| Literature DB >> 22853868 |
Natalia Goldberg1, Yulia Kundel, Ofer Purim, Hanna Bernstine, Noa Gordon, Sara Morgenstern, Efraim Idelevich, Nir Wasserberg, Aaron Sulkes, David Groshar, Baruch Brenner.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Preoperative radiochemotherapy (RCT) is standard in locally advanced rectal cancer (LARC). Initial data suggest that the tumor's metabolic response, i.e. reduction of its 18 F-FDG uptake compared with the baseline, observed after two weeks of RCT, may correlate with histopathological response. This prospective study evaluated the ability of a very early metabolic response, seen after only one week of RCT, to predict the histopathological response to treatment.Entities:
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2012 PMID: 22853868 PMCID: PMC3447722 DOI: 10.1186/1748-717X-7-124
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Radiat Oncol ISSN: 1748-717X Impact factor: 3.481
Patient and tumor characteristic at presentation
| Age, yrs | | |
| Median (range) | 65 (45–86) | |
| Gender | | |
| Male | 10 | 50 |
| Female | 10 | 50 |
| Distance from anal verge | | |
| < 5 cm | 4 | 20 |
| 5-8 cm | 11 | 55 |
| >8 cm | 5 | 25 |
| Clinical T stage | | |
| uT2 | 1 | 5 |
| uT3 | 19 | 95 |
| Clinical N stage | | |
| uN0 | 16 | 80 |
| uN+ | 4 | 20 |
| Clinical TNM stage | | |
| IIA (T3N0) | 11 | 55 |
| IIIB (T3-T4N1) | 8 | 40 |
| IIIC (TanyN2) | 1 | 5 |
| Grade | | |
| I-II | 13 | 65 |
| III | 1 | 5 |
| Unknown | 6 | 30 |
| Mucin secretion | | |
| Yes | 0 | 0 |
| No | 11 | 55 |
| Unknown | 9 | 45 |
Treatment details and results
| Radiotherapy dose (Gy) | | |
| Median (range) | (50.4-54) 51.12 | |
| Patients receiving 50.4 Gy | 16 | 80 |
| Chemotherapy | | |
| Capecitabine | 13 | 65 |
| UFT | 5 | 25 |
| CI 5FU | 2 | 10 |
| Interval between RCT and surgery (weeks) | | |
| Median (range) | 8.7 (6.6 – 21.11) | |
| Surgery | | |
| LAR | 16 | 80 |
| APR2 | 4 | 20 |
| Surgical margins | | |
| R0 | 19 | 95 |
| R1 | 1 | 5 |
| Pathological TNM stage | | |
| 0 | 4 | 20 |
| I | 5 | 25 |
| II | 3 | 15 |
| III | 7 | 35 |
| IV | 1 | 5 |
| Tumor regression grade | | |
| I | 4 | 20 |
| II | 2 | 10 |
| III | 9 | 45 |
| IV | 5 | 25 |
| V | 0 | 0 |
Abbreviations: CI 5FU - continuous infusion of 5-fluorouracil.
UFT - tegafur-uracil, RCT – radiochemotherapy.
LAR – Low anterior resection, APR – Abdomino-perineal resection.
1One patient was removed from per – protocol analysis because of delayed operation.
2Including one patient who had APR and synchronous metastatectomy of liver metastasis.
Figure 1The histopathological appearance of representative cases of a complete responder and a non-responder (H&E, magnification X4). In the case of a complete responder (Figure 1A), the mucosa was eroded at the tumor site and there was marked fibrosis with focal microcalcifications. No residual tumor was found. In the case of a non-responder (Figure 1B), nearly no signs of response were noted (tumor regression grade [TRG] IV). Abundant tumor was found, with minimal fibrosis and regressive changes between the invasive tumor.
Individual patients’ metabolic and histopathological responses
| 1 | 17.6 | 12 | −5.6 | −31.82 | III | no |
| 2 * | 42 | 23 | −19 | −45.24 | IV | no |
| 3 | 21.3 | 19.4 | −1.9 | −8.92 | I | yes |
| 4 | 17 | 13 | −4 | −23.53 | III | no |
| 5 | 16.7 | 9.5 | −7.2 | −43.11 | I | yes |
| 6 | 17.8 | 13.5 | −4.3 | −24.16 | III | no |
| 7 | 13 | 18.5 | 5.5 | 42.31 | II | no |
| 8 | 15.2 | 15.2 | 0 | 0.00 | II | no |
| 9 | 20 | 13.4 | −6.6 | −33.00 | IV | no |
| 10 | 56 | 37.9 | −18.1 | −32.32 | I | yes |
| 11 | 23 | 26 | 3 | 13.04 | III | no |
| 12 | 28 | 36 | 8 | 28.57 | III | no |
| 13 | 18.2 | 15.4 | −2.8 | −15.38 | III | no |
| 14 | 16.9 | 13.7 | −3.2 | −18.93 | III | no |
| 15 | 11.9 | 9.7 | −2.2 | −18.49 | IV | no |
| 16 | 8.9 | 6.2 | −2.7 | −30.34 | IV | no |
| 17 | 7.5 | 13.9 | 6.4 | 85.33 | IV | no |
| 18 | 15.2 | 12.4 | −2.8 | −18.42 | III | no |
| 19 | 24.6 | 25 | 0.4 | 1.63 | III | no |
| 20 | 9.4 | 5.8 | −3.6 | −38.30 | I | yes |
Abbreviations: SUV-MAX - maximum standardized uptake value, pCR – pathological complete response.
*Patient was removed from per – protocol analysis because of delayed operation.
Figure 2Distribution of SUV-max values at baseline and after one week of RCT according to histopathological response. Histopathological response was evaluated by the presence or absence of pCR (Figure 2A) or tumor regression grade (Figure 2B). Extreme values are represented by red circles.
Figure 3Distribution of ΔSUV-MAX between baseline and after one week of RCT according to histopathological response. Histopathological response was evaluated by the presence or absence of pCR (Figure 3A) or tumor regression grade (Figure 3B). Extreme values are represented by red circles.
Figure 4Prediction of histological response using early metabolic response.
Correlation between metabolic and histopathological responses
| Cascini13 (Italy) | 2006 | 331 | 2 | TRG | 62 vs 28 | 52 | 100 | 87 | <0.0001 |
| Janssen14 (Netherlands) | 2009 | 30 | 1 | TRG2 | 29 vs 9 | NA | NA | NA | 0.013 |
| 2 | TRG | 47 vs 18 | 43 | 91 | 82 | 0.001 | |||
| Rosenberg15 (Germany) | 2009 | 30 | 2 | TRG | 44 vs 30 | 35 | 82 | 58 | 0.085 |
| Guerra16 (Italy) | 2009 | 28 | 3 | TRG | 51 vs 43 | 49 | 75 | 42 | NS |
| Lambrecht17 (Belgium) | 2010 | 223 | 2 | pCR | 59 vs 25 | 40 | 60 | 100 | 0.0036 |
| Janssen19 (Netherlands) | 2011 | 30 | 2 | TRG | NR | 48 | 100 | 79 | <0.001 |
| 214 | 2 | TRG | NR | 48 | 83 | 93 | 0.001 | ||
| Leibold1 (USA) | 2011 | 275 | 1.5 | pCR | 27 vs 23 | NR | NR | NR | 0.68 |
| Current (Israel) | 2011 | 206 | 1 | pCR | 35 vs | 32 | 100 | 94 | 0.046 |
| TRG | 1832 vs 17 | NR | NR | NR | 0.064 |
Abbreviations: NR – not relevant, NA – not available.
1Patients received non-standard RCT, including also oxaliplatin and raltitrexed.
2A second end-point was prediction of ypT0-2 vs ypT3-4 by metabolic response.
3Two patients received non-standard RCT, including also oxaliplatin.
4The study included a validation cohort (n = 21); 5 patients were excluded from the analysis due to peritumoral inflammation.
5The study included 4 patients with metastatic disease; responders included complete and near complete pathological response (≥95% response).
6One patient was removed from per – protocol analysis because of delayed operation.