Executive Summary of the American Radium Society Appropriate Use Criteria for Operable Esophageal and Gastroesophageal Junction Adenocarcinoma: Systematic Review and Guidelines.

PURPOSE: Limited guidance exists regarding the relative effectiveness of treatment options for nonmetastatic, operable patients with adenocarcinoma of the esophagus or gastroesophageal junction (GEJ). In this systematic review, the American Radium Society (ARS) gastrointestinal expert panel convened to develop Appropriate Use Criteria (AUC) evaluating how neoadjuvant and/or adjuvant treatment regimens compared with each other, surgery alone, or definitive chemoradiation in terms of response to therapy, quality of life, and oncologic outcomes. METHODS AND MATERIALS: Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) methodology was used to develop an extensive analysis of peer-reviewed phase 2R and phase 3 randomized controlled trials as well as meta-analyses found within the Ovid Medline, Cochrane Central, and Embase databases between 2009 to 2019. These studies were used to inform the expert panel, which then rated the appropriateness of various treatments in 4 broadly representative clinical scenarios through a well-established consensus methodology (modified Delphi). RESULTS: For a medically operable nonmetastatic patient with a cT3 and/or cN+ adenocarcinoma of the esophagus or GEJ (Siewert I-II), the panel most strongly recommends neoadjuvant chemoradiation. For a cT2N0M0 patient with high-risk features, the panel recommends neoadjuvant chemoradiation as usually appropriate. For patients found to have pathologically involved nodes (pN+) who did not receive any neoadjuvant therapy, the panel recommends adjuvant chemoradiation as usually appropriate. These guidelines assess the appropriateness of various dose-fractionating schemes and target volumes. CONCLUSIONS: Chemotherapy and/or radiation regimens for esophageal cancer are still evolving with many areas of active investigation. These guidelines are intended for the use of practitioners and patients who desire information about the management of operable esophageal adenocarcinoma.

ACR Appropriateness Criteria® Stage I Breast Cancer: Initial Workup and Surveillance for Local Recurrence and Distant Metastases in Asymptomatic Women.

As the proportion of women diagnosed with early stage breast cancer increases, the role of imaging for staging and surveillance purposes is considered. National and international guidelines discourage the use of staging imaging for asymptomatic patients newly diagnosed with stage 0 to II breast cancer, even if there is nodal involvement, as unnecessary imaging can delay care and affect outcomes. In asymptomatic patients with a history of stage I breast cancer that received treatment for curative intent, there is no role for imaging to screen for distant recurrences. However, routine surveillance with an annual mammogram is the only imaging test that should be performed to detect an in-breast recurrence or a new primary breast cancer in women with a history of stage I breast cancer. The American College of Radiology Appropriateness Criteria are evidence-based guidelines for specific clinical conditions that are reviewed annually by a multidisciplinary expert panel. The guideline development and revision include an extensive analysis of current medical literature from peer reviewed journals and the application of well-established methodologies (RAND/UCLA Appropriateness Method and Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation or GRADE) to rate the appropriateness of imaging and treatment procedures for specific clinical scenarios. In those instances where evidence is lacking or equivocal, expert opinion may supplement the available evidence to recommend imaging or treatment.

Executive Summary of the American Radium Society Appropriate Use Criteria for Local Excision in Rectal Cancer.

The goal of treatment for early stage rectal cancer is to optimize oncologic outcome while minimizing effect of treatment on quality of life. The standard of care treatment for most early rectal cancers is radical surgery alone. Given the morbidity associated with radical surgery, local excision for early rectal cancers has been explored as an alternative approach associated with lower rates of morbidity. The American Radium Society Appropriate Use Criteria presented in this manuscript are evidence-based guidelines for the use of local excision in early stage rectal cancer that include an extensive analysis of current medical literature from peer-reviewed journals and the application of a well-established consensus methodology (modified Delphi) used by a multidisciplinary expert panel to rate the appropriateness of imaging and treatment procedures. In those instances where evidence is lacking or not definitive, expert opinion may be used to recommend imaging or treatment. These guidelines are intended for the use of all practitioners and patients who desire information regarding the use of local excision in rectal cancer.

Evaluating the influence of prostate-specific antigen kinetics on metastasis in men with PSA recurrence after partial gland therapy.

PURPOSE: Although current Delphi Consensus guidelines do not recommend a specific definition of biochemical recurrence after partial gland therapy, these guidelines acknowledge that serial prostate-specific antigen (PSA) tests remain the best marker for monitoring disease after treatment. The purpose of this study was to determine whether PSA velocity at failure per the Phoenix (nadir + 2 ng/mL) definition is associated with metastasis and prostate cancer-specific mortality (PCSM) in a cohort of patients who experienced PSA failure after partial gland therapy. METHODS: Between 1997 and 2007, 285 patients with favorable risk prostate cancer underwent partial prostate brachytherapy to the peripheral zone. PSA velocity was calculated for 94 patients who experienced PSA failure per the Phoenix (nadir + 2) definition. Fine and Gray competing risks regression was performed to determine whether PSA velocity and other clinical factors were associated with metastasis and PCSM. RESULTS: The median time to PSA failure was 4.2 years (interquartile range: 2.2, 7.9), and the median followup time after PSA failure was 6.5 years (3.5-9.7). Seventeen patients developed metastases, and five experienced PCSM. On multivariate analysis, PSA velocity ≥3.0 ng/mL/year (adjusted hazard ratio 5.97; [2.57, 13.90]; p < 0.001) and PSA nadir (adjusted hazard ratio 0.39; [0.24, 0.64]; p < 0.001) were significantly associated with metastasis. PSA velocity ≥3.0 ng/mL/year was also associated with PCSM (HR 15.3; [1.8, 128.0]; p = 0.012) on univariate analysis. CONCLUSIONS: Rapid PSA velocity at PSA failure after partial gland treatment may be prognostic for long-term outcomes.

Long-term outcomes of partial prostate treatment with magnetic resonance imaging-guided brachytherapy for patients with favorable-risk prostate cancer.

BACKGROUND: Partial prostate treatment has emerged as a potential method for treating patients with favorable-risk prostate cancer while minimizing toxicity. The authors previously demonstrated poor rates of biochemical disease control for patients with National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN) intermediate-risk disease using partial gland treatment with brachytherapy. The objective of the current study was to estimate the rates of distant metastasis and prostate cancer-specific mortality (PCSM) for this cohort. METHODS: Between 1997 and 2007, a total of 354 men with clinical T1c disease, a prostate-specific antigen (PSA) level < 15 ng/mL, and Gleason grade ≤3 + 4 prostate cancer underwent partial prostate treatment with brachytherapy to the peripheral zone under 0.5-Tesla magnetic resonance guidance. The cumulative incidences of metastasis and PCSM for the NCCN very low-risk, low-risk, and intermediate-risk groups were estimated. Fine and Gray competing risk regression was used to evaluate clinical factors associated with time to metastasis. RESULTS: A total of 22 patients developed metastases at a median of 11.0 years (interquartile range, 6.9-13.9 years). The 12-year metastasis rates for patients with very low-risk, low-risk, and intermediate-risk disease were 0.8% (95% confidence interval [95% CI], 0.1%-4.4%), 8.7% (95% CI, 3.4%-17.2%), and 15.7% (95% CI, 5.7%-30.2%), respectively, and the 12-year PCSM estimates were 1.6% (95% CI, 0.1%-7.6%), 1.4% (95% CI, 0.1%-6.8%), and 8.2% (95% CI, 1.9%-20.7%), respectively. On multivariate analysis, NCCN risk category (low risk: hazard ratio, 6.34 [95% CI, 1.18-34.06; P = .03] and intermediate risk: hazard ratio, 6.98 [95% CI, 1.23-39.73; P = .03]) was found to be significantly associated with the time to metastasis. CONCLUSIONS: Partial prostate treatment with brachytherapy may be associated with higher rates of distant metastasis and PCSM for patients with intermediate-risk disease after long-term follow-up. Treatment of less than the full gland may not be appropriate for this cohort.

ACR Appropriateness Criteria® Borderline and Unresectable Pancreas Cancer.

The American College of Radiology Appropriateness Criteria® are evidence-based guidelines for specific clinical conditions that are reviewed every 3 years by a multidisciplinary expert panel. The guideline development and review include an extensive analysis of current medical literature from peer-reviewed journals and the application of a well-established consensus methodology (modified Delphi) to rate the appropriateness of imaging and treatment procedures by the panel. In those instances where evidence is lacking or not definitive, expert opinion may be used to recommend imaging or treatment. The panel reviewed the pertinent literature and voted on five variants to establish appropriate recommended treatment of borderline and unresectable pancreatic cancer. The guidelines reviewed the use of radiation, chemotherapy, and surgery. Radiation technique, dose, and targets were evaluated, as was the recommended chemotherapy, administered either alone or concurrently with radiation. This report will aid clinicians in determining guidelines for the optimal treatment of borderline and unresectable pancreatic cancer.

ACR Appropriateness Criteria® Local Excision in Early Stage Rectal Cancer.

Low anterior resection or abdominoperineal resection are considered standard treatments for early rectal cancer but may be associated with morbidity in selected patients who are candidates for early distal lesions amenable to local excision (LE). The American College of Radiology Appropriateness Criteria are evidence-based guidelines for specific clinical conditions that are reviewed every 3 years by a multidisciplinary expert panel. The guideline development and review include an extensive analysis of current medical literature from peer reviewed journals and the application of a well-established consensus methodology (modified Delphi) to rate the appropriateness of imaging and treatment procedures by the panel. In those instances where evidence is lacking or not definitive, expert opinion may be used to recommend imaging or treatment. The panel recognizes the importance of accurate staging to identify patients who may be candidates for a LE approach. Patients who may be candidates for LE alone include those with small, low-lying T1 tumors, without adverse pathologic features. Several surgical approaches can be utilized for LE however none include lymph node evaluation. Adjuvant radiation±chemotherapy may be warranted depending on the risk of nodal metastases. Patients with high-risk T1 tumors, T2 tumors not amenable to radical surgery may also benefit from adjuvant treatment; however, patients with positive margins or T3 lesions should be offered abdominoperineal resection or low anterior resection. Neoadjuvant radiation±chemotherapy followed by LE in higher risk patients results in excellent local control, but it is not clear if this approach reduces recurrence rates over surgery alone.

ACR Appropriateness Criteria® Resectable Stomach Cancer.

For resectable gastric cancer, perioperative chemotherapy or adjuvant chemoradiation with chemotherapy are standards of care. The decision making for adjuvant therapeutic management can depend on the stage of the cancer, lymph node positivity, and extent of surgical resection. After gastric cancer resection, postoperative chemotherapy combined with chemoradiation should be incorporated in cases of D0 lymph node dissection, positive regional lymph nodes, poor clinical response to induction chemotherapy, or positive margins. In the setting of a D2 lymph node dissection, especially those with negative regional lymph nodes, adjuvant chemotherapy alone could be considered. The American College of Radiology (ACR) Appropriateness Criteria® are evidence-based guidelines for specific clinical conditions that are reviewed every 3 years by a multidisciplinary expert panel. The guideline development and review includes an extensive analysis of current medical literature from peer-reviewed journals and the application of a well-established consensus methodology (modified Delphi) to rate the appropriateness of imaging and treatment procedures by the panel. In those instances where evidence is lacking or not definitive, expert opinion may be used to recommend imaging or treatment.

ACR Appropriateness Criteria® Ductal Carcinoma in Situ.

Ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) is a breast neoplasm with potential for progression to invasive cancer. Management commonly involves excision, radiotherapy, and hormonal therapy. Surgical assessment of regional lymph nodes is rarely indicated except in cases of microinvasion or mastectomy. Radiotherapy is employed for local control in breast conservation, although it may be omitted for select low-risk situations. Several radiotherapy techniques exist beyond standard whole-breast irradiation (ie, partial-breast irradiation [PBI], hypofractionated whole-breast radiation); evidence for these is evolving. We present an update of the American College of Radiology (ACR) Appropriateness Criteria® for the management of DCIS. The ACR Appropriateness Criteria® are evidence-based guidelines for specific clinical conditions, which are reviewed every 3 years by a multidisciplinary expert panel. The guideline development and review includes an extensive analysis of current medical literature from peer-reviewed journals and the application of a well-established consensus methodology (modified Delphi technique) to rate the appropriateness of imaging and treatment procedures by the panel. In those instances where evidence is lacking or not definitive, expert opinion may be used to recommend imaging or treatment.

ACR Appropriateness Criteria® rectal cancer: metastatic disease at presentation.

The management of rectal cancer in patients with metastatic disease at presentation is highly variable. There are no phase III trials addressing therapeutic approaches, and the optimal sequencing of chemotherapy, radiation therapy, and surgery remains unresolved. Although chemoradiation is standard for patients with stage II/III rectal cancer, its role in the metastatic setting is controversial. Omitting chemoradiation may not be appropriate in all stage IV patients, particularly those with symptomatic primary tumors. Moreover, outcomes in this setting are vastly different, as some treatments carry the potential for cure in selected patients, while others are purely palliative. The American College of Radiology Appropriateness Criteria are evidence-based guidelines for specific clinical conditions that are reviewed every 3 years by a multidisciplinary expert panel. The guideline development and review include an extensive analysis of current medical literature from peer-reviewed journals and the application, by the panel, of a well-established consensus methodology (Modified Delphi) to rate the appropriateness of imaging and treatment procedures. In instances in which evidence is lacking or not definitive, expert opinion may be used as the basis for recommending imaging or treatment.

Variability in MRI vs. ultrasound measures of prostate volume and its impact on treatment recommendations for favorable-risk prostate cancer patients: a case series.

BACKGROUND: Prostate volume can affect whether patients qualify for brachytherapy (desired size ≥20 mL and ≤60 mL) and/or active surveillance (desired PSA density ≤0.15 for very low risk disease). This study examines variability in prostate volume measurements depending on imaging modality used (ultrasound versus MRI) and volume calculation technique (contouring versus ellipsoid) and quantifies the impact of this variability on treatment recommendations for men with favorable-risk prostate cancer. METHODS: We examined 70 patients who presented consecutively for consideration of brachytherapy for favorable-risk prostate cancer who had volume estimates by three methods: contoured axial ultrasound slices, ultrasound ellipsoid (height × width × length × 0.523) calculation, and endorectal coil MRI (erMRI) ellipsoid calculation. RESULTS: Average gland size by the contoured ultrasound, ellipsoid ultrasound, and erMRI methods were 33.99, 37.16, and 39.62 mLs, respectively. All pairwise comparisons between methods were statistically significant (all p < 0.015). Of the 66 patients who volumetrically qualified for brachytherapy on ellipsoid ultrasound measures, 22 (33.33%) did not qualify on ellipsoid erMRI or contoured ultrasound measures. 38 patients (54.28%) had PSA density ≤0.15 ng/dl as calculated using ellipsoid ultrasound volumes, compared to 34 (48.57%) and 38 patients (54.28%) using contoured ultrasound and ellipsoid erMRI volumes, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: The ultrasound ellipsoid and erMRI ellipsoid methods appeared to overestimate ultrasound contoured volume by an average of 9.34% and 16.57% respectively. 33.33% of those who qualified for brachytherapy based on ellipsoid ultrasound volume would be disqualified based on ultrasound contoured and/or erMRI ellipsoid volume. As treatment recommendations increasingly rely on estimates of prostate size, clinicians must consider method of volume estimation.

ACR Appropriateness Criteria local-regional recurrence (LRR) and salvage surgery-breast cancer.

Although both breast-conserving surgery and mastectomy generally provide excellent local-regional control of breast cancer, local-regional recurrence (LRR) does occur. Predictors for LRR include patient, tumor, and treatment-related factors. Salvage after LRR includes coordination of available modalities, including surgery, radiation, chemotherapy, and hormonal therapy, depending on the clinical scenario. Management recommendations for breast cancer LRR, including patient scenarios, are reviewed, and represent evidence-based data and expert opinion of the American College of Radiology Appropriateness Criteria Expert Panel on LRR.The American College of Radiology Appropriateness Criteria are evidence-based guidelines for specific clinical conditions that are reviewed every 2 years by a multidisciplinary expert panel.The guideline development and review include an extensive analysis of current medical literature from peer reviewed journals and the application of a well-established consensus methodology (modified Delphi) to rate the appropriateness of imaging and treatment procedures by the panel. In instances in which evidence is lacking or not definitive, expert opinion may be used to recommend imaging or treatment.

ACR Appropriateness Criteria®-Anal Cancer.

The management of anal cancer is driven by randomized and nonrandomized clinical trials. However, trials may present conflicting conclusions. Furthermore, different clinical situations may not be addressed in certain trials because of eligibility inclusion criteria. Although prospective studies point to the use of definitive 5-fluorouracil and mitomycin C-based chemoradiation as a standard, some areas remain that are not well defined. In particular, management of very early stage disease, radiation dose, and the use of intensity-modulated radiation therapy remain unaddressed by phase III studies. The American College of Radiology (ACR) Appropriateness Criteria® are evidence-based guidelines for specific clinical conditions that are reviewed every 2 years by a multidisciplinary expert panel. The guideline development and review include an extensive analysis of current medical literature from peer-reviewed journals and the application of a well-established consensus methodology (modified Delphi) to rate the appropriateness of imaging and treatment procedures by the panel. In those instances where evidence is lacking or not definitive, expert opinion may be used to recommend imaging or treatment.

ACR appropriateness criteria® resectable rectal cancer.

The management of resectable rectal cancer continues to be guided by clinical trials and advances in technique. Although surgical advances including total mesorectal excision continue to decrease rates of local recurrence, the management of locally advanced disease (T3-T4 or N+) benefits from a multimodality approach including neoadjuvant concomitant chemotherapy and radiation. Circumferential resection margin, which can be determined preoperatively via MRI, is prognostic. Toxicity associated with radiation therapy is decreased by placing the patient in the prone position on a belly board, however for patients who cannot tolerate prone positioning, IMRT decreases the volume of normal tissue irradiated. The use of IMRT requires knowledge of the patterns of spreads and anatomy. Clinical trials demonstrate high variability in target delineation without specific guidance demonstrating the need for peer review and the use of a consensus atlas. Concomitant with radiation, fluorouracil based chemotherapy remains the standard, and although toxicity is decreased with continuous infusion fluorouracil, oral capecitabine is non-inferior to the continuous infusion regimen. Additional chemotherapeutic agents, including oxaliplatin, continue to be investigated, however currently should only be utilized on clinical trials as increased toxicity and no definitive benefit has been demonstrated in clinical trials. The ACR Appropriateness Criteria are evidence-based guidelines for specific clinical conditions that are reviewed every two years by a multidisciplinary expert panel. The guideline development and review include an extensive analysis of current medical literature from peer reviewed journals and the application of a well-established consensus methodology (modified Delphi) to rate the appropriateness of imaging and treatment procedures by the panel. In those instances where evidence is lacking or not definitive, expert opinion may be used to recommend imaging or treatment.

Updated results of magnetic resonance imaging guided partial prostate brachytherapy for favorable risk prostate cancer: implications for focal therapy.

PURPOSE: We report updated results of magnetic resonance imaging guided partial prostate brachytherapy and propose a definition of biochemical failure following focal therapy. MATERIALS AND METHODS: From 1997 to 2007, 318 men with cT1c, prostate specific antigen less than 15 ng/ml, Gleason 3 + 4 or less prostate cancer received magnetic resonance imaging guided brachytherapy in which only the peripheral zone was targeted. To exclude benign prostate specific antigen increases due to prostatic hyperplasia, we investigated the usefulness of defining prostate specific antigen failure as nadir +2 with prostate specific antigen velocity greater than 0.75 ng/ml per year. Cox regression was used to determine the factors associated with prostate specific antigen failure. RESULTS: Median followup was 5.1 years (maximum 12.1). While 36 patients met the nadir +2 criteria, 16 of 17 biopsy proven local recurrences were among the 26 men who also had a prostate specific antigen velocity greater than 0.75 ng/ml per year (16 of 26 vs 1 of 10, p = 0.008). Using the nadir +2 definition, prostate specific antigen failure-free survival for low risk cases at 5 and 8 years was 95.1% (91.0-97.3) and 80.4% (70.7-87.1), respectively. This rate improved to 95.6% (91.6-97.7) and 90.0% (82.6-94.3) using nadir +2 with prostate specific antigen velocity greater than 0.75 ng/ml per year. For intermediate risk cases survival was 73.0% (55.0-84.8) at 5 years and 66.4% (44.8-81.1) at 8 years (the same values as using nadir +2 with prostate specific antigen velocity greater than 0.75 ng/ml per year). CONCLUSIONS: Requiring a prostate specific antigen velocity greater than 0.75 ng/ml per year in addition to nadir +2 appears to better predict clinical failure after therapies that target less than the whole gland. Further followup will determine whether magnetic resonance imaging guided brachytherapy targeting the peripheral zone produces comparable cancer control to whole gland treatment in men with low risk disease. However, at this time it does not appear adequate for men with even favorable intermediate risk disease.

ACR Appropriateness Criteria®-Recurrent Rectal Cancer.

The American College of Radiology Appropriateness Criteria are evidence-based guidelines for specific clinical conditions. These Criteria are reviewed every 2 years by a multidisciplinary expert panel. The development and review of these guidelines includes an extensive analysis of current medical literature from peer-reviewed journals and the application of a well-established consensus methodology (modified Delphi) to rate the appropriateness of imaging and treatment procedures by the panel. In those instances where evidence is lacking or not definitive, expert opinion may be used to recommend imaging or treatment.Local recurrence of rectal cancer can result in devastating symptoms for patients, including intractable pain and discharge. Prior treatment can limit subsequent treatment options. Preoperative 5-FU based chemoradiotherapy is the treatment of choice for patients with a local recurrence who did not receive adjuvant therapy after initial resection or who might have received chemotherapy alone. Chemoradiotherapy followed by evaluation for surgery is the preferred treatment for patients who have undergone previous radiotherapy after surgery. The inclusion of surgery has resulted in the best outcomes in a majority of studies. Palliative chemoradiotherapy is appropriate for patients who have received previous radiotherapy whose recurrent disease is considered inoperable. Radiotherapy can be delivered on a standard or hyperfractionated treatment schedule.Newer systemic treatments have improved response rates and given physicians more options for treating patients in this difficult situation. The use of induction chemotherapy prior to radiotherapy is an evolving treatment option. Specialized treatment modalities should be used at institutions with experience in these techniques and preferably in patients enrolled in clinical trials.

American Society for Radiation Oncology (ASTRO) and American College of Radiology (ACR) practice guideline for the transperineal permanent brachytherapy of prostate cancer.

Transperineal permanent prostate brachytherapy is a safe and efficacious treatment option for patients with organ-confined prostate cancer. Careful adherence to established brachytherapy standards has been shown to improve the likelihood of procedural success and reduce the incidence of treatment-related morbidity. A collaborative effort of the American College of Radiology (ACR) and American Society for Therapeutic Radiation Oncology (ASTRO) has produced a practice guideline for permanent prostate brachytherapy. The guideline defines the qualifications and responsibilities of all the involved personnel, including the radiation oncologist, physicist and dosimetrist. Factors with respect to patient selection and appropriate use of supplemental treatment modalities such as external beam radiation and androgen suppression therapy are discussed. Logistics with respect to the brachytherapy implant procedure, the importance of dosimetric parameters, and attention to radiation safety procedures and documentation are presented. Adherence to these practice guidelines can be part of ensuring quality and safety in a successful prostate brachytherapy program.

ACR Appropriateness Criteria: local excision in early-stage rectal cancer.

Low anterior resection or abdominoperineal resection is considered standard treatment for early rectal cancer. These procedures, however, carry a risk of morbidity and mortality that may not be warranted for early distal lesions, which may be treated with local excision. Emerging data has investigated the efficacy of local excision in patients with early stage rectal cancers. An expert panel designated by the American College of Radiology has reviewed supporting data, from a few prospective multi-institutional trials and a number of single-institution, retrospective reviews. The consensus recognizes the importance of accurate staging to identify patients who may be candidates for a local excision approach. Optimal candidates for local excision alone include small, low-lying T1 tumors, without adverse pathologic features. A number of procedures may be safely used including transanal, posterior trans-sphincteric, posterior proctotomy, transanal excision, or transanal microsurgery. It is important to note that none of these include lymph node evaluation, and depending on the risk of lymph node metastases, adjuvant radiation with or without chemotherapy may be warranted. Patients with positive margins or T3 lesions are at high risk of local recurrence and should be offered immediate APR or LAR. However, patients with high-risk T1 tumors, T2 tumors, or those who are not amenable to more radical surgery may benefit from adjuvant treatment. Data have also reported excellent local control rates for neoadjuvant radiation +/- chemotherapy followed by local excision in higher risk patients, but it is not yet clear if this approach reduces recurrence rates over surgery alone.

ACR Appropriateness Criteria: rectal cancer-metastatic disease at presentation.

In 2009, an estimated 40,870 new cases of rectal cancer will be diagnosed in the USA. After decades of treating metastatic colorectal cancer (CRC) with 5-fluorouracil alone, newer agents have resulted in significant improvements in disease-free and overall survival rates. These improvements stem from combinations of newer cytotoxic agents and targeted therapies. Based on performance status and burden of disease, metastatic CRC patients are generally treated with either a curative or palliative intent. Curative paradigm patients often have low burden liver or lung metastases which are technically resectable. Patients with resectable colorectal liver metastases and no evidence of any extrahepatic metastases have impressive 5-year survival rates of 30%-70% following resection. Unfortunately, only 20%-30% of patients with colorectal liver metastases are candidates for resection at initial presentation. Patients with unresectable liver or lung metastasis are candidates for local therapies including radioablation, chemoembolization, radioembolization, and stereotactic radiation therapy. In select patients with metastatic CRC, neoadjuvant or adjuvant pelvic chemoradiation (CRT) is indicated to prevent local recurrence. Patients who have resectable metastatic disease with symptomatic, obstructive, Stage T3-4 and N1, or low-lying (