%) had NR. PET/CT response was a significant predictor of the negative resection margin rate, achieving 96% for CMR, 69% for PMR and 50% for NR. The overall accuracy between PET score and pathological TRG was 45%, and the positive predictive value for CMR was 63%. A longer interval between post-treatment PET/CT and surgery negatively influenced the predictive value.CONCLUSION:Metabolic PET/CT response evaluation after neoadjuvant treatment proves to be a complementary diagnostic tool to standard MRI in assessing tumour response, and may play a role for treatment planning in LRRC patients.

Introduction: The addition of induction chemotherapy (ICT) to neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy (CRT) has the potential to improve outcomes in patients with locally advanced rectal cancer (LARC). However, patient selection is essential to prevent overtreatment. This study compared the complete response (CR) rate after treatment with and without ICT of LARC patients with prognostically poor characteristics. Methods: All LARC patients who were treated with neoadjuvant CRT, whether or not preceded by ICT, and who underwent surgery or were considered for a wait-and-see strategy between January 2016 and March 2020 in the Catharina Hospital Eindhoven, were retrospectively selected. LARC was defined as any T4 tumour, or a T2/T3 tumour with extramural venous invasion and/or tumour deposits and/or N2 lymph node status, and/or mesorectal fascia involvement (T3 tumours only). Case-control matching was per -formed based on the aforementioned characteristics. Results: Of 242 patients, 178 (74%) received CRT (CRT-group) and 64 patients (26%) received ICT followed by CRT (ICT-group). In the ICT-group, 3 patients (5%) did not receive the minimum of three cycles. In addition, in this selected cohort, compliance with radiotherapy was 100% in the ICT-group and 97% in the CRT-group. The CR rate was 30% in the ICT-group and 15% in the CRT-group (p = 0.011). After case-control matching, the CR rate was 28% and 9%, respectively (p = 0.013). Conclusion: Treatment including ICT seemed well tolerated and resulted in a high CR rate. Hence, this treatment strategy may facilitate organ preservation and improve survival in LARC patients with prog-nostically poor characteristics. (c) 2021 Elsevier Ltd, BASO -The Association for Cancer Surgery, and the European Society of Surgical Oncology. All rights reserved.

Patients with locally recurrent rectal cancer (LRRC) frequently present with either synchronous metastases or a history of metastases. This study was conducted to evaluate whether LRRC patients without metastases have a different oncological outcome compared to patients with a history of metastases treated with curative intent or patients with potentially curable synchronous metastases.

PurposeIntraoperative radiation therapy (IORT), delivered by intraoperative electron beam radiation therapy (IOERT) or high-dose-rate intraoperative brachytherapy (HDR-IORT), may reduce the local recurrence rate in patients with locally advanced and locally recurrent rectal cancer (LARC and LRRC, respectively). The aim of this study was to compare the oncological outcomes between both IORT modalities in patients with LARC or LRRC who underwent a microscopic irradical (R1) resection.MethodsAll consecutive patients who received IORT because of an R1 resection of LARC or LRRC between 2000 and 2016 in two tertiary referral centers were included. In LARC, a resection margin of ≤2 mm was considered R1. A resection margin of 0 mm was considered R1 in LRRC.ResultsIn total, 215 patients with LARC were included, of whom 151 (70%) received IOERT and 64 (30%) received HDR-IORT; in addition, 158 patients with LRRC were included, of whom 112 (71%) received IOERT and 46 (29%) received HDR-IORT. After multivariable analyses, the overall survival was not significantly different between the two IORT modalities. The local recurrence-free survival was significantly longer in patients treated with HDR-IORT, both in LARC (hazard ratio [HR], 0.496; 95% CI, 0.253-0.973; P = .041) and LRRC (HR, 0.567; 95% CI, 0.349-0.920; P = .021). In patients with LARC, major postoperative complications were similar for both IORT modalities (IOERT, 30%; HDR-IORT, 27%), whereas in patients with LRRC, the incidence of major postoperative complications was higher after HDR-IORT (IOERT, 26%; HDR-IORT, 46%).Conclusions: This study showed a significantly better local recurrence-free survival in favor of HDR-IORT in patients with an R1 resection for LARC or LRRC. Optimization of the IOERT technique seems warranted.

Background: A resection with clear margins (R0 resection) is the most important prognostic factor in patients with locally recurrent rectal cancer (LRRC). However, this is achieved in only 60 per cent of patients. The aim of this study is to investigate whether the addition of induction chemotherapy to neoadjuvant chemo(re)irradiation improves the R0 resection rate in LRRC. Methods: This multicentre, international, open-label, phase III, parallel-arms study will enrol 364 patients with resectable LRRC after previous partial or total mesorectal resection without synchronous distant metastases or recent chemo- and/or radiotherapy treatment. Patients will be randomized to receive either induction chemotherapy (three 3-week cycles of CAPOX (capecitabine, oxaliplatin), four 2-week cycles of FOLFOX (5-fluorouracil, leucovorin, oxaliplatin) or FOLFORI (5-fluorouracil, leucovorin, irinotecan)) followed by neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy and surgery (experimental arm) or neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy and surgery alone (control arm). Tumours will be restaged using MRI and, in the experimental arm, a further cycle of CAPOX or two cycles of FOLFOX/FOLFIRI will be administered before chemoradiotherapy in case of stable or responsive disease. The radiotherapy dose will be 25 x 2.0 Gy or 28 x 1.8 Gy in radiotherapy-naive patients, and 15 x 2.0 Gy in previously irradiated patients. The concomitant chemotherapy agent will be capecitabine administered twice daily at a dose of 825 mg/m(2) on radiotherapy days. The primary endpoint of the study is the R0 resection rate. Secondary endpoints are long-term oncological outcomes, radiological and pathological response, toxicity, postoperative complications, costs, and quality of life. Discussion: This trial protocol describes the PelvEx II study. PelvEx II, designed as a multicentre, open-label, phase III, parallel-arms study, is the first randomized study to compare induction chemotherapy followed by neoadjuvant chemo(re)irradiation and surgery with neoadjuvant chemo(re)irradiation and surgery alone in patients with locally recurrent rectal cancer, with the aim of improving the number of R0 resections.

In the original article Jacobus W. A. Burger's first name is incorrect. It is correct as reflected here.

Despite improvements in the multimodality treatment for patients with locally recurrent rectal cancer (LRRC), oncological outcomes remain poor. This study evaluated the effect of induction chemotherapy and subsequent chemo(re)irradiation on the pathologic response and the rate of resections with clear margins (R0 resection) in relation to long-term oncological outcomes. All consecutive patients with LRRC treated in the Catharina Hospital Eindhoven who underwent a resection after treatment with induction chemotherapy and subsequent chemo(re)irradiation between January 2010 and December 2018 were retrospectively reviewed. Induction chemotherapy consisted of CAPOX/FOLFOX. Endpoints were pathologic response, resection margin and overall survival (OS), disease free survival (DFS), local recurrence free survival (LRFS), and metastasis free survival (MFS). A pathologic complete response was observed in 22 patients (17%), a “good” response (Mandard 2–3) in 74 patients (56%), and a “poor” response (Mandard 4–5) in 36 patients (27%). An R0 resection was obtained in 83 patients (63%). The degree of pathologic response was linearly correlated with the R0 resection rate (p = 0.026). In patients without synchronous metastases, pathologic response was an independent predictor for LRFS, MFS, and DFS (p = 0.004, p = 0.003, and p = 0.024, respectively), whereas R0 resection was an independent predictor for LRFS and OS (p = 0.020 and p = 0.028, respectively). Induction chemotherapy in addition to neoadjuvant chemo(re)irradiation is a promising treatment strategy for patients with LRRC with high pathologic response rates that translate into improved oncological outcomes, especially when an R0 resection has been achieved.