Meaningful words in rectal MRI synoptic reports: How "polypoid" may be prognostic.

PURPOSE: This study explored the clinicopathologic outcomes of rectal tumor morphological descriptors used in a synoptic rectal MRI reporting template and determined that prognostic differences were observed. METHODS: This retrospective study was conducted at a comprehensive cancer center. Fifty patients with rectal tumors for whom the synoptic descriptor "polypoid" was chosen by three experienced radiologists were compared with ninety comparator patients with "partially circumferential" and "circumferential" rectal tumors. Two radiologists re-evaluated all cases. The outcome measures were agreement among two re-interpreting radiologists, clinical T staging with MRI (mrT) and descriptive nodal features, and degrees of wall attachment of tumors (on MRI) compared with pathological (p) T and N stage when available. RESULTS: Re-evaluation by two radiologists showed moderate to excellent agreement in tumor morphology, presence of a pedicle, and degree of wall attachment (k = 0.41-0.76) and excellent agreement on lymph node presence and size (ICC = 0.83-0.91). Statistically significant lower mrT stage was noted for polypoid morphology, wherein 98% were mrT1/2, while only 7% and 2% of partially circumferential and circumferential tumors respectively were mrT1/2. Pathologic T and N stages among the three morphologies also differed significantly, with only 14% of polypoid cases higher than stage pT2 compared to 48% of partially circumferential cases and 60% of circumferential cases. CONCLUSION: Using a "polypoid" morphology in rectal cancer MRI synoptic reports revealed a seemingly distinct phenotype with lower clinical and pathologic T and N stages when compared with alternative available descriptors. PRECIS: "Polypoid" morphology in rectal cancer confers a lower clinical and pathologic T and N stage and may be useful in determining whether to proceed with surgery versus neoadjuvant treatment.

Assessment of a Watch-and-Wait Strategy for Rectal Cancer in Patients With a Complete Response After Neoadjuvant Therapy.

IMPORTANCE: The watch-and-wait (WW) strategy aims to spare patients with rectal cancer unnecessary resection. OBJECTIVE: To analyze the outcomes of WW among patients with rectal cancer who had a clinical complete response to neoadjuvant therapy. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: This retrospective case series analysis conducted at a comprehensive cancer center in New York included patients who received a diagnosis of rectal adenocarcinoma between January 1, 2006, and January 31, 2015. The median follow-up was 43 months. Data analyses were conducted from June 1, 2016, to October 1, 2018. EXPOSURES: Patients had a clinical complete response after completing neoadjuvant therapy and agreed to a WW strategy of active surveillance and possible salvage surgery (n = 113), or patients underwent total mesorectal excision and were found to have a pathologic complete response (pCR) at resection (n = 136). MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: Kaplan-Meier estimates were used for analyses of local regrowth and 5-year rates of overall survival, disease-free survival, and disease-specific survival. RESULTS: Compared with the 136 patients in the pCR group, the 113 patients in the WW group were older (median [range], 67.2 [32.1-90.9] vs 57.3 [25.0-87.9] years, P < .001) with cancers closer to the anal verge (median [range] height from anal verge, 5.5 [0.0-15.0] vs 7.0 [0.0-13.0] cm). All 22 local regrowths in the WW group were detected on routine surveillance and treated by salvage surgery (20 total mesorectal excisions plus 2 transanal excisions). Pelvic control after salvage surgery was maintained in 20 of 22 patients (91%). No pelvic recurrences occurred in the pCR group. Rectal preservation was achieved in 93 of 113 patients (82%) in the WW group (91 patients with no local regrowths plus 2 patients with local regrowths salvaged with transanal excision). At 5 years, overall survival was 73% (95% CI, 60%-89%) in the WW group and 94% (95% CI, 90%-99%) in the pCR group; disease-free survival was 75% (95% CI, 62%-90%) in the WW group and 92% (95% CI, 87%-98%) in the pCR group; and disease-specific survival was 90% (95% CI, 81%-99%) in the WW group and 98% (95% CI, 95%-100%) in the pCR group. A higher rate of distant metastasis was observed among patients in the WW group who had local regrowth vs those who did not have local regrowth (36% vs 1%, P < .001). CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: A WW strategy for select rectal cancer patients who had a clinical complete response after neoadjuvant therapy resulted in excellent rectal preservation and pelvic tumor control; however, in the WW group, worse survival was noted along with a higher incidence of distant progression in patients with local regrowth vs those without local regrowth.