Is follow-up CT imaging of the chest and abdomen necessary after preoperative neoadjuvant therapy in rectal cancer patients without evidence of metastatic disease at diagnosis?

AIM: Patients with rectal cancer often undergo multiple CT scans prior to surgical resection. We propose that in patients with locally advanced rectal cancer without evidence of metastatic disease at presentation, CT imaging of the chest and abdomen after preoperative neoadjuvant therapy does not change clinical information or surgical management. METHOD: An institutional review board-approved medical record review identified patients with contrast enhanced CT of the chest, abdomen and pelvis alone or in conjunction with (18)F-fluoro-2-deoxy-d-glucose/positron emission tomography imaging for staging of rectal cancer prior to and after neoadjuvant therapy. Eighty-eight patients were included in the study. Scans were reviewed for the presence of metastatic disease on initial and follow-up imaging prior to surgical resection. RESULTS: Seventy-six (86%) of 88 patients had no evidence of metastasis at presentation. None of these patients developed metastatic disease after neoadjuvant therapy. Twelve (14%) had metastases at presentation. No study patient developed metastatic disease in a new organ. CONCLUSION: Imaging after preoperative neoadjuvant therapy in rectal cancer does not change the designation of metastatic disease. Patients with locally advanced rectal adenocarcinoma without evidence of metastases may not benefit from repeat imaging of the chest and abdomen after neoadjuvant therapy.

Oxygen for relief of dyspnoea in mildly- or non-hypoxaemic patients with cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

The aim of this study was to determine the efficacy of palliative oxygen for relief of dyspnoea in cancer patients. MEDLINE and EMBASE were searched for randomised controlled trials, comparing oxygen and medical air in cancer patients not qualifying for home oxygen therapy. Abstracts were reviewed and studies were selected using Cochrane methodology. The included studies provided oxygen at rest or during a 6-min walk. The primary outcome was dyspnoea. Standardised mean differences (SMDs) were used to combine scores. Five studies were identified; one was excluded from meta-analysis due to data presentation. Individual patient data were obtained from the authors of the three of the four remaining studies (one each from England, Australia, and the United States). A total of 134 patients were included in the meta-analysis. Oxygen failed to improve dyspnoea in mildly- or non-hypoxaemic cancer patients (SMD=-0.09, 95% confidence interval -0.22 to 0.04; P=0.16). Results were stable to a sensitivity analysis, excluding studies requiring the use of imputed quantities. In this small meta-analysis, oxygen did not provide symptomatic benefit for cancer patients with refractory dyspnoea, who would not normally qualify for home oxygen therapy. Further study of the use of oxygen in this population is warranted given its widespread use.