MRI before neoadjuvant therapy for risk stratification of rectal cancer patients

2007 ◽  
Vol 4 (9) ◽  
pp. 476-476
Keyword(s):  
Rectal Cancer ◽  
Risk Stratification ◽  
Neoadjuvant Therapy ◽  
Cancer Patients

scholarly journals Influence of incorrect staging of colorectal carcinoma on oncological outcome: are we playing safely?

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Claudia Reali ◽  
Gabriele Bocca ◽  
Ian Lindsey ◽  
Oliver Jones ◽  
Chris Cunningham ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Rectal Cancer ◽  
Neoadjuvant Therapy ◽  
Cancer Patients ◽  
Preoperative Staging ◽  
Neoadjuvant Treatment ◽  
Preoperative Imaging ◽  
Resection Margins ◽  
Colorectal Cancers ◽  
Radiological Staging ◽  
N Stage

AbstractAccurate preoperative staging of colorectal cancers is critical in selecting patients for neoadjuvant therapy prior to resection. Inaccurate staging, particularly understaging, may lead to involved resection margins and poor oncological outcomes. Our aim is to determine preoperative imaging accuracy of colorectal cancers compared to histopathology and define the effect of inaccurate staging on patient selection for neoadjuvant treatment(NT). Staging and treatment were determined for patients undergoing colorectal resections for adenocarcinomas in a single tertiary centre(2016–2020). Data were obtained for 948 patients. The staging was correct for both T and N stage in 19.68% of colon cancer patients. T stage was under-staged in 18.58%. At resection, 23 patients (3.36%) had involved pathological margins; only 7 of which had been predicted by pre-operative staging. However, the staging was correct for both T and N stage in 53.85% of rectal cancer patients. T stage was understaged in 26.89%. Thirteen patients had involved(R1)margins; T4 had been accurately predicted in all of these cases. There was a general trend in understaging both the tumor and lymphonodal involvement (T p < 0.00001 N p < 0.00001) causing a failure in administrating NT in 0.1% of patients with colon tumor, but not with rectal cancer. Preoperative radiological staging tended to understage both colonic and rectal cancers. In colonic tumours this may lead to a misled opportunity to treat with neoadjuvant therapy, resulting in involved margins at resection.

scholarly journals CEA, EpCAM, αvβ6 and uPAR Expression in Rectal Cancer Patients with a Pathological Complete Response after Neoadjuvant Therapy

Diagnostics ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 11 (3) ◽  
pp. 516
Author(s):  
Daan Linders ◽  
Marion Deken ◽  
Maxime van der Valk ◽  
Willemieke Tummers ◽  
Shadhvi Bhairosingh ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Rectal Cancer ◽  
Neoadjuvant Therapy ◽  
Cancer Patients ◽  
Pathological Complete Response ◽  
Neoadjuvant Treatment ◽  
Complete Response ◽  
Response Evaluation ◽  
Tumor Bed ◽  
Upar Expression ◽  
Diagnostic Biopsy

Rectal cancer patients with a complete response after neoadjuvant therapy can be monitored with a watch-and-wait strategy. However, regrowth rates indicate that identification of patients with a pathological complete response (pCR) remains challenging. Targeted near-infrared fluorescence endoscopy is a potential tool to improve response evaluation. Promising tumor targets include carcinoembryonic antigen (CEA), epithelial cell adhesion molecule (EpCAM), integrin αvβ6, and urokinase-type plasminogen activator receptor (uPAR). To investigate the applicability of these targets, we analyzed protein expression by immunohistochemistry and quantified these by a total immunostaining score (TIS) in tissue of rectal cancer patients with a pCR. CEA, EpCAM, αvβ6, and uPAR expression in the diagnostic biopsy was high (TIS > 6) in, respectively, 100%, 100%, 33%, and 46% of cases. CEA and EpCAM expressions were significantly higher in the diagnostic biopsy compared with the corresponding tumor bed (p < 0.01). CEA, EpCAM, αvβ6, and uPAR expressions were low (TIS < 6) in the tumor bed in, respectively, 93%, 95%, 85%, and 62.5% of cases. Immunohistochemical evaluation shows that CEA and EpCAM could be suitable targets for response evaluation after neoadjuvant treatment, since expression of these targets in the primary tumor bed is low compared with the diagnostic biopsy and adjacent pre-existent rectal mucosa in more than 90% of patients with a pCR.

scholarly journals Prognostic Value of Clinical vs Pathologic Stage in Rectal Cancer Patients Receiving Neoadjuvant Therapy

2017 ◽  
Vol 110 (5) ◽  
pp. 460-466 ◽  
Author(s):  
Daniel Delitto ◽  
Thomas J George ◽  
Tyler J Loftus ◽  
Peihua Qiu ◽  
George J Chang ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Rectal Cancer ◽  
Neoadjuvant Therapy ◽  
Cancer Patients ◽  
Prognostic Value ◽  
Pathologic Stage

scholarly journals Nomograms and risk score models for predicting survival in rectal cancer patients with neoadjuvant therapy

2020 ◽  
Vol 26 (42) ◽  
pp. 6638-6657
Author(s):  
Fang-Ze Wei ◽  
Shi-Wen Mei ◽  
Jia-Nan Chen ◽  
Zhi-Jie Wang ◽  
Hai-Yu Shen ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Rectal Cancer ◽  
Neoadjuvant Therapy ◽  
Cancer Patients ◽  
Risk Score

p53 and p27 as predictors of clinical outcome for rectal-cancer patients receiving neoadjuvant therapy

2006 ◽  
Vol 15 (4) ◽  
pp. 211-216 ◽  
Author(s):  
Li-Ching Lin ◽  
Hao-Hsien Lee ◽  
Wei-Shou Hwang ◽  
Chien-Feng Li ◽  
Chien-Tai Huang ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Rectal Cancer ◽  
Clinical Outcome ◽  
Neoadjuvant Therapy ◽  
Cancer Patients

Organ preservation in rectal cancer patients treated with total neoadjuvant therapy.

2019 ◽  
Vol 37 (4_suppl) ◽  
pp. 692-692
Author(s):  
Rosa Maria Jimenez-Rodriguez ◽  
Felipe Fernando Quezada-Diaz ◽  
Irbaz Hameed ◽  
Sujata Patil ◽  
Jesse Joshua Smith ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Rectal Cancer ◽  
Neoadjuvant Therapy ◽  
Cancer Patients ◽  
Rectal Adenocarcinoma ◽  
Case Series ◽  
Complete Response ◽  
Stage Ii ◽  
Clinical Complete Response ◽  
Mri Staging ◽  
Total Neoadjuvant Therapy

692 Background: Retrospective case series suggest that watch-and-wait (WW) is a safe alternative to total mesorectal excision (TME) in selected patients with a clinical complete response (cCR) after chemoradiotherapy (CRT). Because treatment strategies vary widely and total numbers of patients treated at different institutions have not been reported, the proportion of rectal cancer patients who can potentially benefit from WW is not known. Here, we report the results of a treatment strategy incorporating WW in a cohort of rectal cancer patients treated with total neoadjuvant therapy (TNT). Methods: Consecutive patients with stage II/III (MRI staging) rectal adenocarcinoma treated with TNT from 2012 to 2017 by a single surgeon were included. TNT consisted of mFOLFOX6 (8 cycles) or CapeOX (5 cycles) either before or after CRT (5600 cGy in 28 fractions with sensitizing fluorouracil or capecitabine). Tumor response was assessed with a digital rectal exam, endoscopy, and MRI according to predefined criteria. Patients with a cCR were offered WW, and patients with residual tumor were offered TME. WW and TME patients were compared based on intention to treat, using the chi-square or rank sum test. Relapse-free survival (RFS) was evaluated by Kaplan-Meier analysis. Results: A total of 109 patients were identified. One patient died during CRT. Of the 108 patients, 64 (59%) had an incomplete clinical response; 4 of the 64 patients declined surgery or had local excision, and 60 underwent TME. The remaining 44 patients (41%) had a cCR and underwent WW. On average, patients in the WW group were older and had smaller, more distal tumors. Median radiation dose, number of chemotherapy cycles, number ofadverse events, or length of follow-up (28 months) did not differ between the TME and WW groups. Five (11%) of the 44 WW patients had local tumor regrowth, at a median of 14 (4–25) months after TNT; 2 of the 5 also had distant metastasis. Six (10%) of the 60 TME patients had a pathological complete response. RFS did not differ between the TME and WW groups (log rank P= 0.09). Conclusions: Approximately 40% of patients with stage II/III rectal cancer treated with TNT achieve a clinical complete response and can benefit from a WW approach with the aim of preserving the rectum.

Clinically Node Negative, Pathologically Node Positive Rectal Cancer Patients Who Did Not Receive Neoadjuvant Therapy

2016 ◽  
Vol 21 (1) ◽  
pp. 49-55 ◽  
Author(s):  
Nouf Akeel ◽  
Nan Lan ◽  
Luca Stocchi ◽  
Meagan M. Costedio ◽  
David W. Dietz ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Rectal Cancer ◽  
Neoadjuvant Therapy ◽  
Cancer Patients ◽  
Node Negative ◽  
Node Positive

scholarly journals Pathological Response Has Survival Benefits for Rectal Cancer following Neoadjuvant Therapy

2019 ◽  
Author(s):  
Wei-Chih Chen ◽  
Li-Jen Kuo ◽  
Chia-Che Chen ◽  
Po-Li Wei ◽  
Yu-Min Huang ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Risk Factors ◽  
Rectal Cancer ◽  
Overall Survival ◽  
Neoadjuvant Therapy ◽  
Cancer Patients ◽  
Associated Factors ◽  
Disease Recurrence ◽  
Recurrence Free Survival ◽  
Free Survival ◽  
N Stage

Abstract Background Studies reporting the results of associated factors of pathological completed response (PCR) and tumor regression response in patients with rectal cancer following neoadjuvant chemoradiation therapy (nCRT) are inconsistent. The purpose of this study was to identify the prognostic factors of tumor response and outcome in rectal cancer patients.Methods The study was a retrospective analysis. Patients with locally advanced rectal cancer underwent nCRT followed by surgery from 2010 to 2014 with 5 years of follow-up. The primary outcomes were associated factors of pathological completed response and downstaging. The risk factors of survival outcome and disease recurrence were also observed.Results A total of 169 rectal cancer patients were included. The PCR rate was 17.8%, and the downstaging rate was 60.9%. Patients with a histology type of adenocarcinoma associated with PCR, and patients positive for clinical N stage were associated with downstaging. Kaplan-Meier analysis showed the PCR group performed better to a statistically significant level both in overall survival and disease recurrence free survival than the no PCR group (p= 0.033 & 0.025, respectively). Patients with a downstaging response also showed better overall survival benefits and disease recurrence free survival benefits than their counter-parts (both p<0.001). After controlling confounding variables, the risk factors of overall survival were downstaging [Hazard Ratio (HR): 0.40, 95% CI: 0.21-0.74], male, abnormal post-nCRT CEA level and abnormal Hb level. In addition, the protective factors of recurrence were downstaging and having adjuvant chemotherapy.Conclusions Among rectal cancer patients who received the neoadjuvant therapy, histology type and clinical N stage were associated with PCR and downstaging, respectively. Downstaging was an important protective factor for better overall survival and recurrence free survival.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document