1
|
Sluckin TC, Hazen SMJA, Horsthuis K, Beets-Tan RGH, Antonisse IE, Berbée M, van Bockel LW, Boer AH, Ceha HM, Cnossen JS, Geijsen ED, den Hartogh MD, Hendriksen EM, Intven MPW, Leseman-Hoogenboom MM, Meijnen P, Muller K, Oppedijk V, Rozema T, Rütten H, Spruit PH, Stam TC, Velema LA, Verrijssen ASE, Vos-Westerman J, Tanis PJ, Marijnen CAM, Kusters M. Coverage of Lateral Lymph Nodes in Rectal Cancer Patients with Routine Radiation Therapy Practice and Associated Locoregional Recurrence Rates. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2023; 117:422-433. [PMID: 37120027 DOI: 10.1016/j.ijrobp.2023.04.013] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 12/23/2022] [Revised: 04/03/2023] [Accepted: 04/18/2023] [Indexed: 05/01/2023]
Abstract
PURPOSE Involved internal iliac and obturator lateral lymph nodes (LLNs) are a known risk factor for the occurrence of ipsilateral local recurrences (LLR) in rectal cancer. This study examined coverage of LLNs with routine radiation therapy practice in the Netherlands and associated LLR rates. METHODS AND MATERIALS Patients with a primary tumor ≤8 cm of the anorectal junction, cT3-4 stage, and at least 1 internal iliac or obturator LLN with short axis ≥5 mm who received neoadjuvant (chemo)radiation therapy, were selected from a national, cross-sectional study of patients with rectal cancer treated in the Netherlands in 2016. Magnetic resonance images and radiation therapy treatment plans were reviewed regarding segmented LLNs as gross tumor volume (GTV), location of LLNs within clinical target volume (CTV), and received proportion of the planned radiation therapy dose. RESULTS A total of 223 out of 3057 patients with at least 1 LLN ≥5 mm were selected. Of those, 180 (80.7%) LLNs were inside the CTV, of which 60 (33.3%) were segmented as GTV. Overall, 202 LLNs (90.6%) received ≥95% of the planned dose. Four-year LLR rates were not significantly higher for LLNs situated outside the CTV compared with those inside (4.0% vs 12.5%, P = .092) or when receiving <95% versus ≥95% of the planned radiation therapy dose (7.1% vs 11.3%, P = .843), respectively. Two of 7 patients who received a dose escalation of 60 Gy developed an LLR (4-year LLR rate of 28.6%). CONCLUSIONS This evaluation of routine radiation therapy practice showed that adequate coverage of LLNs was still associated with considerable 4-year LLR rates. Techniques resulting in better local control for patients with involved LLNs need to be explored further.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Tania C Sluckin
- Department of Surgery, Amsterdam University Medical Centers, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, Amsterdam, the Netherlands; Treatment and Quality of Life, Imaging and Biomarkers, Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam, the Netherlands; Department of Radiation Oncology, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, the Netherlands
| | - Sanne-Marije J A Hazen
- Department of Surgery, Amsterdam University Medical Centers, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, Amsterdam, the Netherlands; Treatment and Quality of Life, Imaging and Biomarkers, Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - Karin Horsthuis
- Department of Radiology, Amsterdam University Medical Centers, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - Regina G H Beets-Tan
- Department of Radiology, The Netherlands Cancer Institute, Amsterdam, the Netherlands; GROW School for Oncology and Developmental Biology, University of Maastricht, Maastricht, the Netherlands; Department of Radiology, Department of Clinical Research, University of Southern Denmark, Odense University Hospital, Odense, Denmark
| | - Imogeen E Antonisse
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Erasmus Medical Center, Rotterdam, the Netherlands
| | - Maaike Berbée
- Department of Radiation Oncology (MAASTRO), GROW School for Oncology and Developmental Biology, Maastricht University Medical Center, Maastricht, the Netherlands
| | | | - Anniek H Boer
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University Medical Center Groningen, Groningen, the Netherlands
| | - Heleen M Ceha
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Haaglanden Medical Center, The Hague, the Netherlands
| | - Jeltsje S Cnossen
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Catharina Cancer Institute, Eindhoven, the Netherlands
| | - Elisabeth D Geijsen
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Amsterdam University Medical Centers, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | | | - Ellen M Hendriksen
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Medisch Spectrum Twente, Enschede, the Netherlands
| | - Martijn P W Intven
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht, the Netherlands
| | | | - Philip Meijnen
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Amsterdam University Medical Centers, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - Karin Muller
- Radiotherapiegroep, Arnhem/Deventer, the Netherlands
| | - Vera Oppedijk
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Radiation Therapy Institute Friesland, Leeuwarden, the Netherlands
| | - Tom Rozema
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Institute Verbeeten, Tilburg, the Netherlands
| | - Heidi Rütten
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Radboud University Medical Center, Nijmegen, the Netherlands
| | - Patty H Spruit
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Northwest Clinics, Alkmaar, the Netherlands
| | - Tanja C Stam
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Haaglanden Medical Center, The Hague, the Netherlands
| | - Laura A Velema
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, the Netherlands
| | - An-Sofie E Verrijssen
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Catharina Cancer Institute, Eindhoven, the Netherlands
| | | | - Pieter J Tanis
- Treatment and Quality of Life, Imaging and Biomarkers, Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam, the Netherlands; Department of Surgery, Amsterdam University Medical Centers, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, the Netherlands; Department of Surgical Oncology and Gastrointestinal Surgery, Erasmus Medical Center, Rotterdam, the Netherlands
| | - Corrie A M Marijnen
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, the Netherlands; Department of Radiation Oncology, Netherlands Cancer Institute, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - Miranda Kusters
- Department of Surgery, Amsterdam University Medical Centers, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, Amsterdam, the Netherlands; Treatment and Quality of Life, Imaging and Biomarkers, Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam, the Netherlands.
| |
Collapse
|
3
|
Chan DKH, Tan KK, Akiyoshi T. Diagnostic and management strategies for lateral pelvic lymph nodes in low rectal cancer-a review of the evidence. J Gastrointest Oncol 2019; 10:1200-1206. [PMID: 31949940 DOI: 10.21037/jgo.2019.01.22] [Citation(s) in RCA: 5] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/30/2022] Open
Abstract
Patients with low rectal cancer who have enlarged lateral pelvic lymph nodes are known to have a worse prognosis. There is however uncertainty over what constitutes a lateral pelvic lymph node of clinical significance. As the main modality for the detection of such lymph nodes is magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), characteristics of these lateral lymph nodes identified may have prognostic value and assist with guiding treatment. Options to manage such lateral lymph nodes includes neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy as well as lateral lymph node dissection. Surgery is extensive and may lead to significant morbidity to the patient. This review article evaluates diagnostic and management strategies in patients with lateral pelvic lymph nodes in low rectal cancer.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Dedrick Kok Hong Chan
- Division of Colorectal Surgery, University Surgical Cluster, National University Health System, Singapore, Singapore.,Department of Surgery, Yong Loo Lin School of Medicine, National University of Singapore, Singapore, Singapore
| | - Ker-Kan Tan
- Division of Colorectal Surgery, University Surgical Cluster, National University Health System, Singapore, Singapore.,Department of Surgery, Yong Loo Lin School of Medicine, National University of Singapore, Singapore, Singapore
| | - Takashi Akiyoshi
- Gastroenterological Centre, Department of Gastroenterological Surgery, Cancer Institute Hospital, Japanese Foundation for Cancer Research, Tokyo, Japan
| |
Collapse
|
5
|
Kusters M, Uehara K, Velde CJHVD, Moriya Y. Is There Any Reason to Still Consider Lateral Lymph Node Dissection in Rectal Cancer? Rationale and Technique. Clin Colon Rectal Surg 2017; 30:346-356. [PMID: 29184470 DOI: 10.1055/s-0037-1606112] [Citation(s) in RCA: 28] [Impact Index Per Article: 4.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 02/06/2023]
Abstract
Nodal dissemination in locally advanced rectal cancer occurs mainly in two directions: upward and lateral. Lateral node involvement has been demonstrated; however, lateral lymph node dissection (LLND) is not routinely performed in Western countries and the focus is more on neoadjuvant treatment regimens. The main reasons for this are the high morbidity associated with the operation and the uncertain oncological benefit. There is, however, recent evidence that in selected cases, neoadjuvant treatment combined with total mesorectal excision only might not be sufficient. In this article, the historical developments in the East and the West, the current evidence regarding lateral nodal disease, and the surgical steps in the LLND are discussed.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Miranda Kusters
- Department of Surgery, Catharina Hospital, Eindhoven, The Netherlands.,Department of Surgery, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, The Netherlands
| | - Keisuke Uehara
- Division of Surgical Oncology, Nagoya University Graduate School of Medicine, Nagoya, Japan
| | | | | |
Collapse
|
6
|
Konishi T, Watanabe T, Nagawa H, Oya M, Ueno M, Kuroyanagi H, Fujimoto Y, Akiyoshi T, Yamaguchi T, Muto T. Preoperative chemoradiation and extended pelvic lymphadenectomy for rectal cancer: Two distinct principles. World J Gastrointest Surg 2010; 2:95-100. [PMID: 21160857 PMCID: PMC2999227 DOI: 10.4240/wjgs.v2.i4.95] [Citation(s) in RCA: 12] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.9] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 01/04/2010] [Revised: 02/14/2010] [Accepted: 02/21/2010] [Indexed: 02/06/2023] Open
Abstract
Extended pelvic lymphadenectomy (EPL) with total mesorectal excision (TME) has been reported to provide oncological benefit in lower rectal cancer in Japan. In Western countries EPL is not widely accepted because of frequent morbidity but instead preoperative chemoradiation (CRT) followed by TME has been established as a standard treatment for decreasing local recurrence. Recently, several studies have focused on the comparison between these two distinct therapeutic approaches in Western countries and Japan. A study comparing Dutch trial data and Japanese data revealed that EPL and RT are almost equivalent in decreasing local recurrence in lower rectal cancer as compared with TME alone. Considering that almost 45% survival can be achieved by EPL even in the presence of metastatic lateral lymph nodes (LLNs), EPL performed by experienced surgeons definitely contributes to decrease local recurrence. On the other hand, a randomized controlled trial in Japan that compared EPL with conventional TME following preoperative RT revealed that EPL is associated with a higher frequency of sexual and urinary dysfunction without oncological benefits in the presence of preoperative RT. On this point, preoperative CRT followed by conventional TME without EPL would be a better therapeutic approach in patients without evident metastatic LLNs. For future treatment, it would be desirable to have a narrower indication for EPL using full advantage of recent improvement in image diagnosis. Although objective comparison of these two principles between Japan and the West is difficult due to differences in patient groups, further studies would lead to the next great step towards future improvement in treating lower rectal cancer.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Tsuyoshi Konishi
- Tsuyoshi Konishi, Masatoshi Oya, Masashi Ueno, Hiroya Kuroyanagi, Yoshiya Fujimoto, Takashi Akiyoshi, Toshiharu Yamaguchi, Tetsuichiro Muto, Department of Gastroenterological Surgery, Cancer Institute Hospital, Tokyo, 135-8550, Japan
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Collapse
|
7
|
Chemoradiotherapy and adjuvant chemotherapy for rectal cancer. Int J Clin Oncol 2008; 13:488-97. [PMID: 19093175 DOI: 10.1007/s10147-008-0849-0] [Citation(s) in RCA: 19] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.2] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 10/14/2008] [Indexed: 01/01/2023]
Abstract
Local recurrence is an important factor in determining the outcome of patients after surgery for rectal cancer, and various attempts have been made to reduce the local recurrence rate. Randomized controlled trials have shown that radiotherapy combined with total mesorectal excision can reduce the local recurrence rate in rectal cancer patients who undergo curative surgery. Chemoradiotherapy is more effective in achieving local control than radiotherapy alone, and preoperative chemoradiotherapy is superior to postoperative chemoradiotherapy in terms of adverse events. Recent advances have led to the identification of potential therapeutic targets such as epidermal growth factor receptor, vascular endothelial growth factor, and endothelial receptors. These new agents have been used in combination with conventional chemoradiotherapy, and higher pathological complete response rates have been reported for such combinations in comparison with conventional regimens. With regard to lateral node dissection, a recent study showed that postoperative chemoradiotherapy was more effective in reducing the local recurrence rate than lateral node dissection. As for adjuvant chemotherapy, one randomized controlled trial showed that patients who received uracil and tegafur as adjuvant therapy had significantly prolonged relapse-free survival times and overall survival times. As well, one metaanalysis has shown the efficacy of oral uracil-tegafur as adjuvant chemotherapy for rectal cancer.
Collapse
|