Claus Rödel1, Rolf Sauer, Rainer Fietkau. 1. Klinik für Strahlentherapie und Onkologie, Universität Frankfurt/Main, Frankfurt/Main, Germany. claus.roedel@kgu.de
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Traditionally, the decision to apply preoperative treatment for rectal cancer patients has been based on the T- and N-category. Recently, the radial distance of the tumor to the circumferential resection margin (CRM) has been identified as an important risk factor for local failure. By magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) this distance can be measured preoperatively with high reliability. Thus, selected groups have started to limit the indication for preoperative therapy to tumors extending to - or growing within 1 mm from - the mesorectal fascia (CRM+). METHODS: Pros and cons of this selected approach for preoperative treatment and first clinical results are presented. Prerequisites are the availability of modern high-resolution thin-section MRI technology as well as strict quality control of MRI and surgical quality of total mesorectal excision (TME). RESULTS: By selecting patients with CRM-positive tumors on MRI for preoperative therapy, only approximately 35% patients will require preoperative radiotherapy (RT) or radiochemotherapy (RCT). However, with histopathologic work-up of the resected specimen after primary surgery, the indication for postoperative RCT is given for a rather large percentage of patients, i.e., for pCRM+ (5-10%), intramesorectal or intramural excision (30-40%), pN+ (30-40%). Postoperative RCT, however, is significantly less effective and more toxic than preoperative RCT. A further point of concern is the assertion that patients, in whom a CRM-negative status is achieved by surgery alone, do not benefit from additional RT. Data of the Dutch TME trial and the British MRC (Medical Research Council) CR07 trial, however, suggest the reverse. CONCLUSION: To omit preoperative RT/RCT for CRM-negative tumors on MRI needs to be further investigated in prospective clinical trials. The German guidelines for the treatment of colorectal cancer 2008 continue to indicate preoperative RT/RCT based on the T- and N-category.
BACKGROUND: Traditionally, the decision to apply preoperative treatment for rectal cancerpatients has been based on the T- and N-category. Recently, the radial distance of the tumor to the circumferential resection margin (CRM) has been identified as an important risk factor for local failure. By magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) this distance can be measured preoperatively with high reliability. Thus, selected groups have started to limit the indication for preoperative therapy to tumors extending to - or growing within 1 mm from - the mesorectal fascia (CRM+). METHODS: Pros and cons of this selected approach for preoperative treatment and first clinical results are presented. Prerequisites are the availability of modern high-resolution thin-section MRI technology as well as strict quality control of MRI and surgical quality of total mesorectal excision (TME). RESULTS: By selecting patients with CRM-positive tumors on MRI for preoperative therapy, only approximately 35% patients will require preoperative radiotherapy (RT) or radiochemotherapy (RCT). However, with histopathologic work-up of the resected specimen after primary surgery, the indication for postoperative RCT is given for a rather large percentage of patients, i.e., for pCRM+ (5-10%), intramesorectal or intramural excision (30-40%), pN+ (30-40%). Postoperative RCT, however, is significantly less effective and more toxic than preoperative RCT. A further point of concern is the assertion that patients, in whom a CRM-negative status is achieved by surgery alone, do not benefit from additional RT. Data of the Dutch TME trial and the British MRC (Medical Research Council) CR07 trial, however, suggest the reverse. CONCLUSION: To omit preoperative RT/RCT for CRM-negative tumors on MRI needs to be further investigated in prospective clinical trials. The German guidelines for the treatment of colorectal cancer 2008 continue to indicate preoperative RT/RCT based on the T- and N-category.
Authors: J Strassburg; A Lewin; K Ludwig; L Kilian; J Linke; V Loy; P Knuth; O Püttcher; U Ruehl; F Stöckmann; M Hackenthal; W Hopfenmüller; A Huppertz Journal: Langenbecks Arch Surg Date: 2007-02-06 Impact factor: 3.445
Authors: Corrie A M Marijnen; Cornelis J H van de Velde; Hein Putter; Mandy van den Brink; Cornelis P Maas; Hendrik Martijn; Harm J Rutten; Theo Wiggers; Elma Klein Kranenbarg; Jan-Willem H Leer; Anne M Stiggelbout Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2005-03-20 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: Roy F A Vliegen; Regina G Beets-Tan; Bart Vanhauten; Ann Driessen; Michel Oellers; Alfons G Kessels; Ann Arens; Geerard L Beets; Jeroen Buijsen; Angela van Baardwijk; Dirk de Ruysscher; Guido Lammering Journal: Strahlenther Onkol Date: 2008-09-19 Impact factor: 3.621
Authors: Joachim Strassburg; Theo Junginger; Trong Trinh; Olaf Püttcher; Katja Oberholzer; Richard J Heald; Paul Hermanek Journal: Int J Colorectal Dis Date: 2008-07-17 Impact factor: 2.571
Authors: Dietmar Ofner; Alexander F Devries; Renate Schaberl-Moser; Richard Greil; Hans Rabl; Jörg Tschmelitsch; Matthias Zitt; Karin S Kapp; Gerd Fastner; Felix Keil; Wolfgang Eisterer; Robert Jäger; Felix Offner; Michael Gnant; Josef Thaler Journal: Strahlenther Onkol Date: 2011-01-21 Impact factor: 3.621
Authors: Hans Theodor Eich; Anna Stepien; Christian Zimmermann; Martin Hellmich; Ralf Metzger; Arnulf Hölscher; Rolf-Peter Müller Journal: Strahlenther Onkol Date: 2011-03-07 Impact factor: 3.621