doiSerbia

Evidence and research perspectives for surgeons in the European Rectal Cancer Consensus Conference (EURECA-CC2)

Valentini V. (Cattedra Radioterapia, Universit Cattolica del Sacro Cuore Policlinico Universitario 'A. Gemelli', Rome, Italy.6)
Coco C. (Cattedra di Chirurgia, Universit Cattolica del Sacro Cuore Policlinico Universitario 'A. Gemelli', Rome, Italy.6)
Gambacorta M.A. (Cattedra Radioterapia, Universit Cattolica del Sacro Cuore Policlinico Universitario 'A. Gemelli', Rome, Italy.6)
Barba M.C. (Cattedra Radioterapia, Universit Cattolica del Sacro Cuore Policlinico Universitario 'A. Gemelli', Rome, Italy.6)
Meldolesi E. (Cattedra Radioterapia, Universit Cattolica del Sacro Cuore Policlinico Universitario 'A. Gemelli', Rome, Italy.6)

PURPOSE: Although surgery remains the most important treatment of rectal cancer, the management of this disease has evolved to become more multidisciplinary to offer the best clinical outcome. The International Conference on Multidisciplinary Rectal Cancer Treatment: Looking for an European Consensus' (EURECA-CC2) had the due to identify the degree of consensus that could be achieved across a wide range of topics relating to the management of rectal cancer helping shape future programs, investigational protocols and guidelines for staging and treatment throughout Europe. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Consensus was achieved using the Delphi method. Eight chapters were identified: epidemiology, diagnostics, pathology, surgery, radiotherapy and chemotherapy, treatment toxicity and quality of life, follow-up, and research questions. Each chapter was subdivided by topic, and a series of statements were developed. Each committee member commented and voted, sentence by sentence three times. Sentences which did not reach agreement after voting round # 2 were openly debated during the Conference in Perugia (Italy) December 2008. The Executive Committee scored percentage consensus based on three categories: 'large consensus', 'moderate consensus', 'minimum consensus'. RESULTS: The total number of the voted sentences was 207. Of the 207, 86% achieved large consensus, 13% achieved moderate consensus, and only 3 (1%) resulted in minimum consensus. No statement was disagreed by more than 50% of members. All chapters were voted on by at least 75% of the members, and the majority was voted on by 85%. CONCLUSIONS: This Consensus Conference represents an expertise opinion process that may help shape future programs, investigational protocols, and guidelines for staging and treatment of rectal cancer throughout Europe. In spite of substantial progress, many research challenges remain.

Keywords: rectal cancer, combined modality treatment, preoperative radiotherapy, intraoperative radotherapy, surgery, postoperative radiotherapy, chemotherapy, toxicity, research, treatment outcome