Purpose: The standard treatment for locally advanced rectal cancer involves neoadjuvant chemoradiation followed by total mesorectal excision surgery. A subset of patients achieves pathologic complete response (pCR), representing the optimal treatment outcome. This study compares the long-term oncological outcomes of patients who achieved pCR with those who attained clinical complete response (cCR) after total neoadjuvant therapy, managed using a watch-and-wait approach. Methods: This study retrospectively evaluated patients with mid-low locally advanced rectal cancer who underwent neoadjuvant treatment from January 1, 2005, to May 1, 2023. The pCR and cCR groups were compared based on demographic, clinical, histopathological, and long-term survival outcomes. Results: The median follow-up times were 54 months (range, 7–83 months) for the cCR group (n=73), 96 months (range, 7–215 months) for the pCR group (n=63), and 72 months (range, 4–212 months) for the pathological incomplete clinical response (pICR) group (n=627). In the cCR group, 15 patients (20.5%) experienced local regrowth, and 5 (6.8%) developed distant metastasis (DM). The pCR group had no cases of local recurrence, but 3 patients (4.8%) developed DM. Among the pICR patients, 58 (9.2%) experienced local recurrence, and 92 (14.6%) had DM. Five-year disease-free survival rates were 90.0% for cCR, 92.0% for pCR, and 69.5% for pICR (P=0.022). Five-year overall survival rates were 93.1% for cCR, 92.0% for pCR, and 78.1% for pICR. There were no significant differences in outcomes between the cCR and pCR groups (P=0.810); however, the pICR group exhibited poorer outcomes (P=0.002). Conclusion This study shows no significant long-term oncological differences between patients who exhibited cCR and those who experienced pCR.

Purpose: The standard treatment for locally advanced rectal cancer involves neoadjuvant chemoradiation followed by total mesorectal excision surgery. A subset of patients achieves pathologic complete response (pCR), representing the optimal treatment outcome. This study compares the long-term oncological outcomes of patients who achieved pCR with those who attained clinical complete response (cCR) after total neoadjuvant therapy, managed using a watch-and-wait approach. Methods: This study retrospectively evaluated patients with mid-low locally advanced rectal cancer who underwent neoadjuvant treatment from January 1, 2005, to May 1, 2023. The pCR and cCR groups were compared based on demographic, clinical, histopathological, and long-term survival outcomes. Results: The median follow-up times were 54 months (range, 7–83 months) for the cCR group (n=73), 96 months (range, 7–215 months) for the pCR group (n=63), and 72 months (range, 4–212 months) for the pathological incomplete clinical response (pICR) group (n=627). In the cCR group, 15 patients (20.5%) experienced local regrowth, and 5 (6.8%) developed distant metastasis (DM). The pCR group had no cases of local recurrence, but 3 patients (4.8%) developed DM. Among the pICR patients, 58 (9.2%) experienced local recurrence, and 92 (14.6%) had DM. Five-year disease-free survival rates were 90.0% for cCR, 92.0% for pCR, and 69.5% for pICR (P=0.022). Five-year overall survival rates were 93.1% for cCR, 92.0% for pCR, and 78.1% for pICR. There were no significant differences in outcomes between the cCR and pCR groups (P=0.810); however, the pICR group exhibited poorer outcomes (P=0.002). Conclusion This study shows no significant long-term oncological differences between patients who exhibited cCR and those who experienced pCR.

Purpose: The standard treatment for locally advanced rectal cancer involves neoadjuvant chemoradiation followed by total mesorectal excision surgery. A subset of patients achieves pathologic complete response (pCR), representing the optimal treatment outcome. This study compares the long-term oncological outcomes of patients who achieved pCR with those who attained clinical complete response (cCR) after total neoadjuvant therapy, managed using a watch-and-wait approach. Methods: This study retrospectively evaluated patients with mid-low locally advanced rectal cancer who underwent neoadjuvant treatment from January 1, 2005, to May 1, 2023. The pCR and cCR groups were compared based on demographic, clinical, histopathological, and long-term survival outcomes. Results: The median follow-up times were 54 months (range, 7–83 months) for the cCR group (n=73), 96 months (range, 7–215 months) for the pCR group (n=63), and 72 months (range, 4–212 months) for the pathological incomplete clinical response (pICR) group (n=627). In the cCR group, 15 patients (20.5%) experienced local regrowth, and 5 (6.8%) developed distant metastasis (DM). The pCR group had no cases of local recurrence, but 3 patients (4.8%) developed DM. Among the pICR patients, 58 (9.2%) experienced local recurrence, and 92 (14.6%) had DM. Five-year disease-free survival rates were 90.0% for cCR, 92.0% for pCR, and 69.5% for pICR (P=0.022). Five-year overall survival rates were 93.1% for cCR, 92.0% for pCR, and 78.1% for pICR. There were no significant differences in outcomes between the cCR and pCR groups (P=0.810); however, the pICR group exhibited poorer outcomes (P=0.002). Conclusion This study shows no significant long-term oncological differences between patients who exhibited cCR and those who experienced pCR.

Purpose: The standard treatment for locally advanced rectal cancer involves neoadjuvant chemoradiation followed by total mesorectal excision surgery. A subset of patients achieves pathologic complete response (pCR), representing the optimal treatment outcome. This study compares the long-term oncological outcomes of patients who achieved pCR with those who attained clinical complete response (cCR) after total neoadjuvant therapy, managed using a watch-and-wait approach. Methods: This study retrospectively evaluated patients with mid-low locally advanced rectal cancer who underwent neoadjuvant treatment from January 1, 2005, to May 1, 2023. The pCR and cCR groups were compared based on demographic, clinical, histopathological, and long-term survival outcomes. Results: The median follow-up times were 54 months (range, 7–83 months) for the cCR group (n=73), 96 months (range, 7–215 months) for the pCR group (n=63), and 72 months (range, 4–212 months) for the pathological incomplete clinical response (pICR) group (n=627). In the cCR group, 15 patients (20.5%) experienced local regrowth, and 5 (6.8%) developed distant metastasis (DM). The pCR group had no cases of local recurrence, but 3 patients (4.8%) developed DM. Among the pICR patients, 58 (9.2%) experienced local recurrence, and 92 (14.6%) had DM. Five-year disease-free survival rates were 90.0% for cCR, 92.0% for pCR, and 69.5% for pICR (P=0.022). Five-year overall survival rates were 93.1% for cCR, 92.0% for pCR, and 78.1% for pICR. There were no significant differences in outcomes between the cCR and pCR groups (P=0.810); however, the pICR group exhibited poorer outcomes (P=0.002). Conclusion This study shows no significant long-term oncological differences between patients who exhibited cCR and those who experienced pCR.

Purpose: The standard treatment for locally advanced rectal cancer involves neoadjuvant chemoradiation followed by total mesorectal excision surgery. A subset of patients achieves pathologic complete response (pCR), representing the optimal treatment outcome. This study compares the long-term oncological outcomes of patients who achieved pCR with those who attained clinical complete response (cCR) after total neoadjuvant therapy, managed using a watch-and-wait approach. Methods: This study retrospectively evaluated patients with mid-low locally advanced rectal cancer who underwent neoadjuvant treatment from January 1, 2005, to May 1, 2023. The pCR and cCR groups were compared based on demographic, clinical, histopathological, and long-term survival outcomes. Results: The median follow-up times were 54 months (range, 7–83 months) for the cCR group (n=73), 96 months (range, 7–215 months) for the pCR group (n=63), and 72 months (range, 4–212 months) for the pathological incomplete clinical response (pICR) group (n=627). In the cCR group, 15 patients (20.5%) experienced local regrowth, and 5 (6.8%) developed distant metastasis (DM). The pCR group had no cases of local recurrence, but 3 patients (4.8%) developed DM. Among the pICR patients, 58 (9.2%) experienced local recurrence, and 92 (14.6%) had DM. Five-year disease-free survival rates were 90.0% for cCR, 92.0% for pCR, and 69.5% for pICR (P=0.022). Five-year overall survival rates were 93.1% for cCR, 92.0% for pCR, and 78.1% for pICR. There were no significant differences in outcomes between the cCR and pCR groups (P=0.810); however, the pICR group exhibited poorer outcomes (P=0.002). Conclusion This study shows no significant long-term oncological differences between patients who exhibited cCR and those who experienced pCR.

Purpose: Treatment outcomes of locally advanced rectal cancer have improved significantly in recent decades. This retrospective study aimed to assess the efficacy of neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy (nCRT) followed by surgery in patients with T4 rectal cancer and the different outcomes between T4a and T4b patients. Materials and Methods: A total of 60 clinically T4 rectal cancer patients who underwent nCRT were included in the analysis. Patient characteristics, treatment regimens, down-staging rates, pathological response, and overall survival (OS) were evaluated. Results: Both T4a and T4b patients experienced down-staging following nCRT (36.6% and 6.2% respectively; p = 0.021). T4a patients exhibited a higher rate of pathological complete response (pCR) than T4b patients (13.3% in T4a vs. 0% in T4b; p = 0.122). After a median follow-up of 36 months, the OS and recurrence-free survival (RFS) of T4a patients were significantly higher compared to T4b patients (hazard ratio [HR] = 2.52, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.05–6.05, p = 0.038 for OS; HR = 2.32, 95% CI 1.09–4.92, p = 0.025 for RFS). Conclusion This study provides valuable insights into the effectiveness of nCRT in T4 rectal cancer patients. Although down-staging was observed in both T4a and T4b subgroups, achieving a pCR remains a challenge, particularly in T4b patients. Further research is needed to optimize treatment strategies and enhance pCR rates in T4 rectal cancer patients to improve oncologic outcomes.

Purpose: Treatment outcomes of locally advanced rectal cancer have improved significantly in recent decades. This retrospective study aimed to assess the efficacy of neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy (nCRT) followed by surgery in patients with T4 rectal cancer and the different outcomes between T4a and T4b patients. Materials and Methods: A total of 60 clinically T4 rectal cancer patients who underwent nCRT were included in the analysis. Patient characteristics, treatment regimens, down-staging rates, pathological response, and overall survival (OS) were evaluated. Results: Both T4a and T4b patients experienced down-staging following nCRT (36.6% and 6.2% respectively; p = 0.021). T4a patients exhibited a higher rate of pathological complete response (pCR) than T4b patients (13.3% in T4a vs. 0% in T4b; p = 0.122). After a median follow-up of 36 months, the OS and recurrence-free survival (RFS) of T4a patients were significantly higher compared to T4b patients (hazard ratio [HR] = 2.52, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.05–6.05, p = 0.038 for OS; HR = 2.32, 95% CI 1.09–4.92, p = 0.025 for RFS). Conclusion This study provides valuable insights into the effectiveness of nCRT in T4 rectal cancer patients. Although down-staging was observed in both T4a and T4b subgroups, achieving a pCR remains a challenge, particularly in T4b patients. Further research is needed to optimize treatment strategies and enhance pCR rates in T4 rectal cancer patients to improve oncologic outcomes.

Purpose: Treatment outcomes of locally advanced rectal cancer have improved significantly in recent decades. This retrospective study aimed to assess the efficacy of neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy (nCRT) followed by surgery in patients with T4 rectal cancer and the different outcomes between T4a and T4b patients. Materials and Methods: A total of 60 clinically T4 rectal cancer patients who underwent nCRT were included in the analysis. Patient characteristics, treatment regimens, down-staging rates, pathological response, and overall survival (OS) were evaluated. Results: Both T4a and T4b patients experienced down-staging following nCRT (36.6% and 6.2% respectively; p = 0.021). T4a patients exhibited a higher rate of pathological complete response (pCR) than T4b patients (13.3% in T4a vs. 0% in T4b; p = 0.122). After a median follow-up of 36 months, the OS and recurrence-free survival (RFS) of T4a patients were significantly higher compared to T4b patients (hazard ratio [HR] = 2.52, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.05–6.05, p = 0.038 for OS; HR = 2.32, 95% CI 1.09–4.92, p = 0.025 for RFS). Conclusion This study provides valuable insights into the effectiveness of nCRT in T4 rectal cancer patients. Although down-staging was observed in both T4a and T4b subgroups, achieving a pCR remains a challenge, particularly in T4b patients. Further research is needed to optimize treatment strategies and enhance pCR rates in T4 rectal cancer patients to improve oncologic outcomes.

Purpose: Treatment outcomes of locally advanced rectal cancer have improved significantly in recent decades. This retrospective study aimed to assess the efficacy of neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy (nCRT) followed by surgery in patients with T4 rectal cancer and the different outcomes between T4a and T4b patients. Materials and Methods: A total of 60 clinically T4 rectal cancer patients who underwent nCRT were included in the analysis. Patient characteristics, treatment regimens, down-staging rates, pathological response, and overall survival (OS) were evaluated. Results: Both T4a and T4b patients experienced down-staging following nCRT (36.6% and 6.2% respectively; p = 0.021). T4a patients exhibited a higher rate of pathological complete response (pCR) than T4b patients (13.3% in T4a vs. 0% in T4b; p = 0.122). After a median follow-up of 36 months, the OS and recurrence-free survival (RFS) of T4a patients were significantly higher compared to T4b patients (hazard ratio [HR] = 2.52, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.05–6.05, p = 0.038 for OS; HR = 2.32, 95% CI 1.09–4.92, p = 0.025 for RFS). Conclusion This study provides valuable insights into the effectiveness of nCRT in T4 rectal cancer patients. Although down-staging was observed in both T4a and T4b subgroups, achieving a pCR remains a challenge, particularly in T4b patients. Further research is needed to optimize treatment strategies and enhance pCR rates in T4 rectal cancer patients to improve oncologic outcomes.

Purpose: Treatment outcomes of locally advanced rectal cancer have improved significantly in recent decades. This retrospective study aimed to assess the efficacy of neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy (nCRT) followed by surgery in patients with T4 rectal cancer and the different outcomes between T4a and T4b patients. Materials and Methods: A total of 60 clinically T4 rectal cancer patients who underwent nCRT were included in the analysis. Patient characteristics, treatment regimens, down-staging rates, pathological response, and overall survival (OS) were evaluated. Results: Both T4a and T4b patients experienced down-staging following nCRT (36.6% and 6.2% respectively; p = 0.021). T4a patients exhibited a higher rate of pathological complete response (pCR) than T4b patients (13.3% in T4a vs. 0% in T4b; p = 0.122). After a median follow-up of 36 months, the OS and recurrence-free survival (RFS) of T4a patients were significantly higher compared to T4b patients (hazard ratio [HR] = 2.52, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.05–6.05, p = 0.038 for OS; HR = 2.32, 95% CI 1.09–4.92, p = 0.025 for RFS). Conclusion This study provides valuable insights into the effectiveness of nCRT in T4 rectal cancer patients. Although down-staging was observed in both T4a and T4b subgroups, achieving a pCR remains a challenge, particularly in T4b patients. Further research is needed to optimize treatment strategies and enhance pCR rates in T4 rectal cancer patients to improve oncologic outcomes.