Rectal cancer with macroscopic peritoneal involvement--clinical challenges and consequences

Update to the structured MRI report for primary staging of rectal cancer : Perspective from the SAR Disease Focused Panel on Rectal and Anal Cancer

OBJECTIVE

To review existing structured MRI reports for primary staging of rectal cancer and create a new, freely available structured report based on multidisciplinary expert opinion and literature review.

METHODS

Twenty abdominal imaging experts from the Society of Abdominal Radiology (SAR)'s Disease Focused Panel (DFP) on Rectal and Anal Cancer completed a questionnaire and participated in a subsequent consensus meeting based on the RAND-UCLA Appropriateness Method. Twenty-two items were classified via a group survey as "appropriate" or "inappropriate" (defined by ≥ 70% consensus), or "needs group discussion" (defined by < 70% consensus). Certain items were also discussed with multidisciplinary team members from colorectal surgery, oncology and pathology.

RESULTS

After completion of the questionnaire, 16 (72%) items required further discussion (< 70% consensus). Following group discussion, consensus was achieved for 21 (95%) of the items. Based on the consensus meeting, a revised structured report was developed. The most significant modifications included (1) Exclusion of the T2/early T3 category; (2) Replacement of the term "circumferential resection margin (CRM)" with "mesorectal fascia (MRF)"; (3) A revised definition of "mucinous content"; (4) Creation of two distinct categories for suspicious lymph nodes (LNs) and tumor deposits; and (5) Classification of suspicious extra-mesorectal LNs by anatomic location.

CONCLUSION

The SAR DFP on Rectal and Anal Cancer recommends using this newly updated reporting template for primary MRI staging of rectal cancer.

Rectal cancer at the peritoneal reflection. Preoperative MRI accuracy and histophatologic correlation. Prospective study

INTRODUCTION

To investigate magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) accuracy for determining the location of rectal tumors with respect to the peritoneal reflection (PR) and its potential involvement.

METHODS

Prospective study of 161 patients ongoing surgery for rectal cancer. A double-ink method has been aplied to examine surgical specimen, orange ink for the serosal surface and indian ink for the mesorrectal margin, and assess preoperative MRI accuracy.

RESULTS

Twenty-two tumors were located above, 65 at and 74 below PR. MRI accuracy was 90.6% for determining tumor's location with respect to the PR and 80.5% for defining peritoneal involvement. For classifying tumors according to their intra or extraperitoneal location an accuracy of 92.5% was set for MRI. Histophatologic peritoneal involvement was found in 28.7% of tumors located above or at the PR.

CONCLUSIONS

Magnetic resonance imaging accurately predicts the location of rectal tumors with respect to the PR and its potential involvement. The double-ink method is useful to assess serosal involvement (pT4a) and to distinguish mesorrectal fascia from the peritonealized surface.

Occurrence of peritoneal carcinomatosis in patients with rectal cancer undergoing staging pelvic MRI: clinical observations

OBJECTIVES

Describe the cumulative incidence (CUIN) of peritoneal carcinomatosis (PC) and survival in patients presenting with advanced rectal cancer at staging pelvic MRI.

METHODS

From 2013 to 2018, clinicopathologic records of patients with pretreatment rectal MRI clinical (c)T3c, cT3d, cT4a, and cT4b primary rectal adenocarcinoma were retrospectively reviewed by two radiologists. Standard MRI descriptors and pathologic stages were recorded. Recurrence-free (RFS) and overall survival (OS) were estimated using the Kaplan-Meier method. Development of PC was explored using competing risk analysis. Differences in survival were compared using the log-rank test. Gray's test was used to test for differences in CUIN of PC.

RESULTS

Three hundred forty-three patients (147 women; median age, 56 years) had MRI stages cT3cd, n = 170; cT4a, n = 40; and cT4b, n = 133. Median follow-up among survivors was 27 months (0.36-70 months). For M1 patients, OS differed only by cT stage (2-year OS: cT3 88.1%, cT4a 79.1%, cT4b 64.7%, p = 0.045). For M0 patients, OS and RFS differed only by pathological (p)T stage. We observed a statistically significant difference in the cumulative incidence of PC by cT stage (2-year CUIN: cT3 3.2%, cT4a 8.5%, cT4b 1.6%, p = 0.01), but not by pT stage. Seventy-nine patients (23%) presented with metastatic disease (M1), eight with PC (2.3%). Overall, eight patients presented with PC (cT4a: n = 4, other stages: n = 4) and 22 developed PC (cT4a: n = 5, other stages: n = 17).

CONCLUSIONS

PC is uncommon in rectal cancer. MRI-based T stage exhibited an overall association with the cumulative incidence of PC, and descriptively, cT4a stage appears to have the highest CUIN.

KEY POINTS

• In a retrospective study of 343 patients with rectal cancer undergoing baseline MRI and clinical follow-up, we found that peritoneal carcinomatosis was rare. • We observed a significant overall association between PC at presentation and cT stage that appeared to be driven by the higher proportion of cT4a patients presenting with PC. • Among patients that did not present with PC, we observed a significant overall association between time to PC and cT stage that may be driven by the higher cumulative incidence of PC in cT4a patients.

Rectal cancer at the peritoneal reflection. Preoperative MRI accuracy and histophatologic correlation. Prospective study

INTRODUCTION

To investigate magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) accuracy for determining the location of rectal tumors with respect to the peritoneal reflection (PR) and its potential involvement.

METHODS

Prospective study of 161 patients ongoing surgery for rectal cancer. A double-ink method has been aplied to examine surgical specimen, orange ink for the serosal surface and indian ink for the mesorrectal margin, and assess preoperative MRI accuracy.

RESULTS

Twenty-two tumors were located above, 65 at and 74 below PR. MRI accuracy was 90.6% for determining tumor's location with respect to the PR and 80.5% for defining peritoneal involvement. For classifying tumors according to their intra or extraperitoneal location an accuracy of 92.5% was set for MRI. Histophatologic peritoneal involvement was found in 28.7% of tumors located above or at the PR.

CONCLUSIONS

Magnetic resonance imaging accurately predicts the location of rectal tumors with respect to the PR and its potential involvement. The double-ink method is useful to assess serosal involvement (pT4a) and to distinguish mesorrectal fascia from the peritonealized surface.

A systematic review of outcome reporting in colorectal cancer surgery

AIM

Evaluation of surgery for colorectal cancer (CRC) is necessary to inform clinical decision-making and healthcare policy. The standards of outcome reporting after CRC surgery have not previously been considered.

METHOD

Systematic literature searches identified randomized and nonrandomized prospective studies reporting clinical outcomes of CRC surgery. Outcomes were listed verbatim, categorized into broad groups (outcome domains) and examined for a definition (an appropriate textual explanation or a supporting citation). Outcome reporting was considered inconsistent if results of the outcome specified in the methods were not reported. Outcome reporting was compared between randomized and nonrandomized studies.

RESULTS

Of 5644 abstracts, 194 articles (34 randomized and 160 nonrandomized studies) were included reporting 766 different clinical outcomes, categorized into seven domains. A mean of 14 ± 8 individual outcomes were reported per study. 'Anastomotic leak', 'overall survival' and 'wound infection' were the three most frequently reported outcomes in 72, 60 and 44 (37.1%, 30.9% and 22.7%) studies, respectively, and no single outcome was reported in every publication. Outcome definitions were significantly more often provided in randomized studies than in nonrandomized studies (19.0% vs 14.9%, P = 0.015). One-hundred and twenty-seven (65.5%) papers reported results of all outcomes specified in the methods (randomized studies, n = 21, 61.5%; nonrandomized studies, n = 106, 66.2%; P = 0.617).

CONCLUSION

Outcome reporting in CRC surgery lacks consistency and method. Improved standards of outcome measurement are recommended to permit data synthesis and transparent cross-study comparisons.

Primary staging and response assessment postchemoradiotherapy in rectal cancer

SUMMARY Initial assessment of newly diagnosed patients with rectal cancer includes clinical examination, colonoscopy, pelvic MRI and CT scan of the thorax, abdomen and pelvis. Radiological staging can objectively evaluate both surgical and biological prognostic features of rectal cancer. MRI has emerged to be the most useful preoperative prognostic staging tool and it can predict the risk of tumor involvement of surgical circumferential resection margin. An agreed definition of favorable tumor response to chemoradiotherapy is controversial. The importance of detecting and assessing good versus poor responders to chemoradiotherapy is of increasing relevance. MRI has been found to be useful in assessing tumor response postchemoradiotherapy, especially the assessment of potential circumferential resection margin and magnetic resonance tumor regression grade. These imaging markers predict survival outcomes for good and poor responders and provide an opportunity for clinicians to offer additional neoadjuvant and adjuvant treatments to reduce local or distance failure for the poor responders.