BACKGROUND: The current study was conducted to determine whether quantified pathologic response assessed as a percentage of residual tumor cells is predictive of recurrence-free survival (RFS) in patients with rectal cancer. METHODS: The authors studied 251 patients with rectal adenocarcinoma who were treated with neoadjuvant chemoradiation and radical resection. Quantified pathologic response was defined as an estimated percentage of residual cancer cells in relation to the tumor bed: complete, no residual cancer cells; near-complete, ≤ 5% residual cancer cells; major, > 5%, and < 50% residual cancer cells; and minor, ≥ 50% residual cancer cells. The reproducibility of quantified pathologic response between 2 pathologists was assessed using tumors from 55 randomly selected patients who did not demonstrate a complete response. RESULTS: Pathologic response was complete in 21% of patients, near-complete in 20% of patients, major in 37% of patients, and minor in 22% of patients. Nineteen percent of patients had ypT0N0 disease, 27% had ypT1-2N0 disease, 21% had ypT3-4N0 disease, and 33% had N+ disease. The 5-year RFS rates by category of quantified pathologic response were as follows: complete, 95%; near-complete, 88%; major, 69%; and minor, 61% (P < .001). Major and minor response, high histologic grade, and perineural invasion were found to be significant predictors of decreased RFS on multivariate analysis. The 5-year RFS rates for patients with ypT3-4 or N+ disease were better for those with a near-complete response (94%) compared with those with a major (64%) or minor (61%) response (P < .02). Moderate to substantial agreement was observed between the 2 pathologists (κ = 0.72). CONCLUSIONS: Quantified pathologic response is a predictor of RFS in patients with rectal adenocarcinoma and stratifies patients with high pathologic stage disease.
BACKGROUND: The current study was conducted to determine whether quantified pathologic response assessed as a percentage of residual tumor cells is predictive of recurrence-free survival (RFS) in patients with rectal cancer. METHODS: The authors studied 251 patients with rectal adenocarcinoma who were treated with neoadjuvant chemoradiation and radical resection. Quantified pathologic response was defined as an estimated percentage of residual cancer cells in relation to the tumor bed: complete, no residual cancer cells; near-complete, ≤ 5% residual cancer cells; major, > 5%, and < 50% residual cancer cells; and minor, ≥ 50% residual cancer cells. The reproducibility of quantified pathologic response between 2 pathologists was assessed using tumors from 55 randomly selected patients who did not demonstrate a complete response. RESULTS: Pathologic response was complete in 21% of patients, near-complete in 20% of patients, major in 37% of patients, and minor in 22% of patients. Nineteen percent of patients had ypT0N0 disease, 27% had ypT1-2N0 disease, 21% had ypT3-4N0 disease, and 33% had N+ disease. The 5-year RFS rates by category of quantified pathologic response were as follows: complete, 95%; near-complete, 88%; major, 69%; and minor, 61% (P < .001). Major and minor response, high histologic grade, and perineural invasion were found to be significant predictors of decreased RFS on multivariate analysis. The 5-year RFS rates for patients with ypT3-4 or N+ disease were better for those with a near-complete response (94%) compared with those with a major (64%) or minor (61%) response (P < .02). Moderate to substantial agreement was observed between the 2 pathologists (κ = 0.72). CONCLUSIONS: Quantified pathologic response is a predictor of RFS in patients with rectal adenocarcinoma and stratifies patients with high pathologic stage disease.
Authors: E Kapiteijn; C A Marijnen; I D Nagtegaal; H Putter; W H Steup; T Wiggers; H J Rutten; L Pahlman; B Glimelius; J H van Krieken; J W Leer; C J van de Velde Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2001-08-30 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: Tsung-Teh Wu; Lucian R Chirieac; Susan C Abraham; Alyssa M Krasinskas; Huamin Wang; Asif Rashid; Arlene M Correa; Wayne L Hofstetter; Jaffer A Ajani; Stephen G Swisher Journal: Am J Surg Pathol Date: 2007-01 Impact factor: 6.394
Authors: Leyo Ruo; Satish Tickoo; David S Klimstra; Bruce D Minsky; Leonard Saltz; Madhu Mazumdar; Philip B Paty; W Douglas Wong; Steven M Larson; Alfred M Cohen; Jose G Guillem Journal: Ann Surg Date: 2002-07 Impact factor: 12.969
Authors: W Fraser Symmans; Florentia Peintinger; Christos Hatzis; Radhika Rajan; Henry Kuerer; Vicente Valero; Lina Assad; Anna Poniecka; Bryan Hennessy; Marjorie Green; Aman U Buzdar; S Eva Singletary; Gabriel N Hortobagyi; Lajos Pusztai Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2007-09-04 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: In Ja Park; Y Nancy You; John M Skibber; Miguel A Rodriguez-Bigas; Barry Feig; Sa Nguyen; Chung-Yuan Hu; George J Chang Journal: Dis Colon Rectum Date: 2013-02 Impact factor: 4.585
Authors: Jin Ho Baek; Dong Won Baek; Byung Woog Kang; Hye Jin Kim; Su Yeon Park; Jun Seok Park; Gyu Seog Choi; Jong Gwang Kim Journal: In Vivo Date: 2020 Jul-Aug Impact factor: 2.155
Authors: J P Maarten Burbach; Helena M Verkooijen; Martijn Intven; Jean-Paul J E Kleijnen; Mirjam E Bosman; Bas W Raaymakers; Wilhelmina M U van Grevenstein; Miriam Koopman; Enrica Seravalli; Bram van Asselen; Onne Reerink Journal: Trials Date: 2015-02-22 Impact factor: 2.279
Authors: M J McCoy; C Hemmings; T J Miller; S J Austin; M K Bulsara; N Zeps; A K Nowak; R A Lake; C F Platell Journal: Br J Cancer Date: 2015-12-08 Impact factor: 7.640