Literature DB >> 27956537

Neoadjuvant Therapy for Rectal Cancer Affects Lymph Node Yield and Status Without Clear Implications on Outcome: The Case for Eliminating a Metric and Using Preoperative Staging to Guide Therapy.

Sherif R Z Abdel-Misih1, Lai Wei1, Al B Benson1, Steven Cohen1, Lily Lai1, John Skibber1, Neal Wilkinson1, Martin Weiser1, Deborah Schrag1, Tanios Bekaii-Saab1.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Nodal status has long been considered pivotal to oncologic care, staging, and management. This has resulted in the establishment of rudimentary metrics regarding adequate lymph node yield in colon and rectal cancers for accurate cancer staging. In the era of neoadjuvant treatment, the implications of lymph node yield and status on patient outcomes remains unclear. PATIENT AND METHODS: This study included 1,680 patients with locally advanced rectal cancer from the NCCN prospective oncology database stratified into 3 groups based on preoperative therapy received: no neoadjuvant therapy, neoadjuvant chemoradiation, and neoadjuvant chemotherapy. Clinicopathologic characteristics and survival were compared between the groups, with univariate and multivariate analyses undertaken.
RESULTS: The clinicopathologic characteristics demonstrated statistically significant differences and heterogeneity among the 3 groups. The neoadjuvant chemoradiation group demonstrated the statistically lowest median lymph node yield (n=15) compared with 17 and 18 for no-neoadjuvant and neoadjuvant chemotherapy, respectively (P<.0001). Neoadjuvant treatment did impact survival, with chemoradiation demonstrating increased median overall survival of 42.7 compared with 37.3 and 26.6 months for neoadjuvant chemotherapy and no-neoadjuvant therapy, respectively (P<.0001). Patients with a yield of fewer than 12 lymph nodes had improved median overall survival of 43.3 months compared with 36.6 months in patients with 12 or more lymph nodes (P=.009). Multivariate analysis demonstrated that neither node yield nor status were predictors for overall survival. DISCUSSION: This analysis reiterates that nodal yield in rectal cancer is multifactorial, with neoadjuvant therapy being a significant factor. Node yield and status were not significant predictors of overall survival. A nodal metric may not be clinically relevant in the era of neoadjuvant therapy, and guidelines for perioperative therapy may need reconsideration.
Copyright © 2016 by the National Comprehensive Cancer Network.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2016        PMID: 27956537      PMCID: PMC5292039          DOI: 10.6004/jnccn.2016.0164

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Natl Compr Canc Netw        ISSN: 1540-1405            Impact factor:   11.908


  22 in total

1.  Is there a minimum number of lymph nodes that should be histologically assessed for a reliable nodal staging of T3N0M0 colorectal carcinomas?

Authors:  Gábor Cserni; Vincent Vinh-Hung; Tomasz Burzykowski
Journal:  J Surg Oncol       Date:  2002-10       Impact factor: 3.454

2.  Lymph node harvest in colon and rectal cancer: Current considerations.

Authors:  James R McDonald; Andrew G Renehan; Sarah T O'Dwyer; Najib Y Haboubi
Journal:  World J Gastrointest Surg       Date:  2012-01-27

3.  Clinicopathological staging for colorectal cancer: an International Documentation System (IDS) and an International Comprehensive Anatomical Terminology (ICAT).

Authors:  L P Fielding; P A Arsenault; P H Chapuis; O Dent; B Gathright; J D Hardcastle; P Hermanek; J R Jass; R C Newland
Journal:  J Gastroenterol Hepatol       Date:  1991 Jul-Aug       Impact factor: 4.029

4.  Lymph node evaluation as a colon cancer quality measure: a national hospital report card.

Authors:  Karl Y Bilimoria; David J Bentrem; Andrew K Stewart; Mark S Talamonti; David P Winchester; Thomas R Russell; Clifford Y Ko
Journal:  J Natl Cancer Inst       Date:  2008-09-09       Impact factor: 13.506

5.  Impact of preoperative radiation for rectal cancer on subsequent lymph node evaluation: a population-based analysis.

Authors:  Nancy N Baxter; Arden M Morris; David A Rothenberger; Joel E Tepper
Journal:  Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys       Date:  2005-02-01       Impact factor: 7.038

6.  Variation in lymph node assessment after colon cancer resection: patient, surgeon, pathologist, or hospital?

Authors:  Hari Nathan; Andrew D Shore; Robert A Anders; Elizabeth C Wick; Susan L Gearhart; Timothy M Pawlik
Journal:  J Gastrointest Surg       Date:  2010-12-21       Impact factor: 3.452

7.  Impact of number of nodes retrieved on outcome in patients with rectal cancer.

Authors:  J E Tepper; M J O'Connell; D Niedzwiecki; D Hollis; C Compton; A B Benson; B Cummings; L Gunderson; J S Macdonald; R J Mayer
Journal:  J Clin Oncol       Date:  2001-01-01       Impact factor: 44.544

8.  Fewer than 12 lymph nodes can be expected in a surgical specimen after high-dose chemoradiation therapy for rectal cancer.

Authors:  J H Marks; E B Valsdottir; A A Rather; I C Nweze; D A Newman; M R Chernick
Journal:  Dis Colon Rectum       Date:  2010-07       Impact factor: 4.585

9.  The impact of surgeon and pathologist on lymph node retrieval in colorectal cancer and its impact on survival for patients with Dukes' stage B disease.

Authors:  M D Evans; K Barton; A Rees; J D Stamatakis; S S Karandikar
Journal:  Colorectal Dis       Date:  2007-03-07       Impact factor: 3.788

10.  Colon cancer survival is associated with increasing number of lymph nodes analyzed: a secondary survey of intergroup trial INT-0089.

Authors:  T E Le Voyer; E R Sigurdson; A L Hanlon; R J Mayer; J S Macdonald; P J Catalano; D G Haller
Journal:  J Clin Oncol       Date:  2003-08-01       Impact factor: 44.544

View more
  6 in total

1.  Comparison of three classifications for lymph node evaluation in patients undergoing total mesorectal excision for rectal cancer.

Authors:  Johannes Fritzmann; Pietro Contin; Christoph Reissfelder; Markus W Büchler; Jürgen Weitz; Nuh N Rahbari; Alexis B Ulrich
Journal:  Langenbecks Arch Surg       Date:  2018-03-09       Impact factor: 3.445

2.  Log odds of positive lymph nodes is an excellent prognostic factor for patients with rectal cancer after neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy.

Authors:  Tianlei Xu; Lin Zhang; Liang Yu; Yuelu Zhu; Hui Fang; Bo Chen; Haizeng Zhang
Journal:  Ann Transl Med       Date:  2021-04

3.  Optimal Lymph Node Yield for Survival Prediction in Rectal Cancer Patients After Neoadjuvant Therapy.

Authors:  Ching-Chieh Yang; Cheng-Wei Lin; Yu-Min Lin; Chia-Lin Chou; Yu-Hsuan Kuo; Hung-Chang Wu; Chia-Jen Tsai; Chung-Han Ho; Yi-Chen Chen
Journal:  Cancer Manag Res       Date:  2021-10-24       Impact factor: 3.989

4.  Clinical trends and effects on quality metrics for surgical gastroesophageal cancer care.

Authors:  Roderich E Schwarz
Journal:  Transl Gastroenterol Hepatol       Date:  2018-07-19

5.  Comparison of efficacy and safety of preoperative Chemoradiotherapy in locally advanced upper and middle/lower rectal cancer.

Authors:  Ming-Yii Huang; Hsin-Hua Lee; Hsiang-Lin Tsai; Ching-Wen Huang; Yung-Sung Yeh; Cheng-Jen Ma; Chun-Ming Huang; Chiao-Yun Chen; Joh-Jong Huang; Jaw-Yuan Wang
Journal:  Radiat Oncol       Date:  2018-03-27       Impact factor: 3.481

6.  A lower cut-off for lymph node harvest predicts for poorer overall survival after rectal surgery post neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy.

Authors:  Charleen Shanwen Yeo; Nicholas Syn; Huimin Liu; Sau Shung Fong
Journal:  World J Surg Oncol       Date:  2020-03-20       Impact factor: 2.754

  6 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.