scholarly journals Lymphangiogenesis in Regional Lymph Nodes Is an Independent Prognostic Marker in Rectal Cancer Patients after Neoadjuvant Treatment

PLoS ONE ◽  
2011 ◽  
Vol 6 (11) ◽  
pp. e27402 ◽  
Author(s):  
Christiane Jakob ◽  
Daniela E. Aust ◽  
Birgit Liebscher ◽  
Gustavo B. Baretton ◽  
Kaustubh Datta ◽  
...  
2016 ◽  
Vol 32 (6) ◽  
pp. 925-927 ◽  
Author(s):  
L. Bustamante-Lopez ◽  
C. S. Nahas ◽  
S. C. Nahas ◽  
U. Ribeiro ◽  
C. F. Marques ◽  
...  

Author(s):  
Claudia Reali ◽  
Gabriele Bocca ◽  
Ian Lindsey ◽  
Oliver Jones ◽  
Chris Cunningham ◽  
...  

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.


2020 ◽  
Vol 36 (1) ◽  
pp. 177-185
Author(s):  
Elizabeth Alwers ◽  
Lina Jansen ◽  
Jakob Kather ◽  
Efrat Amitay ◽  
Hendrik Bläker ◽  
...  

Abstract Background In rectal cancer, prediction of tumor response and pathological complete response (pCR) to neoadjuvant treatment could contribute to refine selection of patients who might benefit from a delayed- or no-surgery approach. The aim of this study was to explore the association of clinical and molecular characteristics of rectal cancer with response to neoadjuvant treatment and to compare patient survival according to level of response. Methods Resected rectal cancer patients were selected from a population-based cohort study. Molecular tumor markers were determined from the surgical specimen. Tumor response and pCR were defined as downstaging in T or N stage and absence of tumor cells upon pathological examination, respectively. The associations of patient and tumor characteristics with tumor response and pCR were explored, and patient survival was determined by degree of response to neoadjuvant treatment. Results Among 1536 patients with rectal cancer, 602 (39%) received neoadjuvant treatment. Fifty-five (9%) patients presented pCR, and 239 (49%) and 250 (53%) patients showed downstaging of the T and N stages, respectively. No statistically significant associations were observed between patient or tumor characteristics and tumor response or pCR. Patients who presented any type of response to neoadjuvant treatment had significantly better cancer-specific and overall survival compared with non-responders. Conclusion In this study, patient characteristics were not associated with response to neoadjuvant treatment, and molecular characteristics determined after surgical resection of the tumor were not predictive of pCR or tumor downstaging. Future studies should include molecular biomarkers from biopsy samples before neoadjuvant treatment.


Diagnostics ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 11 (3) ◽  
pp. 516
Author(s):  
Daan Linders ◽  
Marion Deken ◽  
Maxime van der Valk ◽  
Willemieke Tummers ◽  
Shadhvi Bhairosingh ◽  
...  

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.


2018 ◽  
pp. 20170938 ◽  
Author(s):  
Per Loftås ◽  
Margrét Sturludóttir ◽  
Olof Hallböök ◽  
Karin Almlöv ◽  
Gunnar Arbman ◽  
...  

Author(s):  
Jung Kyong Shin ◽  
Yoon Ah Park ◽  
Jung Wook Huh ◽  
Seong Hyeon Yun ◽  
Hee Cheol Kim ◽  
...  

2019 ◽  
Vol 2019 ◽  
pp. 1-6 ◽  
Author(s):  
Elena Orsenigo ◽  
Giulia Gasparini ◽  
Michele Carlucci

Many colorectal resections do not meet the minimum of 12 lymph nodes (LNs) recommended by the American Joint Committee on Cancer for accurate staging of colorectal cancer. The aim of this study was to investigate factors affecting the number of the adequate nodal yield in colorectal specimens subject to routine pathological assessment. We have retrospectively analysed the data of 2319 curatively resected colorectal cancer patients in San Raffaele Scientific Institute, Milan, between 1993 and 2017 (1259 colon cancer patients and 675 rectal cancer patients plus 385 rectal cancer patients who underwent neoadjuvant therapy). The factors influencing lymph node retrieval were subjected to uni- and multivariate analyses. Moreover, a survival analysis was carried out to verify the prognostic implications of nodal counts. The mean number of evaluated nodes was 24.08±11.4, 20.34±11.8, and 15.33±9.64 in surgically treated right-sided colon cancer, left-sided colon cancer, and rectal tumors, respectively. More than 12 lymph nodes were reported in surgical specimens in 1094 (86.9%) cases in the colon cohort and in 425 (63%) cases in the rectal cohort, and patients who underwent neoadjuvant chemoradiation were analysed separately. On univariate analysis of the colon cancer group, higher LNs counts were associated with female sex, right colon cancer, emergency surgery, pT3-T4 diseases, higher tumor size, and resected specimen length. On multivariate analysis right colon tumors, larger mean size of tumor, length of specimen, pT3-T4 disease, and female sex were found to significantly affect lymph node retrieval. Colon cancer patients with 12 or more lymph nodes removed had a significantly better long-term survival than those with 11 or fewer nodes (P=0.002, log-rank test). Rectal cancer patients with 12 or more lymph nodes removed approached but did not reach a statistically different survival (P=0.055, log-rank test). Multiple tumor and patients’ factors are associated with lymph node yield, but only the removal of at least 12 lymph nodes will reliably determine lymph node status.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document