Jennifer S Golia Pernicka1, David D B Bates2, James L Fuqua2, Andrea Knezevic3, Joongchul Yoon4, Lorenzo Nardo5, Iva Petkovska2, Viktoriya Paroder2, Garrett M Nash6, Arnold J Markowitz7, Marc J Gollub2. 1. Department of Radiology, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, 530 East 74th Street, New York, NY 10065, USA. Electronic address: goliapej@mskcc.org. 2. Department of Radiology, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, 530 East 74th Street, New York, NY 10065, USA. 3. Department of Epidemiology & Biostatistics, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, 1275 York Avenue, New York, NY 10065, USA. 4. Department of Radiology, Hôpital Saint-Eustache, 520 Boulevard Arthur-Sauvé, Saint-Eustache, QC J7R 5B1, Canada. 5. Department of Radiology, University of California-Davis, 4860 Y Street, Sacramento, CA 95817, USA. 6. Department of Surgery, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, 1275 York Avenue, New York, NY 10065, USA. 7. Department of Medicine, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, 1275 York Avenue, New York, NY 10065, USA.
Abstract
PURPOSE: This study explored the clinicopathologic outcomes of rectal tumor morphological descriptors used in a synoptic rectal MRI reporting template and determined that prognostic differences were observed. METHODS: This retrospective study was conducted at a comprehensive cancer center. Fifty patients with rectal tumors for whom the synoptic descriptor "polypoid" was chosen by three experienced radiologists were compared with ninety comparator patients with "partially circumferential" and "circumferential" rectal tumors. Two radiologists re-evaluated all cases. The outcome measures were agreement among two re-interpreting radiologists, clinical T staging with MRI (mrT) and descriptive nodal features, and degrees of wall attachment of tumors (on MRI) compared with pathological (p) T and N stage when available. RESULTS: Re-evaluation by two radiologists showed moderate to excellent agreement in tumor morphology, presence of a pedicle, and degree of wall attachment (k = 0.41-0.76) and excellent agreement on lymph node presence and size (ICC = 0.83-0.91). Statistically significant lower mrT stage was noted for polypoid morphology, wherein 98% were mrT1/2, while only 7% and 2% of partially circumferential and circumferential tumors respectively were mrT1/2. Pathologic T and N stages among the three morphologies also differed significantly, with only 14% of polypoid cases higher than stage pT2 compared to 48% of partially circumferential cases and 60% of circumferential cases. CONCLUSION: Using a "polypoid" morphology in rectal cancer MRI synoptic reports revealed a seemingly distinct phenotype with lower clinical and pathologic T and N stages when compared with alternative available descriptors. PRECIS: "Polypoid" morphology in rectal cancer confers a lower clinical and pathologic T and N stage and may be useful in determining whether to proceed with surgery versus neoadjuvant treatment.
PURPOSE: This study explored the clinicopathologic outcomes of rectal tumor morphological descriptors used in a synoptic rectal MRI reporting template and determined that prognostic differences were observed. METHODS: This retrospective study was conducted at a comprehensive cancer center. Fifty patients with rectal tumors for whom the synoptic descriptor "polypoid" was chosen by three experienced radiologists were compared with ninety comparator patients with "partially circumferential" and "circumferential" rectal tumors. Two radiologists re-evaluated all cases. The outcome measures were agreement among two re-interpreting radiologists, clinical T staging with MRI (mrT) and descriptive nodal features, and degrees of wall attachment of tumors (on MRI) compared with pathological (p) T and N stage when available. RESULTS: Re-evaluation by two radiologists showed moderate to excellent agreement in tumor morphology, presence of a pedicle, and degree of wall attachment (k = 0.41-0.76) and excellent agreement on lymph node presence and size (ICC = 0.83-0.91). Statistically significant lower mrT stage was noted for polypoid morphology, wherein 98% were mrT1/2, while only 7% and 2% of partially circumferential and circumferential tumors respectively were mrT1/2. Pathologic T and N stages among the three morphologies also differed significantly, with only 14% of polypoid cases higher than stage pT2 compared to 48% of partially circumferential cases and 60% of circumferential cases. CONCLUSION: Using a "polypoid" morphology in rectal cancer MRI synoptic reports revealed a seemingly distinct phenotype with lower clinical and pathologic T and N stages when compared with alternative available descriptors. PRECIS: "Polypoid" morphology in rectal cancer confers a lower clinical and pathologic T and N stage and may be useful in determining whether to proceed with surgery versus neoadjuvant treatment.
Authors: S Balyasnikova; J Read; D Tait; A Wotherspoon; I Swift; D Cunningham; P Tekkis; G Brown Journal: Colorectal Dis Date: 2017-02 Impact factor: 3.788
Authors: Satoshi Okabe; Jinru Shia; Garrett Nash; W Douglas Wong; José G Guillem; Martin R Weiser; Larissa Temple; Kenichi Sugihara; Philip B Paty Journal: J Gastrointest Surg Date: 2004-12 Impact factor: 3.452
Authors: Gina Brown; Catherine J Richards; Michael W Bourne; Robert G Newcombe; Andrew G Radcliffe; Nicholas S Dallimore; Geraint T Williams Journal: Radiology Date: 2003-05 Impact factor: 11.105
Authors: P J Brown; H Rossington; J Taylor; D M J Lambregts; E Morris; N P West; P Quirke; D Tolan Journal: Eur Radiol Date: 2019-02-22 Impact factor: 5.315
Authors: R Detering; S E van Oostendorp; V M Meyer; S van Dieren; A C R K Bos; J W T Dekker; O Reerink; J H T M van Waesberghe; C A M Marijnen; L M G Moons; R G H Beets-Tan; R Hompes; H L van Westreenen; P J Tanis; J B Tuynman Journal: Br J Surg Date: 2020-04-16 Impact factor: 6.939