ABSTRACT
PURPOSE: We investigated whether neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy (nCRT) in patients with rectal cancer can be restricted to those at high risk of locoregional recurrence (LR) without compromising oncological outcomes. PATIENTS AND METHODS: In a prospective multicenter interventional study, patients with rectal cancer (cT2-4, any cN, cM0) were classified according to the minimal distance between the tumor, suspicious lymph nodes or tumor deposits, and mesorectal fascia (mrMRF). Patients with a distance >1 mm underwent up-front total mesorectal excision (TME; low-risk group), whereas those with a distance ≤1 mm and/or cT4 and cT3 tumors in the lower rectal third received nCRT followed by TME surgery (high-risk group). The primary end point was 5-year LR rate. RESULTS: Of the 1,099 patients included, 884 (80.4%) were treated according to the protocol. A total of 530 patients (60%) underwent up-front surgery, and 354 (40%) had nCRT followed by surgery. Kaplan-Meier analyses revealed 5-year LR rates of 4.1% (95% CI, 2.7 to 5.5) for patients treated per protocol, 2.9% (95% CI, 1.3 to 4.5) after up-front surgery, and 5.7% (95% CI, 3.2 to 8.2) after nCRT followed by surgery. The 5-year rate of distant metastases was 15.9% (95% CI, 12.6 to 19.2) and 30.5% (95% CI, 25.4 to 35.6), respectively. In a subgroup analysis of 570 patients with lower and middle rectal third cII and cIII tumors, 257 (45.1%) were at low-risk. The 5-year LR rate in this group was 3.8% (95% CI, 1.4 to 6.2) after up-front surgery. In 271 high-risk patients (involved mrMRF and/or cT4), the 5-year rate of LR was 5.9% (95% CI, 3.0 to 8.8) and of metastases 34.5% (95% CI, 28.6 to 40.4); disease-free survival and overall survival were the worst. CONCLUSION: The findings support the avoidance of nCRT in low-risk patients and suggest that in high-risk patients, neoadjuvant therapy should be intensified to improve prognosis.
Subject(s)
Neoadjuvant Therapy , Rectal Neoplasms , Humans , Neoadjuvant Therapy/methods , Treatment Outcome , Prospective Studies , Chemoradiotherapy/methods , Neoplasm Staging , Rectal Neoplasms/pathology , Neoplasm Recurrence, Local/pathology , Retrospective StudiesABSTRACT
PURPOSE: No consensus is available on the appropriate criteria for neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy selection of patients with rectal cancer. The purpose was to evaluate the accuracy of MRI staging and determine the risk of over- and undertreatment by comparing MRI findings and histopathology. METHOD: In 609 patients of a multicenter study clinical T- and N categories, clinical stage and minimal distance between the tumor and mesorectal fascia (mrMRF) were determined using MRI and compared with the histopathological categories in resected specimen. Accuracy, sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive, and negative predictive value (NPV) were calculated. Overstaging was defined as the MRI category being higher than the histopathological category. mrMRF and circumferential resection margin (CRM) were judged as tumor free at a minimal distance > 1 mm. The chi-squared test or Fisher's exact test were used. P < 0.05 was considered significant. RESULTS: The T category was correct in 63.5% (386/608) of patients; cT was overstaged in 22.9% (139/608) and understaged in 13.5% (82/608). MRI accuracy for lymph node involvement was 56.5% (344/609); 22.2% (28/126) of patients with clinical stage II and 28.1% (89/317) with clinical stage III disease were diagnosed by histopathology as stage I. The accuracy for tumor free CRM was 86.5% (527/609) and the NPV was 98.1% (514/524). In 1.7% (9/524) mrMRF was false negative. CONCLUSION: MRI prediction of the tumor-free margin is more reliable than the prediction of tumor stage. MRF status as determined MRI should therefore be prioritized for decision making.
Subject(s)
Neoadjuvant Therapy , Rectal Neoplasms , Humans , Magnetic Resonance Imaging , Neoplasm Staging , Patient Selection , Rectal Neoplasms/diagnostic imaging , Rectal Neoplasms/pathology , Rectal Neoplasms/therapyABSTRACT
We present a case of a 54-year-old male patient who was admitted to our Emergency Department (ED) with localized epigastric pain. Inflammation markers, ultrasound, and CT scan were inconsistent with an initial diagnosis of cholecystitis. However, there was additional evidence of cholecystolithiasis. The ECG showed new anterior biphasic T waves typical for a Wellens' type A ECG. Additionally, the patient had an intermittent left bundle branch block (LBBB). The diagnostic challenges in differentiating possible diagnoses will be described, to which in this case, were either acute cholecystitis or acute coronary syndrome (ACS). A laparoscopic study confirmed acute cholecystitis. Coronary angiography showed no pathological processes associated with ACS. ECG abnormalities were initially ongoing, but were no longer detectable during an 8month follow up assessment.