Journals / Türk Kolon ve Rektum Hastalıkları Dergisi / 2019 / Cilt: 29 - Sayı: 1

Magnetic Resonance Imaging Value to Predict Pathologic Staging in Locally Advanced Rectal Cancer After Neoadjuvant Chemoradiation

Lokal İleri Rektum Tümöründe Neoadjuvan Kemoradyasyon Sonrası Patolojik Evrelemeyi Tahmin Etmek İçin Manyetik Rezonans Görüntülemenin Değeri

Pages
39–45
Publication Date
2022-11-06
DOI
—
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

Conclusion: MRI has low accuracy for restaging locally advanced rectal cancer after preoperative CRT so it is currently not consistent enough for clinical application.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:Aim: This study was designed to evaluate the role of magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) on preoperative restaging of locally advanced rectal cancer after neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy (CRT), in order to facilitate individualization of surgical management.
📊
Key Findings & Data:Method: We analyzed 117 patients who had received neoadjuvant CRT, underwent a MRI before and after CRT.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:Conclusion: MRI has low accuracy for restaging locally advanced rectal cancer after preoperative CRT so it is currently not consistent enough for clinical application.
🔬Design:Research Article
📍Scope:Comprehensive Sample
⚙️Variables:Domain Parameters

Abstract

Aim: This study was designed to evaluate the role of magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) on preoperative restaging of locally advanced rectal cancer after neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy (CRT), in order to facilitate individualization of surgical management. Method: We analyzed 117 patients who had received neoadjuvant CRT, underwent a MRI before and after CRT. All patients underwent restaging MRI followed by surgery after the end of CRT. The primary end point of this study was to estimate the accuracy of post-CRT MRI as compared with pathologic staging. Results: Pathologic T classification matched the post-CRT MRI findings in 44 (37.6%) of 117 patients. Sensitivity in T0, T1, T2, T3 and T4 was 23.8%, 16.7%, 25.6%, 48.9% and 83.3% respectively. Specificity in T0, T1, T2, T3 and T4 were 87.5%, 93.7%, 79.5%, and 64% and 88.3% respectively. Sensitivity in N0 and N1 were 82% and 20% respectively. Specificity was 88% in N0 and 87% in N1. Fifty two (44.4%) of 117 patients were downstaged in T classification. Pathologic N classification matched the post-CRI MRI findings in 73 (62.4%) of 117 patients. Twenty one (17.9%) were overstaged in N classification. Twenty seven (23%) of 117 patients who had been down staged on MRI after CRT were confirmed on the pathological staging with same stage (T and N). 17p with ypT0 were correlated with MRI after CRT in 5 patients (4.3%). Conclusion: MRI has low accuracy for restaging locally advanced rectal cancer after preoperative CRT so it is currently not consistent enough for clinical application.

Özet

Amaç: Bu çalışma, neoadjuvan kemoradyoterapi (CRT) sonrası lokal ileri rektum kanserinin preoperatif olarak yeniden düzenlenmesinde, cerrahi tedavinin bireyselleştirilmesini kolaylaştırmak için manyetik rezonans görüntülemenin (MRG) rolünü değerlendirmek için tasarlanmıştır. Yöntem: MRG öncesi ve sonrasında neoadjuvan CRT alan 117 hastayı inceledik. Tüm hastalara yeniden evreleme için MRG ve takiben CRT bittikten sonra operasyon yapıldı. Bu çalışmanın birincil bitiş noktası, CRT sonrası MRG evrelemesinin patolojik evrelemeye göre doğruluğunu tahmin etmekti. Bulgular: Patolojik T sınıflaması, CRT sonrası MRG bulgularını 117 hastanın 44’ünde (%37,6) eşleştirdi. T0, T1, T2, T3 ve T4’te sensitivite sırasıyla %23,8, %16,7, %25,6, %48,9 ve %83,3 idi. T0, T1, T2, T3 ve T4’te spesifite sırasıyla %87,5, % 93,7, %79,5 ve %64 ve %88,3 idi. N0 ve N1’de sensitivite sırasıyla %82 ve %20 idi. Spesifite N0’da %88 ve N1’de %87 idi. Yüz onyedi hastadan 52 tanesi (% 44,4) T sınıflamasına alındı. Patolojik N sınıflaması, 117 hastanın 73’ünde (% 62,4) CRT sonrası MRG bulgularına uyuyordu. Yirmi bir hasta (%17,9) N sınıflamasına alındı. CRT sonrası MRG’de evrelenen 117 hastanın 27’sinde (%23) patolojik evrelemede aynı aşamada olunduğu doğrulandı (T ve N) . T0 ile 17 hasta, 5 hastada (%4,3) CRT sonrası MRG ile korele idi. Sonuç: MRG preoperatif CRT sonrası lokal ileri rektum kanserinin yeniden evrelemesinde düşük bir hassasiyete sahiptir, bu nedenle klinik uygulama için yeterince tutarlı bir tetkik değildir.

🔖

Cite This Article

PINTA, C. D. L., MARTIN, M., HERVAS, A., LIZARBE, E. F., LOPEZ, F., SANCHO, S., SEMPERE, C. (2022). Magnetic Resonance Imaging Value to Predict Pathologic Staging in Locally Advanced Rectal Cancer After Neoadjuvant Chemoradiation. Türk Kolon ve Rektum Hastalıkları Dergisi, Cilt: 29 - Sayı: 1, 39–45. https://ajindex.com/articles/634593

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (12)

  1. Ferlay J, Soerjomataram I, Ervik M, Dikshit R, Eser S, Mathers C, Rebelo M, Parkin DM, Forman D, Bray, F. Cancer Incidence and Mortality Worldwide: sources, methods and major patterns in GLOBOCAN 2012. Int J Cancer 2015;136:E359-86
  2. MERCURY Study Group. Diagnostic accuracy of preoperative magnetic resonance Imaging in predicting curative resection of rectal cancer: prospective observational study. BMJ 2006;333:779
  3. Kim DJ, Kim JH, Lim JS, Yu JS, Chung JJ, Kim MJ, Kim KW. Restaging of rectal cancer with MR imaging after concurrent chemotherapy and radiation therapy. Radiographics 2010;30:503-516
  4. Lee JH, Kim SH, Kim JG, Cho HM, Shim BY. Preoperative chemoradiotherapy (CRT) followed by laparoscopic surgery for rectal cancer: predictors of the tumor response and the long-term oncologic outcomes. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2011;82:431-438
  5. Kuo LJ, Chern MC, Tsou MH, Liu MC, Jian JJ, Chen CM, Chung YL, Fang WT. Interpretation of magnetic resonanceimaging for Locally advanced rectal carcinoma after preoperative chemoradiationtherapy. DisColon Rectum 2005;48:23-28
  6. Chen CC, Lee RC, Lin JK, Wang LW, Yang SH. How accurate is magnetic resonance imaging in restaging rectal cancer in patients receiving preoperative combined chemoradiotherapy? Dis Colon Rectum 2005;48:722-728
  7. R Ryan, D Gibbons, J M P Hyland, D Treanor, A White, H E Mulcahy, D P O’Donoghue, M Moriarty, D Fennelly& K Sheahan. Pathological response following long-course neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy for locally advanced rectal cancer. Histopathology 2005;47:141-146
  8. Patel UB, Taylor F, Blomqvist L, George C, Evans H, Tekkis P, Quirke P, Sebag-Montefiore D, Moran B, Heald R, Guthrie A, Bees N, Swift I, Pennert K, Brown G. Magnetic resonance imaging-detected tumour Response for locally advanced rectal cancer predicts survival outcomes: MERCURY experience. J Clin Oncol 2011;29:3753e3760
  9. Glynne-Jones R, Wyrwicz L, Tiret E,4, Brown G, Rödel C, Cervantes A, Arnold D; ESMO Guidelines Committee. Rectal cancer: ESMO Clinical Practice Guidelines for diagnosis, treatment and follow-up. Ann Oncol 2017 Jul 1;28(suppl_4):iv22-iv40
  10. NCCN Clinical Practice Guidelines in Oncology (NCCN Guideliness), Rectal Cancer Version 3.2018
  11. Patel UB, Blomqvist LK, Taylor F, George C, Guthrie A, Bees N, Brown G. MRI after treatment of locally advanced rectal cancer: How to report tumor response--The MERCURY experience. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2012;199:W486-95
  12. Suppiah A, Hunter IA, Cowley J, Gari