AIM: To establish the association between lymph node involvement and the response to neoadjuvant therapy in locally advanced rectal cancer. METHODS: Data of 130 patients with mid and low locally advanced rectal adenocarcinoma treated with neoadjuvant chemoradiation followed by radical surgery over a 5-year period were reviewed. Tumor staging was done by endorectal ultrasound and/or magnetic resonance imaging. Tumor response to neoadjuvant therapy was determined by T-downstaging and tumor regression grading (TRG). Pathologic complete response (pCR) is defined as the absence of tumor cells in the surgical specimen (ypT0N0). The varying degrees TRG were classified according to Mandard's scoring system. The evaluation of the response is based on the comparison between previous clinico-radiological staging and the results of pathological evaluation. χ (2) and Spearman's correlation tests were used for the comparison of variables. RESULTS: Pathologic complete response (pCR, ypT0N0, TRG1) was observed in 19 cases (14.6%), and other 18 (13.8%) had only very few residual malignant cells in the rectal wall (TRG2). T-downstaging was found in 63 (48.5%). Mean lymph node retrieval was 9.4 (range 0-38). In 37 cases (28.5%) more than 12 nodes were identified in the surgical specimen. Preoperative lymph node involvement was seen in 77 patients (59.2%), 71 N1 and 6 N2. Postoperative lymph node involvement was observed in 41 patients (31.5%), 29 N1 and 12 N2, while the remaining 89 were N0 (68.5%). In relation to ypT stage, we found nodal involvement of 9.4% in ypT0-1, 22.2% in ypT2 and 43.7% in ypT3-4. Of the 37 patients considered "responders" to neoadjuvant therapy (TRG1 and 2), there were only 4 N+ (10.8%) and the remainder N0 (89.2%). In the "non responders" group (TRG 3, 4 and 5), 37 cases were N+ (39.8%) and 56 (60.2%) were N0 (P < 0.001). CONCLUSION: Response to neoadjuvant chemoradiation in rectal cancer is associated with lymph node involvement.
AIM: To establish the association between lymph node involvement and the response to neoadjuvant therapy in locally advanced rectal cancer. METHODS: Data of 130 patients with mid and low locally advanced rectal adenocarcinoma treated with neoadjuvant chemoradiation followed by radical surgery over a 5-year period were reviewed. Tumor staging was done by endorectal ultrasound and/or magnetic resonance imaging. Tumor response to neoadjuvant therapy was determined by T-downstaging and tumor regression grading (TRG). Pathologic complete response (pCR) is defined as the absence of tumor cells in the surgical specimen (ypT0N0). The varying degrees TRG were classified according to Mandard's scoring system. The evaluation of the response is based on the comparison between previous clinico-radiological staging and the results of pathological evaluation. χ (2) and Spearman's correlation tests were used for the comparison of variables. RESULTS: Pathologic complete response (pCR, ypT0N0, TRG1) was observed in 19 cases (14.6%), and other 18 (13.8%) had only very few residual malignant cells in the rectal wall (TRG2). T-downstaging was found in 63 (48.5%). Mean lymph node retrieval was 9.4 (range 0-38). In 37 cases (28.5%) more than 12 nodes were identified in the surgical specimen. Preoperative lymph node involvement was seen in 77 patients (59.2%), 71 N1 and 6 N2. Postoperative lymph node involvement was observed in 41 patients (31.5%), 29 N1 and 12 N2, while the remaining 89 were N0 (68.5%). In relation to ypT stage, we found nodal involvement of 9.4% in ypT0-1, 22.2% in ypT2 and 43.7% in ypT3-4. Of the 37 patients considered "responders" to neoadjuvant therapy (TRG1 and 2), there were only 4 N+ (10.8%) and the remainder N0 (89.2%). In the "non responders" group (TRG 3, 4 and 5), 37 cases were N+ (39.8%) and 56 (60.2%) were N0 (P < 0.001). CONCLUSION: Response to neoadjuvant chemoradiation in rectal cancer is associated with lymph node involvement.
Authors: Carlo Capirci; Vincenzo Valentini; Luca Cionini; Antonino De Paoli; Claus Rodel; Robert Glynne-Jones; Claudio Coco; Mario Romano; Giovanna Mantello; Silvia Palazzi; Falchetti Osti Mattia; Maria Luisa Friso; Domenico Genovesi; Cristiana Vidali; Maria Antonietta Gambacorta; Alberto Buffoli; Marco Lupattelli; Maria Silvia Favretto; Giuseppe La Torre Journal: Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys Date: 2008-04-11 Impact factor: 7.038
Authors: M Beresford; R Glynne-Jones; P Richman; A Makris; S Mawdsley; D Stott; M Harrison; M Osborne; R Ashford; J Grainger; J Al-Jabbour; I Talbot; I C Mitchell; J Meyrick Thomas; J I Livingstone; J McCue; P MacDonald; J A M Northover; A Windsor; R Novell; M Wallace; R A Harrison Journal: Clin Oncol (R Coll Radiol) Date: 2005-09 Impact factor: 4.126
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: Angelita Habr-Gama; Rodrigo O Perez; Igor Proscurshim; Viviane Rawet; Diego D Pereira; Afonso H S Sousa; Desiderio Kiss; Ivan Cecconello Journal: Dis Colon Rectum Date: 2008-03 Impact factor: 4.585
Authors: T Koëter; S G C van Elderen; G F A J B van Tilborg; J H W de Wilt; D K Wasowicz; T Rozema; D D E Zimmerman Journal: Radiat Oncol Date: 2020-03-02 Impact factor: 3.481