Do clinical criteria reflect pathologic complete response in rectal cancer following neoadjuvant therapy?

4Citations
Citations of this article
20Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.
Get full text

Abstract

Background: Clinical complete response (cCR) in rectal cancer is being evaluated as a tool to identify patients who would not require surgery in the curative management of rectal cancer. Our study reviews mucosal changes after neoadjuvant therapy for rectal cancer in patients treated at our center. Methods: Pathology reports were retrieved for patients treated with neoadjuvant chemoradiation therapy (CRT) or high-dose rate brachytherapy (HDRBT). The macroscopic appearance of the specimen was compared with pathologic staging. Results: This study included 282 patients: 88 patients underwent neoadjuvant CRT and 194 patients underwent HDRBT; all patients underwent total mesorectal excision (TME). There were 160 male and 122 female patients with a median age of 65 years (range 29–87). The median time between neoadjuvant therapy and surgery was 50 and 58 days. Sixty patients (21.2%) were staged as ypT0N0, 21.2% had a pathologic complete response (pCR), and only 3.2% had a cCR. Of the 67 patients with initial involvement of the circumferential radial margin (CRM), 44 converted to pathologic CRM−. Two hundred seventy-three patients (96.8%) had mucosal abnormalities. Of the 222 patients with residual tumor, 70 patients had no macroscopic tumor visualized but an ulcer in its place. Conclusion: Most patients undergoing neoadjuvant therapy for rectal cancer have residual mucosal abnormalities which preclude to a cCR as per published criteria from Brazil. Further studies are required to optimize clinical evaluation and MRI imaging in selected patients.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Garant, A., Florianova, L., Gologan, A., Spatz, A., Faria, J., Morin, N., … Vuong, T. (2018). Do clinical criteria reflect pathologic complete response in rectal cancer following neoadjuvant therapy? International Journal of Colorectal Disease, 33(6), 727–733. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00384-018-3033-7

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free