✳️Firstly, I am categorically against putting T4 and T3 disease into same pocket (stage II is highly heterogeneous)❗️
✳️Risk of peritoneal recurrence for T4 and T3 is not same and not even close ‼️
✳️Peritoneal microscopic disease doesn’t shed CtDNA as much as liver MRD‼️
✳️Moreover, control group was a bit vague in this study, conventional risk factors are used for ad therapy which can offer you different approaches ‼️
✳️Currently there is not consensus for high risk stage II in NCCN and options include observation vs FP alone or doublet ‼️
✳️So this perhaps brought quite significant heterogeneity in control group and this was perhaps the reason why CtDNA guided arm received more oxaliplatin based therapies than ‼️
✳️While we are trying to go beyond clinicopathological classification, using the same system to define stage II colon population enrolled in DYNAMIC trial is my concern ‼️
✳️The standard of care for MMR-D rectal cancer is changing/changed❗️
✳️We should do all we can to avoid surgery for patients with MMR-D rectal cancer ❗️
✳️Although data is early and it is highly promising enough to move forward ‼️@ASCO@OncoAlert@MoffittNews
👇
✳️Perhaps important to note that 100% clinical response is not complete pathological response ‼️
✳️However this is higher than we achieved with OPRA in MSS rectal cancer ‼️
✳️Also, all patients had BRAF WT which is expected (Lynch cause more MMR-D rectal than sporadic event)
✳️As next step we should consider adding anti-CTLA4 blockade after seeing long term outcomes, if needed ‼️
✳️Very exciting time for patients with MMR-D CRC and great to see this change in this field and happy for our patients ‼️