The Eighth Edition AJCC Cancer Staging Manual: Continuing to build a bridge from a population-based to a more "personalized" approach to cancer staging.

The American Joint Committee on Cancer (AJCC) staging manual has become the benchmark for classifying patients with cancer, defining prognosis, and determining the best treatment approaches. Many view the primary role of the tumor, lymph node, metastasis (TNM) system as that of a standardized classification system for evaluating cancer at a population level in terms of the extent of disease, both at initial presentation and after surgical treatment, and the overall impact of improvements in cancer treatment. The rapid evolution of knowledge in cancer biology and the discovery and validation of biologic factors that predict cancer outcome and response to treatment with better accuracy have led some cancer experts to question the utility of a TNM-based approach in clinical care at an individualized patient level. In the Eighth Edition of the AJCC Cancer Staging Manual, the goal of including relevant, nonanatomic (including molecular) factors has been foremost, although changes are made only when there is strong evidence for inclusion. The editorial board viewed this iteration as a proactive effort to continue to build the important bridge from a "population-based" to a more "personalized" approach to patient classification, one that forms the conceptual framework and foundation of cancer staging in the era of precision molecular oncology. The AJCC promulgates best staging practices through each new edition in an effort to provide cancer care providers with a powerful, knowledge-based resource for the battle against cancer. In this commentary, the authors highlight the overall organizational and structural changes as well as "what's new" in the Eighth Edition. It is hoped that this information will provide the reader with a better understanding of the rationale behind the aggregate proposed changes and the exciting developments in the upcoming edition. CA Cancer J Clin 2017;67:93-99. © 2017 American Cancer Society.

A Study of Thymidylate Synthase Expression as a Biomarker for Resectable Colon Cancer: Alliance (Cancer and Leukemia Group B) 9581 and 89803.

PURPOSE: Tumor levels of thymidylate synthase (TS), a target of 5-fluorouracil (5-FU)-based chemotherapy for colorectal cancer, have been studied as a predictive or prognostic biomarker with mixed results. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Tumor TS levels were prospectively evaluated in two adjuvant therapy trials for patients with resected stage II or III colon cancer. TS expression was determined by standard immunohistochemistry and by automated quantitative analysis. Tumor mismatch repair deficiency (MMR-D) and BRAF c.1799T > A (p.V600E) mutation status were also examined. Relationships between tumor TS, MMR-D, and BRAF mutation status, overall survival (OS), and disease-free survival (DFS) were investigated in the subset of stage III patients. RESULTS: Patients whose tumors demonstrated high TS expression experienced better treatment outcomes, with DFS hazard ratio (HR) = 0.67, 95% confidence interval (CI) = 0.53, 0.84; and OS HR = 0.68, 95% CI = 0.53, 0.88, for high versus low TS expression, respectively. No significant interaction between TS expression and stage was observed (DFS: interaction HR = 0.94; OS: interaction HR = 0.94). Tumors with high TS expression were more likely to demonstrate MMR-D (22.2% vs. 12.8%; p = .0003). Patients whose tumors demonstrated both high TS and MMR-D had a 7-year DFS of 77%, compared with 58% for those whose tumors had low TS and were non-MMR-D (log-rank p = .0006). Tumor TS expression did not predict benefit of a particular therapeutic regimen. CONCLUSION: This large prospective analysis showed that high tumor TS levels were associated with improved DFS and OS following adjuvant therapy for colon cancer, although tumor TS expression did not predict benefit of 5-FU-based chemotherapy. The Oncologist 2017;22:107-114Implications for Practice: This study finds that measurement of tumor levels of thymidylate synthase is not helpful in assigning specific adjuvant treatment for colorectal cancer. It also highlights the importance of using prospective analyses within treatment clinical trials as the optimal method of determining biomarker utility.

The impact of stage, grade, and mucinous histology on the efficacy of systemic chemotherapy in adenocarcinomas of the appendix: Analysis of the National Cancer Data Base.

BACKGROUND: Adenocarcinomas of the appendix represent a heterogeneous disease depending on the presence of mucinous histology, histologic grade, and stage. In the current study, the authors sought to explore the interplay of these factors with systemic chemotherapy in a large population data set. METHODS: Patients in the National Cancer Data Base (NCDB) who were diagnosed with mucinous, nonmucinous, and signet ring cell-type appendiceal neoplasms from 1985 through 2006 were selected. Multivariable Cox proportional hazards regression models were developed. RESULTS: A total of 11,871 patients met the inclusion criteria for the current study: 50.3% had mucinous neoplasms, 40.5% had nonmucinous neoplasms, and 9.2% had signet ring cell-type neoplasms. The 5-year overall survival (OS) stratified by grade was similar among patients with American Joint Committee on Cancer stage I to stage III disease but not for those with stage IV disease. The median OS for patients with stage IV mucinous and nonmucinous tumors was 6.4 years and 2.3 years, respectively, for those with well differentiated histology (P<.0001) and was 1.5 years and 0.8 years, respectively, for those with poorly differentiated histology (P<.0001). In multivariable modeling for stage I to III disease, adjuvant chemotherapy improved OS for both mucinous and nonmucinous histologies, with hazard ratios (HRs) of 0.78 (95% confidence interval [95% CI], 0.68-0.89 [P = .0002]) and 0.83 (95% CI, 0.74-0.94 [P = .002]), respectively. For patients with stage IV disease, systemic chemotherapy significantly improved OS for those with nonmucinous (HR, 0.72; 95% CI, 0.64-0.82 [P<.0001]) but not mucinous (HR, 0.95; 95% CI, 0.86-1.04 [P = .2) histologies, although this was grade-dependent. The median OS for chemotherapy versus no chemotherapy was 6.4 years versus 6.5 years (P value not significant) for patients with mucinous, well-differentiated tumors and 1.6 years versus 1.0 years (P = .0007) for patients with mucinous, poorly differentiated tumors. CONCLUSIONS: Adjuvant chemotherapy demonstrated a significant OS benefit regardless of histology. However, for patients with stage IV disease, the benefit of systemic chemotherapy varied by tumor histology and grade, with patients with well-differentiated, mucinous, appendiceal adenocarcinomas deriving no survival benefit from systemic chemotherapy. Cancer 2016;122:213-221. © 2015 American Cancer Society.

Intersection of biobanking and clinical care: should discrepant diagnoses and pathological findings be returned to research participants?

Diagnostic discrepancies occur when the diagnosis made on a biospecimen during the course of review at a biobank differs from the original clinical diagnosis. These diagnostic discrepancies detected during biobanking present unique challenges that are distinct from other types of research results or incidental findings. The proposed process for reporting diagnostic discrepancies or pathological incidental findings identified through a quality assurance evaluation at the biobank includes verification of the biospecimen identity, verification of the diagnosis within the biobank, and re-review of the case by the pathologist at the biospecimen collection site. If the pathologist at the biobank and the original pathologist do not reach agreement, an impartial and knowledgeable third party is consulted. The decision as to whether and how to notify research participants of any confirmed changes in diagnosis would be determined by institutional procedures. Implementation of this proposed process will require clear delineation of the roles and responsibilities of all involved parties in order to promote excellence in patient care and ensure that researchers have access to biospecimens of requisite quality.Genet Med 2012:14(4):417-423.

Before you analyze a human specimen, think quality, variability, and bias.

Personalized medicine requires capabilities to detect and measure health-associated biomarkers with increasingly specific and sensitive methods, putting analytical chemists at the front lines of translational research. Analytical scientists must be upstream in the experimental design process because the analysis of a biospecimen (tissue, blood, etc.) presents technical and experimental design complexities. (To listen to a podcast about this feature, please go to the Analytical Chemistry multimedia page at pubs.acs.org/page/ancham/audio/index.html.).

The American Joint Committee on Cancer: the 7th edition of the AJCC cancer staging manual and the future of TNM.

The American Joint Committee on Cancer and the International Union for Cancer Control update the tumor-node-metastasis (TNM) cancer staging system periodically. The most recent revision is the 7th edition, effective for cancers diagnosed on or after January 1, 2010. This editorial summarizes the background of the current revision and outlines the major issues revised. Most notable are the marked increase in the use of international datasets for more highly evidenced-based changes in staging, and the enhanced use of nonanatomic prognostic factors in defining the stage grouping. The future of cancer staging lies in the use of enhanced registry data standards to support personalization of cancer care through cancer outcome prediction models and nomograms.

p27Kip1 in stage III colon cancer: implications for outcome following adjuvant chemotherapy in cancer and leukemia group B protocol 89803.

BACKGROUND: In retrospective studies, loss of p27(Kip1) (p27), a cyclin-dependent kinase inhibitor, has been associated with poor prognosis following colorectal cancer treatment. In a prospective study, we validated this relationship in patients enrolled on a trial of adjuvant chemotherapy for stage III colon cancer. METHODS: Cancer and Leukemia Group B protocol 89803 randomized 1,264 stage III colon cancer patients to receive weekly bolus 5-fluorouracil/leucovorin or weekly bolus irinotecan, 5-fluorouracil, and leucovorin (IFL). The primary endpoint was overall survival (OS); disease-free survival was a secondary endpoint. Expression of p27 and DNA mismatch repair proteins were determined by immunohistochemistry in primary tumor and normal tissue from paraffin blocks. Data were analyzed using log-rank test. RESULTS: Of 601 tumors analyzed, 207 (34.4%) showed p27 loss, 377 (62.8%) retained p27, and 17 (2.8%) were indeterminate. Patients with p27-negative tumors showed reduced OS [5-year OS 66%: 95% confidence interval (95% CI), 0.59-0.72 versus 75%: 95% CI, 0.70-0.79; log-rank P = 0.021]. This relationship was not influenced by treatment arm. Combination of p27 status with mismatch repair status, however, identified a small subset of patients that may benefit from IFL (n = 36; 5-year disease-free survival 81%: 95% CI, 0.64-0.98 versus 47%: 95% CI, 0.21-0.72; log-rank P = 0.042; 5-year OS 81%: 95% CI, 0.64-0.98 versus 60%: 95% CI, 0.35-0.85; log-rank P = 0.128). CONCLUSIONS: Loss of p27 is associated with reduced survival in stage III colon cancer but by itself does not indicate a significant difference in outcome between patients treated IFL or 5-fluorouracil/leucovorin.

Tissue-based research in kidney cancer: current challenges and future directions.

The past several years have seen unprecedented advances in the application of various therapeutic strategies for the treatment of patients with renal cancer. The availability of active immunotherapy, antiangiogenic therapy, and targeted therapy for this disease has brought front and center issues related to choosing the appropriate treatment for particular patient populations. It is increasingly evident that the most promising treatment selection strategies will incorporate identifying specific features of the tumor itself. To facilitate this move toward personalized medicine, it is critically important to establish some standard principles for renal cancer tissue collection, preparation, and analysis for translational research studies. In this article, we identify and discuss some critical issues related to tissue-based kidney cancer research. We focus on five major areas as follows: (a) surgical and image-guided techniques for tissue collection; (b) quality control of specimen collection, processing, storage, and review; (c) issues related to analysis of paraffin embedded tissues; (d) genomic studies; and (e) assessment of reproducibility of assays across institutions. In addition, some practical implementation strategies are proposed. Although many of the topics discussed are specific for renal cancer, several are also relevant to tissue based biomarker investigations in a broad array of malignancies.

Preanalytics and Precision Pathology: Pathology Practices to Ensure Molecular Integrity of Cancer Patient Biospecimens for Precision Medicine.

Biospecimens acquired during routine medical practice are the primary sources of molecular information about patients and their diseases that underlies precision medicine and translational research. In cancer care, molecular analysis of biospecimens is especially common because it often determines treatment choices and may be used to monitor therapy in real time. However, patient specimens are collected, handled, and processed according to routine clinical procedures during which they are subjected to factors that may alter their molecular quality and composition. Such artefactual alteration may skew data from molecular analyses, render analysis data uninterpretable, or even preclude analysis altogether if the integrity of a specimen is severely compromised. As a result, patient care and safety may be affected, and medical research dependent on patient samples may be compromised. Despite these issues, there is currently no requirement to control or record preanalytical variables in clinical practice with the single exception of breast cancer tissue handled according to the guideline jointly developed by the American Society of Clinical Oncology and College of American Pathologists (CAP) and enforced through the CAP Laboratory Accreditation Program. Recognizing the importance of molecular data derived from patient specimens, the CAP Personalized Healthcare Committee established the Preanalytics for Precision Medicine Project Team to develop a basic set of evidence-based recommendations for key preanalytics for tissue and blood specimens. If used for biospecimens from patients, these preanalytical recommendations would ensure the fitness of those specimens for molecular analysis and help to assure the quality and reliability of the analysis data.

Optimal pathologic staging: defining stage II disease.

Tumor stage remains the most important determinant of prognosis in colorectal cancer and is the basis of all authoritative patient management guidelines. The pathologic assessment of stage II disease is especially critical because it may help to identify patients at additional risk for whom surgery alone may not be curative. Accurate analysis of regional lymph nodes, extent of tumor penetration, and circumferential resection margins constitute the most crucial issues. For assignment of pN0, adequacy of the surgical resection and thoroughness of the lymph node harvest from the resection specimen are both essential. The minimum number of lymph nodes has been variably determined to be between 12 and 18 for assignment of pN0, but the confidence level increases with increasing numbers of nodes examined. The ability of exhaustive analysis of sentinel lymph nodes using special techniques to substitute for an exhaustive lymph node harvest and standard node examination has not been definitively shown. Although special techniques may facilitate the identification of minute amounts of tumor (i.e., isolated tumor cells) in regional lymph nodes, the prognostic significance of such findings remains unclear. Additional stage-independent pathologic features that have been validated as adverse prognostic factors include involvement by tumor of mural lymphovascular channels, venous vessels, or the surgical resection margin of the operative specimen and high tumor grade. The presence of these features may help to identify patients for whom surgery alone will not be curative and adjuvant therapies may be appropriate.

Newer pathologic assessment techniques for colorectal carcinoma.

The pathogenesis of colorectal carcinoma is characterized by progressive genetic abnormalities, which lead to proteomic and cellular changes that determine the cancer malignant phenotype. Phenotypic characteristics seen on histopathologic examination (e.g., tumor stage, histologic grade, and vasoinvasiveness) are essential to planning patient management and should continue to be the major focus of pathologists' efforts. Nonetheless, additional markers that improve the prognostic and predictive power of the pathologic analysis of the primary tumor have been the focus of intense research in recent years. Improved prognostic power may derive from advancements in histopathologic evaluation, more sensitive lymph node staging techniques, and specific molecular analysis methods, such as genetic tests or immunophenotypic profiles. Histopathologic improvements are needed to better standardize histologic grade determination and recognize tumor budding at the invasive front as a marker of aggressive biological behavior and an adverse parameter. Ultrastaging of mesenteric lymph nodes remains a controversial area. Genotypic studies are well developed in the areas of microsatellite instability and chromosome 18q deletion/loss of heterozygosity. Immunophenotypic studies are available in a range of areas including tumor suppressor gene/oncogene expression, proliferation/apoptosis, angiogenesis, and cell adhesion and signaling. Gene expression profiles identified by microarray techniques may help to subtype the large category of microsatellite-stable colorectal carcinoma and define immunophenotypic panels to subclassify tumors into prognostic and therapeutic groups. This brief review discusses the most promising of these approaches and evidence supporting their potential clinical utility.

New approaches to assessing and treating early-stage colon and rectal cancer: summary statement from 2007 Santa Monica Conference.

The 2007 Santa Monica Conference on Assessing and Treating Early-Stage Colon and Rectal Cancer, a multidisciplinary meeting of leaders in surgery, medical and radiation oncology, and pathology, was convened on January 12 to 13, 2007. The purpose of the meeting was to assess current data and issues in the field and to develop recommendations for advancing patient care and clinical research. Topics included pathologic assessment and staging, transanal versus laparoscopic versus open resection, adjuvant therapy, genetic testing and counseling, cooperative group strategies, and the use of biological therapies and novel agents. A review of the key issues discussed, as well as conclusions and recommendations considered significant to the field, is summarized below and presented at greater length in the individual manuscripts and accompanying discussion that comprise the full conference proceedings. Although the management of early-stage colon and rectal cancers remains a challenge for all of us, the development and use of new technologies and methods of assessment and treatment over the past several decades is yielding encouraging results. A variety of opportunities to further improve outcomes were addressed in this forum, including recommendations that specific protocols be adopted regarding surgical and pathologic dissection and reporting, particularly for stage II disease; the corollary need to increase active multidisciplinary collaboration; and the development of comprehensive consensus guidelines and recommendations to standardize care in early-stage colorectal cancer.

A predictive model of rectal tumor response to preoperative radiotherapy using classification and regression tree methods.

PURPOSE: The ability to predict rectal tumor response to preoperative radiotherapy before treatment would significantly impact patient selection. In this study, classification and regression tree (CART) methods were used to model tumor response to preoperative conformal high-dose rate brachytherapy by assessing the predictive value of vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF), Bcl-2, p21, p53, and APAF-1. EXPERIMENTAL DESIGN: Immunohistochemistry was used to detect VEGF, Bcl-2, p21, p53, and APAF-1 from 62 pretreatment rectal tumor biopsies. Scores were assigned as percentages of positive tumor cell staining and were used in CART analysis to identify the proteins that best predicted response to radiotherapy. Ten-fold cross-validation was used to prevent overfitting and multiple cross-validation experiments were run to estimate the prediction error. RESULTS: Postoperative pathologic evaluation of the irradiated tumor bed revealed 43 responsive tumors [20 with complete response (T(0)) and 23 with partial response] and 19 nonresponsive tumors. The optimal tree resulting from CART analysis had five terminal nodes with a misclassification rate of 18%. Of the five proteins selected for their predictive value, VEGF and Bcl-2 contributed most to the classification of responsive and nonresponsive tumors. All 10 tumors with no VEGF were completely responsive (T(0)) to radiotherapy; 85% of those with VEGF and negative for Bcl-2 were responsive to therapy. CONCLUSIONS: VEGF and Bcl-2 status in pretreatment rectal tumor biopsies may be predictive of response to preoperative high-dose rate brachytherapy.

The national biomarker development alliance: confronting the poor productivity of biomarker research and development.

Making precision (personalized) medicine a routine clinical reality will require a comprehensive inventory of validated biomarkers and molecular diagnostic tests to stratify disease subtypes and improve accuracy in diagnosis and treatment selection. Realization of this promise has been hindered by the poor productivity of biomarker identification and validation. This situation reflects deficiencies that are pervasive across the entire spectrum of biomarker R&D, from discovery to clinical validation and in the failure of regulatory and reimbursement policies to accommodate new classes of biomarkers. The launch of the National Biomarker Development Alliance is the culmination of a 2-year review and consultation process involving diverse stakeholders to advance standards, best practices and guidelines to enhance biomarker discovery and validation by adoption of systems-based approaches and trans-sector collaboration between academia, clinical medicine and relevant private and public sector stakeholders.

A Novel Approach to High-Quality Postmortem Tissue Procurement: The GTEx Project.

The Genotype-Tissue Expression (GTEx) project, sponsored by the NIH Common Fund, was established to study the correlation between human genetic variation and tissue-specific gene expression in non-diseased individuals. A significant challenge was the collection of high-quality biospecimens for extensive genomic analyses. Here we describe how a successful infrastructure for biospecimen procurement was developed and implemented by multiple research partners to support the prospective collection, annotation, and distribution of blood, tissues, and cell lines for the GTEx project. Other research projects can follow this model and form beneficial partnerships with rapid autopsy and organ procurement organizations to collect high quality biospecimens and associated clinical data for genomic studies. Biospecimens, clinical and genomic data, and Standard Operating Procedures guiding biospecimen collection for the GTEx project are available to the research community.

Surgical pathology for the oncology patient in the age of standardization: of margins, micrometastasis, and molecular markers.

From initial diagnosis through definitive treatment, pathologic evaluation plays a central role in the care of patients with cancer. All patient management is dependent on the correct tissue diagnosis. For surgically resected malignancies, the pathologic stage is widely recognized as the most accurate predictor of survival, and it typically determines the appropriateness of adjuvant treatment as well. Numerous additional pathologic factors have been shown by multivariate analyses to have prognostic significance that is independent of stage, and these may help to further substratify tumors, individualize treatment, and more accurately predict outcome. On a larger scale, pathologic data are essential for epidemiologic and clinical research and is the common language of cancer worldwide. Despite its overriding importance, however, current pathologic analysis is fraught with variations in methodology, interpretation of findings, terminology, reporting norms, and statistical approaches that compromise its utility, both to the individual patient and to the progress of cancer medicine and research. In the last 5 years, increasing attention has been focused on the negative impact of variation in pathology practices on patient care and medical progress at all levels including institutional, regional, national, and international. This problem is within the immediate ability of the pathology profession to correct, and the author's prediction for oncologic pathology over the next 5 years is that standardization based on best practices will become, itself, the standard.

Prevalence and prognostic significance of acinar cell differentiation in pancreatic endocrine tumors.

We have noted that many histologically and immunohistochemically confirmed pancreatic endocrine tumors show immunophenotypic evidence of acinar cell differentiation, but the clinical relevance of this finding is unknown. We performed this study to evaluate the prevalence and prognostic significance of exocrine differentiation by immunohistochemistry in pancreatic endocrine tumors that do not show morphologic features of acinar cell differentiation. Routinely processed tissue sections from 87 pancreatic endocrine tumors were immunohistochemically stained with monoclonal antibodies against acinar (lipase, chymotrypsin, trypsin) and endocrine cell markers (chromogranin A, neuron-specific enolase, synaptophysin, Leu-7) and for the proliferation-associated peptide Ki67. The degree of staining with each marker was graded on a three-tier scale for acinar markers (grade 0, <5%; grade 1, 5-10%; grade 2, 11-25%; and grade 3, >25%) and on a four-tier scale for endocrine markers (grade 0, <5%; grade 1, 5-25%; grade 2, 26-50%; grade 3, 51-75%; and grade 4, >75%), and the results were correlated with clinical outcome (mean follow-up 53 months). Greater than 75% of the tumor cells stained for chromogranin A, neuron-specific enolase, synaptophysin, and Leu-7 in 100%, 96%, 93%, and 27% of cases, respectively. Overall, 66% of tumors stained positively for at least one acinar cell marker, 31% stained for at least two acinar cell markers, and 13% stained for all three acinar cell markers. Forty-seven percent stained for lipase (23 grade 1, 11 grade 2, seven grade 3), 37% for trypsin (22 grade 1, three grade 2, seven grade 3), and 25% stained for chymotrypsin (13 grade 1, five grade 2, four grade 3). No correlation was noted between the presence or extent of expression of any single or combination of acinar cell markers and clinical outcome. However, higher tumor stage correlated with a poor clinical outcome (p = 0.002), and location in the tail of the pancreas was associated with a longer interval to tumor recurrence (p = 0.03). The presence of synaptophysin (p = 0.03) and Leu-7 expression (p = 0.03) correlated significantly with less aggressive clinical behavior. An association was observed between increased Ki67 labeling and poorer clinical outcome, but this was not statistically significant (p >0.05). In conclusion, immunophenotypic evidence of acinar cell differentiation is common in pancreatic endocrine tumors, but this feature does not have any relevance to clinical prognosis. However, in addition to tumor stage, location in the pancreatic tail and the immunohistochemical expression of synaptophysin and/or Leu-7 may be useful prognostic indicators in patients with these lesions.

Loss of glutathione S-transferase (GST) mu phenotype in colorectal adenocarcinomas from patients with a GSTM1 positive genotype.

Glutathione S-transferase (GST) mu phenotype was assessed in colon tissue from patients with ulcerative colitis and colorectal neoplasms that were positive for GSTM1 genotype. GST mu protein (enzyme linked immunosorbent assay) was absent in 2/9 unaffected colon tissue (22.3%), 4/13 tissues with chronic ulcerative colitis (CUC) (30.7%), 4/11 adenomas (36.4%) and 7/14 adenocarcinomas (50.0%; P

Pathologic prognostic factors in the recurrence of rectal cancer.

For rectal cancer, local recurrence following surgical treatment is a grave complication that occurs in as many as 25% of cases. Pathological examination of the surgical resection specimen plays a primary role in assessing both the surgery- and tumor-related factors that contribute to the risk of recurrence. Among the tumor-related factors, stage has long been considered the single most accurate indicator of survival. However, recent evidence strongly suggests that the most powerful predictor of both local recurrence and overall outcome in the absence of distant metastatic disease is the macroscopic quality of the mesorectum in the resection specimen and the proximity of the tumor to the circumferential (radial) resection margin. Additional pathologic features have been shown to have stage-independent prognostic significance in colorectal cancer and may help to further define risk of adverse outcome. Such features include: tumor grade; histologic type; extent of extramural penetration by tumor; neural, venous, and/or lymphatic invasion; tumor border configuration; tumor budding; and host lymphoid response. The predictive value of tumor-specific molecular features is currently under investigation and may help to further improve prognostication and refine individual patient management in rectal cancer.