Akiko Ono

Background: The management of rectal cancer has evolved toward response-adapted strategies, including organ preservation in selected patients achieving a clinical complete response (cCR) after neoadjuvant treatment. However, most available evidence derives from clinical trials, and data from real-world clinical practice remain limited. Methods: We conducted a retrospective observational cohort study including consecutive patients with rectal adenocarcinoma treated at a tertiary referral center between January 2021 and December 2025. Baseline clinical, tumor-related, and treatment characteristics were collected. Tumor response was assessed using clinical, endoscopic, and radiological criteria. The primary endpoint was the rate of clinical complete response and the implementation of watch-and-wait strategies. Secondary endpoints included recurrence patterns and exploratory oncologic outcomes according to baseline tumor characteristics. Results: A total of 229 patients were identified, of whom 148 were evaluable for treatment response. Clinical complete response was documented in 56 patients (37.8%), and a watch-and-wait strategy was implemented in 42 patients (28.4%). Higher cCR rates were observed in patients with stage I–II disease and in tumors measuring < 4 cm on baseline magnetic resonance imaging, with cCR rates exceeding 55% in this subgroup. Tumors ≥ 4 cm showed substantially lower response rates. Clinical complete responses were observed across both short-course radiotherapy plus chemotherapy and long-course chemoradiotherapy regimens in patients with small tumors and early-stage disease. Tumor distance from the anal verge was not consistently associated with response. With a median follow-up of 26 months in the watch-and-wait group, five recurrences were observed, including three local recurrences. Conclusions: In this real-world cohort, baseline tumor size and clinical stage were the main determinants of clinical complete response and eligibility for organ-preservation strategies in rectal cancer. Small tumors (<4 cm) showed high response rates regardless of neoadjuvant regimen. These findings support response-adapted, individualized treatment strategies and highlight the importance of tumor burden in selecting candidates for non-operative management in routine clinical practice.

Background: The European Colonoscopy Quality Investigation (ECQI) Group aims to raise awareness for improvement in colonoscopy standards across Europe. We analysed data collected on a sample of procedures conducted across Europe to evaluate the achievement of the polyp detection rate (PDR) target. We also investigated factors associated with PDR, in the hope of establishing areas that could lead to a quality improvement. Methods: 6445 form completions from 12 countries between 2 June 2016 and 30 April 2018 were considered for this analysis. We performed an exploratory analysis looking at PDR according to European Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ESGE) definition. Stepwise multivariable logistic regression analysis was conducted to determine the most influential associated factors after adjusting for the other pre-specified variables. Results: In our sample there were 3365 screening and diagnostic procedures performed in those over 50 years. The PDR was 40.5%, which is comparable with the ESGE minimum standard of 40%. The variables found to be associated with PDR were in descending order: use of high-definition equipment, body mass index (BMI), patient gender, age group, and the reason for the procedure. Use of HD equipment was associated with a significant increase in the reporting of flat lesions (14.3% vs. 5.7%, p < 0.0001) and protruded lesions (34.7% vs. 25.4%, p < 0.0001). Conclusions: On average, the sample of European practice captured by the ECQI survey meets the minimum PDR standard set by the ESGE. Our findings support the ESGE recommendation for routine use of HD colonoscopy.

The European Colonoscopy Quality Investigation (ECQI) Group aims to raise awareness for improvement in colonoscopy standards across Europe. We analyzed data collected on a sample of procedures conducted across Europe to evaluate the achievement of the European Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ESGE) mean withdrawal time (WT) target. We also investigated factors associated with WT, in the hope of establishing areas that could lead to a quality improvement. Methods: 6445 form completions from 12 countries between 2 June 2016 and 30 April 2018 were considered for this analysis. We performed an exploratory analysis looking at WT according to the ESGE definition. Stepwise multivariable logistic regression analysis was conducted to determine the most influential associated factors after adjusting for the other pre-specified variables. Results: In 1150 qualifying colonoscopies, the mean WT was 7.8 min. Stepwise analysis, including 587 procedures where all inputs were known, found that the variables most associated with mean WT were a previous total colonoscopy in the last five years (p = 0.0011) and the time of day the colonoscopy was performed (p = 0.0192). The main factor associated with a WT < 6 min was the time of day that a colonoscopy was performed. Use of sedation was the main factor associated with a higher proportion of WT > 10 min, along with a previous colonoscopy. Conclusions: On average, the sample of European practice captured by the ECQI survey met the minimum standard set by the ESGE. However, there was variation and potential for improvement.

Colorectal cancer (CRC) screening programs have been implemented to reduce the burden of the disease. When an advanced colonic lesion is detected, clinical practice guidelines recommend endoscopic surveillance with different intervals between explorations. Endoscopic surveillance is producing a considerable increase in the number of colonoscopies, with a limited effect on the CRC incidence. Instead, participation in CRC screening programs based on the fecal immunochemical test (FIT) could be a non-inferior alternative to endoscopic surveillance to reduce 10-year CRC incidence. Based on this hypothesis, we have designed a multicenter and randomized clinical trial within the Spanish population CRC screening programs to compare FIT surveillance with endoscopic surveillance. We will include individuals aged from 50 to 65 years with complete colonoscopy and advanced lesions resected within the CRC screening programs. Patients will be randomly allocated to perform an annual FIT and colonoscopy if fecal hemoglobin concentration is ≥10 µg/g, or to perform endoscopic surveillance. On the basis of the non-superior CRC incidence, we will recruit 1894 patients in each arm. The main endpoint is 10-year CRC incidence and the secondary endpoints are diagnostic yield, participation, adverse effects, mortality and cost-effectiveness. Our results may modify the clinical practice after advanced colonic resection in CRC screening programs.