Pathologic Complete Response in Rectal Cancer: Can We Detect It? Lessons Learned From a Proposed Randomized Trial of Watch-and-Wait Treatment of Rectal Cancer

Imagem de Miniatura
Arquivos
art_NAHAS_Pathologic_Complete_Response_in_Rectal_Cancer_Can_We_2016.PDF (569.84 KB)
Citações na Scopus
90
Tipo de produção
article
Data de publicação
2016
DOI
Scopus
Web of Science
PubMed
Título da Revista
ISSN da Revista
Título do Volume
Editora
LIPPINCOTT WILLIAMS & WILKINS
Autores
Citação
DISEASES OF THE COLON & RECTUM, v.59, n.4, p.255-263, 2016
Projetos de Pesquisa
Unidades Organizacionais
Fascículo
Resumo
BACKGROUND: Chemoradiotherapy has the potential to downsize and downstage tumors before surgery, decrease locoregional recurrence, and induce a complete sterilization of tumor cells for middle and low locally advanced rectal cancer. A watch-and-wait tactic has been proposed for patients with clinical complete response.(7 R8 R9 R10 R11 R12 R13 R14 R15 R16 R17 R18 R19""> 7-19) OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to verify our ability to identify complete clinical response in patients with rectal cancer based on clinical and radiologic criteria. DESIGN: This was a prospective study. SETTINGS: The study was conducted at a single institution, in the setting of a watch-and-wait randomized trial. PATIENTS: Consecutive patients with stage T3 to T4N0M0 or T(any)N+M0 cancer located within 10 cm from anal verge or T2N0 within 7 cm from anal verge were included in the study. Patients were staged and restaged 8 weeks after completion of chemoradiation (5-fluorouracil, 5040 cGy) by digital examination, colonoscopy, pelvic MRI, and thorax and abdominal CT scans. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Clinical and radiologic judgments of tumor response were compared with pathologic response of patients treated by total mesorectal excision or clinical follow-up of patients selected for nonoperative treatment. RESULTS: A total of 118 patients were treated. Six patients were considered clinic complete responders (2 randomly assigned for surgery (1 ypT0N0 and 1 ypT2N0) and 4 patients randomly assigned for observation (3 sustained clinic complete response and 1 had tumor regrowth)). The 112 clinic incomplete responders underwent total mesorectal excision, and 18 revealed pathologic complete response. These 18 patients were not considered complete responders at restaging because they presented at least 1 of the following conditions: mucosal ulceration and/or deformity and/or substenosis of rectal lumen at digital rectal examination and colonoscopy (n = 16), ymrT1 to T4 (n = 16), ymrN+ (n = 2), involvement of circumferential resection margin on MRI (n = 3), extramural vascular invasion on MRI (n = 4), MRI tumor response grade 2 to 4 (n = 15), and pelvic side wall lymph node involvement on MRI (n = 1). Sensitivity for identification of ypT0N0 or sustained clinic complete response was 18.2%. LIMITATIONS: This study has a short follow-up and small sample size. Radiologists who reviewed the restaging examination were not blinded to the pretreatment stage. Only 1 radiologist read the images of each patient. CONCLUSIONS: Evaluation of clinic complete response according to current adopted criteria has low sensitivity because pathologic complete response more frequently presented as clinic incomplete response (see Video, Supplemental Digital Content 1, [GRAPHICS] ).
Palavras-chave
Watchful waiting, Rectal tumor, Rectal neoplasms, Neoadjuvant treatment, Rectal cancer
URI
https://observatorio.fm.usp.br/handle/OPI/14230
Referências
  1. Maas M, 2011, J CLIN ONCOL, V29, P4633, DOI 10.1200/JCO.2011.37.7176
  2. Habr-Gama A, 2004, ANN SURG, V240, P711, DOI 10.1097/01.sla.0000141194.27992.32
  3. Glynne-Jones R, 2012, BRIT J SURG, V99, P897, DOI 10.1002/bjs.8732
  4. Nakagawa WT, 2002, ANN SURG ONCOL, V9, P568, DOI 10.1245/aso.2002.9.6.568
  5. Guillem JG, 2005, J CLIN ONCOL, V23, P3475, DOI 10.1200/JCO.2005.06.114
  6. Patel UB, 2011, J CLIN ONCOL, V29, P3753, DOI 10.1200/JCO.2011.34.9068
  7. Habr-Gama A, 2006, J GASTROINTEST SURG, V10, P1319, DOI 10.1016/j.gassur.2006.09.005
  8. Allen SD, 2007, AM J ROENTGENOL, V188, P442, DOI 10.2214/AJR.05.1967
  9. Smith JD, 2012, ANN SURG, V256, P965, DOI 10.1097/SLA.0b013e3182759f1c
  10. Habr-Gama A, 2013, DIS COLON RECTUM, V56, P1109, DOI 10.1097/DCR.0b013e3182a25c4e
  11. Chen CC, 2005, DIS COLON RECTUM, V48, P722, DOI 10.1007/s10350-004-0851-1
  12. Kapiteijn E, 2001, NEW ENGL J MED, V345, P638, DOI 10.1056/NEJMoa010580
  13. Habr-Gama A, 2010, DIS COLON RECTUM, V53, P1692, DOI 10.1007/DCR.0b013e3181f42b89
  14. Smith FM, 2006, EJSO, V32, P55, DOI 10.1016/j.ejso.2005.09.010
  15. Hiotis SP, 2002, J AM COLL SURGEONS, V194, P131, DOI 10.1016/S1072-7515(01)01159-0
  16. Mignanelli ED, 2010, DIS COLON RECTUM, V53, P251, DOI 10.1007/DCR.0b013e3181bcd3cc
  17. Pahlman L, 1997, NEW ENGL J MED, V336, P980
  18. Sauer R, 2004, NEW ENGL J MED, V351, P1731, DOI 10.1056/NEJMoa040694
  19. Smith FM, 2014, DIS COLON RECTUM, V57, P311, DOI 10.1097/DCR.0b013e3182a84eba
  20. Dalton RSJ, 2012, COLORECTAL DIS, V14, P567, DOI 10.1111/j.1463-1318.2011.02752.x
  21. Hughes R, 2010, ACTA ONCOL, V49, P378, DOI 10.3109/02841860903483692
  22. Rossi BM, 1998, ANN SURG ONCOL, V5, P113, DOI 10.1007/BF02303843
  23. Habr-Gama A, 1998, DIS COLON RECTUM, V41, P1087, DOI 10.1007/BF02239429
  24. Beddy D, 2008, ANN SURG ONCOL, V15, P3471, DOI 10.1245/s10434-008-0149-y
  25. Lim L, 2007, DIS COLON RECTUM, V50, P2032, DOI 10.1007/s10350-007-9062-x
  26. Kuo LJ, 2005, DIS COLON RECTUM, V48, P23, DOI 10.1007/s10350-004-0787-5
  27. Yu SK, 2011, J CLIN ONCOL S4, V29

Coleções
Artigos e Materiais de Revistas Científicas - FM/MGT
Artigos e Materiais de Revistas Científicas - FM/MDR
Artigos e Materiais de Revistas Científicas - HC/ICESP
Artigos e Materiais de Revistas Científicas - HC/ICHC
Artigos e Materiais de Revistas Científicas - HC/InRad
Artigos e Materiais de Revistas Científicas - LIM/24
Carregar mais