1
|
Custers PA, Beets GL, Bach SP, Blomqvist LK, Figueiredo N, Gollub MJ, Martling A, Melenhorst J, Ortega CD, Perez RO, Smith JJ, Lambregts DMJ, Beets-Tan RGH, Maas M. An International Expert-Based Consensus on the Definition of a Clinical Near-Complete Response After Neoadjuvant (Chemo)radiotherapy for Rectal Cancer. Dis Colon Rectum 2024; 67:782-795. [PMID: 38701503 DOI: 10.1097/dcr.0000000000003209] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 05/05/2024]
Abstract
BACKGROUND A variety of definitions for a clinical near-complete response after neoadjuvant (chemo) radiotherapy for rectal cancer are currently used. This variety leads to inconsistency in clinical practice, long-term outcome, and trial enrollment. OBJECTIVE The aim of this study was to reach expert-based consensus on the definition of a clinical near-complete response after (chemo) radiotherapy. DESIGN A modified Delphi process, including a systematic review, 3 surveys, and 2 meetings, was performed with an international expert panel consisting of 7 surgeons and 4 radiologists. The surveys consisted of individual features, statements, and feature combinations (endoscopy, T2-weighted MRI, and diffusion-weighted MRI). SETTING The modified Delphi process was performed in an online setting; all 3 surveys were completed online by the expert panel, and both meetings were hosted online. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES The main outcome was to reach consensus (80% or more agreement). RESULTS The expert panel reached consensus on a 3-tier categorization of the near-complete response category based on the likelihood of the response to evolve into a clinical complete response after a longer waiting interval. The panelists agreed that a near-complete response is a temporary entity only to be used in the first 6 months after (chemo)radiotherapy. Furthermore, consensus was reached that the lymph node status should be considered when deciding on a near-complete response and that biopsies are not always needed when a near-complete response is found. No consensus was reached on whether primary staging characteristics have to be taken into account when deciding on a near-complete response. LIMITATIONS This 3-tier subcategorization is expert-based; therefore, there is no supporting evidence for this subcategorization. Also, it is unclear whether this subcategorization can be generalized into clinical practice. CONCLUSIONS Consensus was reached on the use of a 3-tier categorization of a near-complete response, which can be helpful in daily practice as guidance for treatment and to inform patients with a near-complete response on the likelihood of successful organ preservation. See Video Abstract. UN CONSENSO INTERNACIONAL BASADO EN EXPERTOS ACERCA DE LA DEFINICIN DE UNA RESPUESTA CLNICA CASI COMPLETA DESPUS DE QUIMIORADIOTERAPIA NEOADYUVANTE CONTRA EL CNCER DE RECTO ANTECEDENTES:Actualmente, se utilizan una variedad de definiciones para una respuesta clínica casi completa después de quimioradioterapia neoadyuvante contra el cáncer de recto. Esta variedad resulta en inconsistencia en la práctica clínica, los resultados a largo plazo y la inscripción en ensayos.OBJETIVO:El objetivo de este estudio fue llegar a un consenso de expertos sobre la definición de una respuesta clínica casi completa después de quimioradioterapia.DISEÑO:Se realizó un proceso Delphi modificado que incluyó una revisión sistemática, 3 encuestas y 2 reuniones con un panel internacional de expertos compuesto por siete cirujanos y 4 radiólogos. Las encuestas consistieron en características individuales, declaraciones y combinaciones de características (endoscopía, T2W-MRI y DWI).AJUSTE:El proceso Delphi modificado se realizó en un entorno en línea; el panel de expertos completó las tres encuestas en línea y ambas reuniones se realizaron en línea.PRINCIPALES MEDIDAS DE RESULTADO:El resultado principal fue llegar a un consenso (≥80% de acuerdo).RESULTADOS:El panel de expertos llegó a un consenso sobre una categorización de tres niveles de la categoría de respuesta casi completa basada en la probabilidad de que la respuesta evolucione hacia una respuesta clínica completa después de un intervalo de espera más largo. Los panelistas coincidieron en que una respuesta casi completa es una entidad temporal que sólo debe utilizarse en los primeros 6 meses después de la quimioradioterapia. Además, se llegó a un consenso en que se debe considerar el estado de los nódulos linfáticos al decidir sobre una respuesta casi completa y que no siempre se necesitan biopsias cuando se encuentra una respuesta casi completa. No se llegó a un consenso sobre si se deben tener en cuenta las características primarias de estadificación al decidir una respuesta casi completa.LIMITACIONES:Esta subcategorización de 3 niveles está basada en expertos; por lo tanto, no hay evidencia que respalde esta subcategorización. Además, no está claro si esta subcategorización puede generalizarse a la práctica clínica.CONCLUSIONES:Se alcanzó consenso sobre el uso de una categorización de 3 niveles de una respuesta casi completa que puede ser útil en la práctica diaria como guía para el tratamiento y para informar a los pacientes con una respuesta casi completa sobre la probabilidad de una preservación exitosa del órgano. (Traducción - Dr. Aurian Garcia Gonzalez).
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Petra A Custers
- Department of Surgery, Netherlands Cancer Institute - Antoni van Leeuwenhoek, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
- GROW School for Oncology and Developmental Reproduction, Maastricht University, Maastricht, the Netherlands
| | - Geerard L Beets
- Department of Surgery, Netherlands Cancer Institute - Antoni van Leeuwenhoek, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
- GROW School for Oncology and Developmental Reproduction, Maastricht University, Maastricht, the Netherlands
| | - Simon P Bach
- Department of Surgery, Queen Elizabeth Hospital, Birmingham, United Kingdom
| | - Lennart K Blomqvist
- Department of Molecular Medicine and Surgery, Karolinska Institute, Stockholm, Sweden
- Department of Radiation Physics and Nuclear Medicine, Karolinska University Hospital, Stockholm, Sweden
| | - Nuno Figueiredo
- Department of Surgery, Hospital Lusiadas Lisboa, Lisbon, Portugal
| | - Marc J Gollub
- Department of Radiology, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York
| | - Anna Martling
- Department of Molecular Medicine and Surgery, Karolinska Institute, Stockholm, Sweden
- Department of Pelvic Cancer, Division of Coloproctology, Karolinska University Hospital, Stockholm, Sweden
| | - Jarno Melenhorst
- GROW School for Oncology and Developmental Reproduction, Maastricht University, Maastricht, the Netherlands
- Department of Surgery, Maastricht University Medical Centre, Maastricht, the Netherlands
| | - Cinthia D Ortega
- Department of Radiology, University of São Paulo School of Medicine, São Paulo, Brazil
- Department of Radiology and Diagnostic Imaging, Hospital Israelita Albert Einstein, São Paulo, Brazil
| | - Rodrigo O Perez
- Division of Colorectal Surgery, Hospital Alemão Oswaldo Cruz, São Paulo, Brazil
| | - J Joshua Smith
- Department of Surgery, Colorectal Service, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York
| | - Doenja M J Lambregts
- GROW School for Oncology and Developmental Reproduction, Maastricht University, Maastricht, the Netherlands
- Department of Radiology, Netherlands Cancer Institute - Antoni van Leeuwenhoek, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - Regina G H Beets-Tan
- GROW School for Oncology and Developmental Reproduction, Maastricht University, Maastricht, the Netherlands
- Department of Radiology, Netherlands Cancer Institute - Antoni van Leeuwenhoek, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - Monique Maas
- GROW School for Oncology and Developmental Reproduction, Maastricht University, Maastricht, the Netherlands
- Department of Radiology, Netherlands Cancer Institute - Antoni van Leeuwenhoek, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| |
Collapse
|
2
|
Hazen SMJA, van Geffen EGM, Sluckin TC, Beets GL, Belgers HJ, Borstlap WAA, Consten ECJ, Dekker JWT, Hompes R, Tuynman JB, van Westreenen HL, de Wilt JHW, Tanis PJ, Kusters M. Long-term restoration of bowel continuity after rectal cancer resection and the influence of surgical technique: A nationwide cross-sectional study. Colorectal Dis 2024. [PMID: 38706109 DOI: 10.1111/codi.17015] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 10/02/2023] [Revised: 01/10/2024] [Accepted: 04/02/2024] [Indexed: 05/07/2024]
Abstract
AIM Literature on nationwide long-term permanent stoma rates after rectal cancer resection in the minimally invasive era is scarce. The aim of this population-based study was to provide more insight into the permanent stoma rate with interhospital variability (IHV) depending on surgical technique, with pelvic sepsis, unplanned reinterventions and readmissions as secondary outcomes. METHOD Patients who underwent open or minimally invasive resection of rectal cancer (lower border below the sigmoid take-off) in 67 Dutch centres in 2016 were included in this cross-sectional cohort study. RESULTS Among 2530 patients, 1470 underwent a restorative resection (58%), 356 a Hartmann's procedure (14%, IHV 0%-42%) and 704 an abdominoperineal resection (28%, IHV 3%-60%). Median follow-up was 51 months. The overall permanent stoma rate at last follow-up was 50% (IHV 13%-79%) and the unintentional permanent stoma rate, permanent stoma after a restorative procedure or an unplanned Hartmann's procedure, was 11% (IHV 0%-29%). A total of 2165 patients (86%) underwent a minimally invasive resection: 1760 conventional (81%), 170 transanal (8%) and 235 robot-assisted (11%). An anastomosis was created in 59%, 80% and 66%, with corresponding unintentional permanent stoma rates of 12%, 24% and 14% (p = 0.001), respectively. When corrected for age, American Society of Anesthesiologists classification, cTNM, distance to the anorectal junction and neoadjuvant (chemo)radiotherapy, the minimally invasive technique was not associated with an unintended permanent stoma (p = 0.071) after a restorative procedure. CONCLUSION A remarkable IHV in the permanent stoma rate after rectal cancer resection was found. No beneficial influence of transanal or robot-assisted laparoscopy on the unintentional permanent stoma rate was found, although this might be caused by the surgical learning curve. A reduction in IHV and improving preoperative counselling for decision-making for restorative procedures are required.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Sanne-Marije J A Hazen
- Department of Surgery, Amsterdam UMC Location Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
- Treatment and Quality of Life, Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
- Imaging and Biomarkers, Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Eline G M van Geffen
- Department of Surgery, Amsterdam UMC Location Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
- Treatment and Quality of Life, Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
- Imaging and Biomarkers, Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Tania C Sluckin
- Department of Surgery, Amsterdam UMC Location Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
- Treatment and Quality of Life, Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
- Imaging and Biomarkers, Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Geerard L Beets
- Surgery, The Netherlands Cancer Institute, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
- GROW School of Oncology and Developmental Biology, University of Maastricht, Maastricht, The Netherlands
| | | | - Wernard A A Borstlap
- Surgery, Amsterdam UMC Location University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Esther C J Consten
- Surgery, Meander Medical Center, Amersfoort, The Netherlands
- Surgery, University Medical Centre Groningen, Groningen, The Netherlands
| | | | - Roel Hompes
- Treatment and Quality of Life, Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
- Surgery, Amsterdam UMC Location University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Jurriaan B Tuynman
- Department of Surgery, Amsterdam UMC Location Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
- Treatment and Quality of Life, Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
- Imaging and Biomarkers, Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | | | - Johannes H W de Wilt
- Surgery, Radboud Institute for Health Sciences, Radboud University Medical Centre, Nijmegen, The Netherlands
| | - Pieter J Tanis
- Treatment and Quality of Life, Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
- Imaging and Biomarkers, Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
- Surgery, Amsterdam UMC Location University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
- Surgical Oncology and Gastrointestinal Surgery, Erasmus Medical Center, Rotterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Miranda Kusters
- Department of Surgery, Amsterdam UMC Location Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
- Treatment and Quality of Life, Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
- Imaging and Biomarkers, Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| |
Collapse
|
3
|
van Geffen EGM, Langhout JMA, Hazen SJA, Sluckin TC, van Dieren S, Beets GL, Beets-Tan RGH, Borstlap WAA, Burger JWA, Horsthuis K, Intven MPW, Aalbers AGJ, Havenga K, Marinelli AWKS, Melenhorst J, Nederend J, Peulen HMU, Rutten HJT, Schreurs WH, Tuynman JB, Verhoef C, de Wilt JHW, Marijnen CAM, Tanis PJ, Kusters M, On Behalf Of The Dutch Snapshot Research Group. Evolution of clinical nature, treatment and survival of locally recurrent rectal cancer: Comparative analysis of two national cross-sectional cohorts. Eur J Cancer 2024; 202:114021. [PMID: 38520925 DOI: 10.1016/j.ejca.2024.114021] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 01/02/2024] [Revised: 03/04/2024] [Accepted: 03/10/2024] [Indexed: 03/25/2024]
Abstract
BACKGROUND In the Netherlands, use of neoadjuvant radiotherapy for rectal cancer declined after guideline revision in 2014. This decline is thought to affect the clinical nature and treatability of locally recurrent rectal cancer (LRRC). Therefore, this study compared two national cross-sectional cohorts before and after the guideline revision with the aim to determine the changes in treatment and survival of LRRC patients over time. METHODS Patients who underwent resection of primary rectal cancer in 2011 (n = 2094) and 2016 (n = 2855) from two nationwide cohorts with a 4-year follow up were included. Main outcomes included time to LRRC, synchronous metastases at time of LRRC diagnosis, intention of treatment and 2-year overall survival after LRRC. RESULTS Use of neoadjuvant (chemo)radiotherapy for the primary tumour decreased from 88.5% to 60.0% from 2011 to 2016. The 3-year LRRC rate was not significantly different with 5.1% in 2011 (n = 114, median time to LRRC 16 months) and 6.3% in 2016 (n = 202, median time to LRRC 16 months). Synchronous metastasis rate did not significantly differ (27.2% vs 33.7%, p = 0.257). Treatment intent of the LRRC shifted towards more curative treatment (30.4% vs. 47.0%, p = 0.009). In the curatively treated group, two-year overall survival after LRRC diagnoses increased from 47.5% to 78.7% (p = 0.013). CONCLUSION Primary rectal cancer patients in 2016 were treated less often with neoadjuvant (chemo)radiotherapy, while LRRC rates remained similar. Those who developed LRRC were more often candidate for curative intent treatment compared to the 2011 cohort, and survival after curative intent treatment also improved substantially.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- E G M van Geffen
- Department of Surgery, Amsterdam UMC location Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, Amsterdam, the Netherlands; Treatment and Quality of Life and Imaging and Biomarkers, Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - J M A Langhout
- Department of Surgery, Amsterdam UMC location Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - S J A Hazen
- Department of Surgery, Amsterdam UMC location Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, Amsterdam, the Netherlands; Treatment and Quality of Life and Imaging and Biomarkers, Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - T C Sluckin
- Department of Surgery, Amsterdam UMC location Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, Amsterdam, the Netherlands; Treatment and Quality of Life and Imaging and Biomarkers, Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - S van Dieren
- Department of Surgery, Amsterdam UMC location Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - G L Beets
- GROW School of Oncology and Developmental Biology, University of Maastricht, Maastricht, the Netherlands; Department of Surgery, Netherlands Cancer Institute, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - R G H Beets-Tan
- GROW School of Oncology and Developmental Biology, University of Maastricht, Maastricht, the Netherlands; Department of Radiology, Netherlands Cancer Institute, Amsterdam, the Netherlands; Department of Radiology, Department of Clinical Research, University of Southern Denmark, Odense University Hospital, Odense, Denmark
| | - W A A Borstlap
- Department of Surgery, Amsterdam UMC location Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, Amsterdam, the Netherlands; Treatment and Quality of Life and Imaging and Biomarkers, Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - J W A Burger
- Department of Surgery, Catharina Hospital, Eindhoven, the Netherlands
| | - K Horsthuis
- Department of Radiology, Amsterdam UMC location Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - M P W Intven
- Department of Radiotherapy, Division Imaging and Oncology, University Medical Centre Utrecht, the Netherlands
| | - A G J Aalbers
- Department of Surgery, Netherlands Cancer Institute, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - K Havenga
- Department of Surgery, University Medical Center Groningen, University of Groningen, Groningen, the Netherlands
| | - A W K S Marinelli
- Department of Surgery, Haaglanden Medisch Centrum, Den Haag, the Netherlands
| | - J Melenhorst
- GROW School of Oncology and Developmental Biology, University of Maastricht, Maastricht, the Netherlands; Department of Surgery and Colorectal Surgery, Maastricht University Medical Centre, Maastricht, the Netherlands
| | - J Nederend
- Department of Radiology, Catharina Hospital, Eindhoven, the Netherlands
| | - H M U Peulen
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Catharina Hospital, Eindhoven, the Netherlands
| | - H J T Rutten
- Department of Surgery, Catharina Hospital, Eindhoven, the Netherlands
| | - W H Schreurs
- Department of Surgery, Nothwest Clinics, Alkmaar, the Netherlands
| | - J B Tuynman
- Department of Surgery, Amsterdam UMC location Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, Amsterdam, the Netherlands; Treatment and Quality of Life and Imaging and Biomarkers, Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - C Verhoef
- Department of Surgical Oncology and Gastrointestinal Surgery, Erasmus MC Cancer Institute, Rotterdam, the Netherlands
| | - J H W de Wilt
- Department of Surgery, Radboud University Medical Center, Nijmegen, the Netherlands
| | - C A M Marijnen
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Netherlands Cancer Institute, Amsterdam, the Netherlands; Department of Radiation Oncology, Leiden University Medical Centre, Leiden, the Netherlands
| | - P J Tanis
- Department of Surgical Oncology and Gastrointestinal Surgery, Erasmus MC Cancer Institute, Rotterdam, the Netherlands; Department of Surgery, Amsterdam UMC location University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - M Kusters
- Treatment and Quality of Life and Imaging and Biomarkers, Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam, the Netherlands; Department of Surgery, Amsterdam UMC location University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, the Netherlands.
| | | |
Collapse
|
4
|
Spiekerman van Weezelenburg MA, Daemen JHT, van Kuijk SMJ, van Haaren ERM, Janssen A, Vissers YLJ, Beets GL, van Bastelaar J. Seroma formation after mastectomy: A systematic review and network meta-analysis of different flap fixation techniques. J Surg Oncol 2024; 129:1015-1024. [PMID: 38247263 DOI: 10.1002/jso.27589] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 10/16/2023] [Accepted: 12/13/2023] [Indexed: 01/23/2024]
Abstract
Flap fixation is the most promising solution to prevent seroma formation after mastectomy. In this systematic review with network meta-analysis (NMA), three different techniques were compared. The NMA included 25 articles, comprising 3423 patients, and revealed that sutures are superior to tissue glue in preventing clinically significant seroma. In addition, running sutures seemed to be superior to interrupted sutures. An RCT comparing these suture techniques seems necessary, given the quality and nature of existing literature.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
| | - Jean H T Daemen
- Department of Surgery, Zuyderland Medical Centre, Sittard-Geleen, The Netherlands
| | - Sander M J van Kuijk
- Department of Clinical Epidemiology and Medical Technology Assessment, Maastricht University Medical Centre, Maastricht, The Netherlands
| | | | - Alfred Janssen
- Department of Surgery, Zuyderland Medical Centre, Sittard-Geleen, The Netherlands
| | - Yvonne L J Vissers
- Department of Surgery, Zuyderland Medical Centre, Sittard-Geleen, The Netherlands
| | - Geerard L Beets
- Department of Surgery, Netherlands Cancer Institute, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
- GROW School for Oncology and Developmental Biology, University of Maastricht, Maastricht, The Netherlands
| | - James van Bastelaar
- Department of Surgery, Zuyderland Medical Centre, Sittard-Geleen, The Netherlands
| |
Collapse
|
5
|
Beets NRA, Verheij FS, Williams H, Omer DM, Lin ST, Qin LX, Beets GL, Beets-Tan RGH, Wei IH, Widmar M, Pappou EP, Weiser MR, Nash GM, Smith JJ, Paty PB, Miranda J, Kim TH, Gollub MJ, Garcia-Aguilar J. Association of Lateral Pelvic Lymph Nodes with Disease Recurrence and Organ Preservation in Patients with Distal Rectal Adenocarcinoma Treated with Total Neoadjuvant Therapy. Ann Surg 2024:00000658-990000000-00850. [PMID: 38647132 DOI: 10.1097/sla.0000000000006305] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 04/25/2024]
Abstract
OBJECTIVE Assess the significance of enlarged lateral lymph nodes (LLN) for disease recurrence, metastasis, and organ preservation in patients with rectal cancer. BACKGROUND Optimal treatment of rectal adenocarcinoma involving LLN is subject to debate. METHODS A post hoc analysis of the OPRA trial, a multicenter study of patients with rectal cancer treated with total neoadjuvant therapy (TNT) followed by total mesorectal excision or watch-and-wait management. We analyzed the association of visible LLN (LLN+), LLN≥7 mm (short axis) on baseline MRI, and LLN≥4 mm on restaging MRI with recurrence, metastasis, and rectum preservation. RESULTS At baseline, 57 out of 324 (18%) patients had LLN+. In 30 (53%) of 57 patients with LLN+ on baseline MRI, the LLN disappeared after TNT. Disease recurrence in LLN was rare (3.5% of patients with LLN+ and 0.4% of patients with LLN-). All patients with recurrence in LLN also had distant metastasis. The rate of organ preservation was significantly lower in patients with LLN≥4 mm on restaging MRI (P=0.013). We found no significant differences in rates of local recurrence or metastasis between patients with LLN+ vs. LLN- and in patients with LLN≥7 vs.<7 mm on baseline MRI. LLN dissection was performed in 3 patients; 2 of them died of distant metastasis. CONCLUSIONS LLN involvement is not associated with disease recurrence or metastasis, but persistence of LLN≥4 mm after TNT is negatively associated with rectum preservation in patients with locally advanced rectal cancer treated with TNT. Dissection of lateral nodes likely benefits few patients.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Nathalie R A Beets
- From the Department of Surgery, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY
| | - Floris S Verheij
- From the Department of Surgery, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY
| | - Hannah Williams
- From the Department of Surgery, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY
| | - Dana M Omer
- From the Department of Surgery, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY
| | - Sabrina T Lin
- Department of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY
| | - Li-Xuan Qin
- Department of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY
| | - Geerard L Beets
- Netherlands Cancer Institute, Amsterdam, and Maastricht University, Maastricht, The Netherlands
| | - Regina G H Beets-Tan
- Netherlands Cancer Institute, Amsterdam, and Maastricht University, Maastricht, The Netherlands
| | - Iris H Wei
- From the Department of Surgery, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY
| | - Maria Widmar
- From the Department of Surgery, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY
| | - Emmanouil P Pappou
- From the Department of Surgery, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY
| | - Martin R Weiser
- From the Department of Surgery, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY
| | - Garrett M Nash
- From the Department of Surgery, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY
| | - J Joshua Smith
- From the Department of Surgery, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY
| | - Philip B Paty
- From the Department of Surgery, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY
| | - Joao Miranda
- Department of Radiology, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY
| | - Tae-Hyung Kim
- Department of Radiology, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY
| | - Marc J Gollub
- Department of Radiology, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY
| | - Julio Garcia-Aguilar
- From the Department of Surgery, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY
| |
Collapse
|
6
|
Spiekerman van Weezelenburg MA, de Rooij L, Aldenhoven L, van Kuijk SMJ, van Haaren ERM, Janssen A, Vissers YLJ, Beets GL, van Bastelaar J. Drain-free mastectomy and flap fixation: The interim analysis of a randomized controlled noninferiority trial. J Surg Oncol 2024; 129:975-980. [PMID: 38173366 DOI: 10.1002/jso.27577] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 10/15/2023] [Accepted: 12/13/2023] [Indexed: 01/05/2024]
Abstract
INTRODUCTION Flap fixation after mastectomy has proven to be one of the most promising solutions to reduce seroma formation. Drain placement remains standard practice in many clinics, even though this may be redundant after flap fixation. METHODS This is a prospective randomized controlled trial comparing mastectomy and wound closure using flap fixation with or without drain placement. The primary outcome measure was clinically significant seroma (CSS) incidence. The aim of this interim analysis was to assess the assumptions for the sample size calculation and to provide preliminary results. RESULTS Between July 2020 and January 2023, 112 patients were included. CSS incidence was 9.1% in the drain group and 21% in the no-drain group. In total, 10 patients were lost to follow-up. These numbers are similar to the ones used for the sample size calculation. In the drain group, three patients required interventions for wound complications compared to nine in the no-drain group (odds ratio: 3.612 [95% confidence interval: 0.898-14.537]). CONCLUSION The sample size calculation seems to be correct and no protocol amendments are necessary. Current preliminary results show no significant differences in CSS incidence. Complete results should be awaited to draw a well-powered conclusion regarding drain policy after mastectomy.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
| | - Lisa de Rooij
- Department of Surgery, Zuyderland Medical Centre, Sittard, Limburg, the Netherlands
| | - Loeki Aldenhoven
- Department of Surgery, Zuyderland Medical Centre, Sittard, Limburg, the Netherlands
| | - Sander M J van Kuijk
- Department of Clinical Epidemiology and Medical Technology Assessment, Maastricht University Medical Centre, Maastricht, the Netherlands
| | | | - Alfred Janssen
- Department of Surgery, Zuyderland Medical Centre, Sittard, Limburg, the Netherlands
| | - Yvonne L J Vissers
- Department of Surgery, Zuyderland Medical Centre, Sittard, Limburg, the Netherlands
| | - Geerard L Beets
- Department of Surgery, Netherlands Cancer Institute, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
- GROW School for Oncology and Developmental Biology, University of Maastricht, Maastricht, the Netherlands
| | - James van Bastelaar
- Department of Surgery, Zuyderland Medical Centre, Sittard, Limburg, the Netherlands
| |
Collapse
|
7
|
Mirnezami AH, Drami I, Glyn T, Sutton PA, Tiernan J, Behrenbruch C, Guerra G, Waters PS, Woodward N, Applin S, Charles SJ, Rose SA, Denys A, Pape E, van Ramshorst GH, Baker D, Bignall E, Blair I, Davis P, Edwards T, Jackson K, Leendertse PG, Love-Mott E, MacKenzie L, Martens F, Meredith D, Nettleton SE, Trotman MP, van Hecke JJM, Weemaes AMJ, Abecasis N, Angenete E, Aziz O, Bacalbasa N, Barton D, Baseckas G, Beggs A, Brown K, Buchwald P, Burling D, Burns E, Caycedo-Marulanda A, Chang GJ, Coyne PE, Croner RS, Daniels IR, Denost QD, Drozdov E, Eglinton T, Espín-Basany E, Evans MD, Flatmark K, Folkesson J, Frizelle FA, Gallego MA, Gil-Moreno A, Goffredo P, Griffiths B, Gwenaël F, Harris DA, Iversen LH, Kandaswamy GV, Kazi M, Kelly ME, Kokelaar R, Kusters M, Langheinrich MC, Larach T, Lydrup ML, Lyons A, Mann C, McDermott FD, Monson JRT, Neeff H, Negoi I, Ng JL, Nicolaou M, Palmer G, Parnaby C, Pellino G, Peterson AC, Quyn A, Rogers A, Rothbarth J, Abu Saadeh F, Saklani A, Sammour T, Sayyed R, Smart NJ, Smith T, Sorrentino L, Steele SR, Stitzenberg K, Taylor C, Teras J, Thanapal MR, Thorgersen E, Vasquez-Jimenez W, Waller J, Weber K, Wolthuis A, Winter DC, Brangan G, Vimalachandran D, Aalbers AGJ, Abdul Aziz N, Abraham-Nordling M, Akiyoshi T, Alahmadi R, Alberda W, Albert M, Andric M, Angeles M, Antoniou A, Armitage J, Auer R, Austin KK, Aytac E, Baker RP, Bali M, Baransi S, Bebington B, Bedford M, Bednarski BK, Beets GL, Berg PL, Bergzoll C, Biondo S, Boyle K, Bordeianou L, Brecelj E, Bremers AB, Brunner M, Bui A, Burgess A, Burger JWA, Campain N, Carvalhal S, Castro L, Ceelen W, Chan KKL, Chew MH, Chok AK, Chong P, Christensen HK, Clouston H, Collins D, Colquhoun AJ, Constantinides J, Corr A, Coscia M, Cosimelli M, Cotsoglou C, Damjanovic L, Davies M, Davies RJ, Delaney CP, de Wilt JHW, Deutsch C, Dietz D, Domingo S, Dozois EJ, Duff M, Egger E, Enrique-Navascues JM, Espín-Basany E, Eyjólfsdóttir B, Fahy M, Fearnhead NS, Fichtner-Feigl S, Fleming F, Flor B, Foskett K, Funder J, García-Granero E, García-Sabrido JL, Gargiulo M, Gava VG, Gentilini L, George ML, George V, Georgiou P, Ghosh A, Ghouti L, Giner F, Ginther N, Glover T, Golda T, Gomez CM, Harris C, Hagemans JAW, Hanchanale V, Harji DP, Helbren C, Helewa RM, Hellawell G, Heriot AG, Hochman D, Hohenberger W, Holm T, Holmström A, Hompes R, Hornung B, Hurton S, Hyun E, Ito M, Jenkins JT, Jourand K, Kaffenberger S, Kapur S, Kanemitsu Y, Kaufman M, Kelley SR, Keller DS, Kersting S, Ketelaers SHJ, Khan MS, Khaw J, Kim H, Kim HJ, Kiran R, Koh CE, Kok NFM, Kontovounisios C, Kose F, Koutra M, Kraft M, Kristensen HØ, Kumar S, Lago V, Lakkis Z, Lampe B, Larsen SG, Larson DW, Law WL, Laurberg S, Lee PJ, Limbert M, Loria A, Lynch AC, Mackintosh M, Mantyh C, Mathis KL, Margues CFS, Martinez A, Martling A, Meijerink WJHJ, Merchea A, Merkel S, Mehta AM, McArthur DR, McCormick JJ, McGrath JS, McPhee A, Maciel J, Malde S, Manfredelli S, Mikalauskas S, Modest D, Morton JR, Mullaney TG, Navarro AS, Neto JWM, Nguyen B, Nielsen MB, Nieuwenhuijzen GAP, Nilsson PJ, Nordkamp S, O’Dwyer ST, Paarnio K, Pappou E, Park J, Patsouras D, Peacock O, Pfeffer F, Piqeur F, Pinson J, Poggioli G, Proud D, Quinn M, Oliver A, Radwan RW, Rajendran N, Rao C, Rasheed S, Rasmussen PC, Rausa E, Regenbogen SE, Reims HM, Renehan A, Rintala J, Rocha R, Rochester M, Rohila J, Rottoli M, Roxburgh C, Rutten HJT, Safar B, Sagar PM, Sahai A, Schizas AMP, Schwarzkopf E, Scripcariu D, Scripcariu V, Seifert G, Selvasekar C, Shaban M, Shaikh I, Shida D, Simpson A, Skeie-Jensen T, Smart P, Smith JJ, Solbakken AM, Solomon MJ, Sørensen MM, Spasojevic M, Steffens D, Stocchi L, Stylianides NA, Swartling T, Sumrien H, Swartking T, Takala H, Tan EJ, Taylor D, Tejedor P, Tekin A, Tekkis PP, Thaysen HV, Thurairaja R, Toh EL, Tsarkov P, Tolenaar J, Tsukada Y, Tsukamoto S, Tuech JJ, Turner G, Turner WH, Tuynman JB, Valente M, van Rees J, van Zoggel D, Vásquez-Jiménez W, Verhoef C, Vierimaa M, Vizzielli G, Voogt ELK, Uehara K, Wakeman C, Warrier S, Wasmuth HH, Weiser MR, Westney OL, Wheeler JMD, Wild J, Wilson M, Yano H, Yip B, Yip J, Yoo RN, Zappa MA. The empty pelvis syndrome: a core data set from the PelvEx collaborative. Br J Surg 2024; 111:znae042. [PMID: 38456677 PMCID: PMC10921833 DOI: 10.1093/bjs/znae042] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 12/13/2023] [Accepted: 01/15/2024] [Indexed: 03/09/2024]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Empty pelvis syndrome (EPS) is a significant source of morbidity following pelvic exenteration (PE), but is undefined. EPS outcome reporting and descriptors of radicality of PE are inconsistent; therefore, the best approaches for prevention are unknown. To facilitate future research into EPS, the aim of this study is to define a measurable core outcome set, core descriptor set and written definition for EPS. Consensus on strategies to mitigate EPS was also explored. METHOD Three-stage consensus methodology was used: longlisting with systematic review, healthcare professional event, patient engagement, and Delphi-piloting; shortlisting with two rounds of modified Delphi; and a confirmatory stage using a modified nominal group technique. This included a selection of measurement instruments, and iterative generation of a written EPS definition. RESULTS One hundred and three and 119 participants took part in the modified Delphi and consensus meetings, respectively. This encompassed international patient and healthcare professional representation with multidisciplinary input. Seventy statements were longlisted, seven core outcomes (bowel obstruction, enteroperineal fistula, chronic perineal sinus, infected pelvic collection, bowel obstruction, morbidity from reconstruction, re-intervention, and quality of life), and four core descriptors (magnitude of surgery, radiotherapy-induced damage, methods of reconstruction, and changes in volume of pelvic dead space) reached consensus-where applicable, measurement of these outcomes and descriptors was defined. A written definition for EPS was agreed. CONCLUSIONS EPS is an area of unmet research and clinical need. This study provides an agreed definition and core data set for EPS to facilitate further research.
Collapse
|
8
|
El Khababi N, Beets-Tan RGH, Tissier R, Lahaye MJ, Maas M, Curvo-Semedo L, Dresen RC, van Griethuysen JJM, Nougaret S, Beets GL, van Triest B, Taylor SA, Lambregts DMJ. Outcomes and potential impact of a virtual hands-on training program on MRI staging confidence and performance in rectal cancer. Eur Radiol 2024; 34:1746-1754. [PMID: 37646807 PMCID: PMC10873460 DOI: 10.1007/s00330-023-10167-4] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 05/18/2023] [Revised: 06/27/2023] [Accepted: 07/16/2023] [Indexed: 09/01/2023]
Abstract
OBJECTIVES To explore the potential impact of a dedicated virtual training course on MRI staging confidence and performance in rectal cancer. METHODS Forty-two radiologists completed a stepwise virtual training course on rectal cancer MRI staging composed of a pre-course (baseline) test with 7 test cases (5 staging, 2 restaging), a 1-day online workshop, 1 month of individual case readings (n = 70 cases with online feedback), a live online feedback session supervised by two expert faculty members, and a post-course test. The ESGAR structured reporting templates for (re)staging were used throughout the course. Results of the pre-course and post-course test were compared in terms of group interobserver agreement (Krippendorf's alpha), staging confidence (perceived staging difficulty), and diagnostic accuracy (using an expert reference standard). RESULTS Though results were largely not statistically significant, the majority of staging variables showed a mild increase in diagnostic accuracy after the course, ranging between + 2% and + 17%. A similar trend was observed for IOA which improved for nearly all variables when comparing the pre- and post-course. There was a significant decrease in the perceived difficulty level (p = 0.03), indicating an improved diagnostic confidence after completion of the course. CONCLUSIONS Though exploratory in nature, our study results suggest that use of a dedicated virtual training course and web platform has potential to enhance staging performance, confidence, and interobserver agreement to assess rectal cancer on MRI virtual training and could thus be a good alternative (or addition) to in-person training. CLINICAL RELEVANCE STATEMENT Rectal cancer MRI reporting quality is highly dependent on radiologists' expertise, stressing the need for dedicated training/teaching. This study shows promising results for a virtual web-based training program, which could be a good alternative (or addition) to in-person training. KEY POINTS • Rectal cancer MRI reporting quality is highly dependent on radiologists' expertise, stressing the need for dedicated training and teaching. • Using a dedicated virtual training course and web-based platform, encouraging first results were achieved to improve staging accuracy, diagnostic confidence, and interobserver agreement. • These exploratory results suggest that virtual training could thus be a good alternative (or addition) to in-person training.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Najim El Khababi
- Department of Radiology, The Netherlands Cancer Institute, P.O. Box 90203, 1106 BE, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
- GROW School for oncology and reproduction, University of Maastricht, Maastricht, The Netherlands
| | - Regina G H Beets-Tan
- Department of Radiology, The Netherlands Cancer Institute, P.O. Box 90203, 1106 BE, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
- GROW School for oncology and reproduction, University of Maastricht, Maastricht, The Netherlands
| | - Renaud Tissier
- Biostatistics Unit, The Netherlands Cancer Institute, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Max J Lahaye
- Department of Radiology, The Netherlands Cancer Institute, P.O. Box 90203, 1106 BE, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
- GROW School for oncology and reproduction, University of Maastricht, Maastricht, The Netherlands
| | - Monique Maas
- Department of Radiology, The Netherlands Cancer Institute, P.O. Box 90203, 1106 BE, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
- GROW School for oncology and reproduction, University of Maastricht, Maastricht, The Netherlands
| | - Luís Curvo-Semedo
- Department of Radiology, Centro Hospitalar E Universitario de Coimbra EPE, Faculty of Medicine, University of Coimbra, Coimbra, Portugal
| | - Raphaëla C Dresen
- Department of Radiology, University Hospitals Leuven, Leuven, Belgium
| | - Joost J M van Griethuysen
- Department of Radiology, The Netherlands Cancer Institute, P.O. Box 90203, 1106 BE, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
- Department of Radiology, UMC Utrecht, Utrecht, The Netherlands
| | - Stephanie Nougaret
- Medical Imaging Department, Montpellier Cancer Institute, Montpellier Cancer Research Institute (U1194), University of Montpellier, Montpellier, France
| | - Geerard L Beets
- GROW School for oncology and reproduction, University of Maastricht, Maastricht, The Netherlands
- Department of Surgery, The Netherlands Cancer Institute, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Baukelien van Triest
- Department of Radiation Oncology, The Netherlands Cancer Institute, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Stuart A Taylor
- Department of Radiology, University College London Hospitals Biomedical Research Centre, London, UK
| | - Doenja M J Lambregts
- Department of Radiology, The Netherlands Cancer Institute, P.O. Box 90203, 1106 BE, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
- GROW School for oncology and reproduction, University of Maastricht, Maastricht, The Netherlands.
| |
Collapse
|
9
|
Spiekerman van Weezelenburg MA, Bakens MJAM, Daemen JHT, Aldenhoven L, van Haaren ERM, Janssen A, Vissers YLJ, Beets GL, van Bastelaar J. Prevention of Seroma Formation and Its Sequelae After Axillary Lymph Node Dissection: An Up-to-Date Systematic Review and Guideline for Surgeons. Ann Surg Oncol 2024; 31:1643-1652. [PMID: 38038792 DOI: 10.1245/s10434-023-14631-9] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 09/06/2023] [Accepted: 11/06/2023] [Indexed: 12/02/2023]
Abstract
INTRODUCTION Seroma formation after axillary lymph node dissection (ALND) remains a troublesome complication with significant morbidity. Numerous studies have tried to identify techniques to prevent seroma formation. The aim of this systematic review and network meta-analysis is to use available literature to identify the best intervention for prevention of seroma after standalone ALND. METHODS A literature search was performed for all comparative articles regarding seroma formation in patients undergoing a standalone ALND or ALND with breast-conserving surgery in the last 25 years. Data regarding seroma formation, clinically significant seroma (CSS), surgical site infections (SSI), and hematomas were collected. The network meta-analysis was performed using a random effects model and the level of inconsistency was evaluated using the Bucher method. RESULTS A total of 19 articles with 1962 patients were included. Ten different techniques to prevent seroma formation were described. When combining direct and indirect comparisons, axillary drainage until output is less than 50 ml per 24 h for two consecutive days results in significantly less CSS. The use of energy sealing devices, padding, tissue glue, or patches did not significantly reduce the incidence of CSS. When comparing the different techniques with regard to SSIs, no statistically significant differences were seen. CONCLUSIONS To prevent CSS after ALND, axillary drainage is the most valuable and scientifically proven measure. On the basis of the results of this systematic review with network meta-analysis, removing the drain when output is < 50 ml per 24 h for two consecutive days irrespective of duration seems best. Since drainage policies vary widely, an evidence-based guideline is needed.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
| | - Maikel J A M Bakens
- Department of Surgery, Zuyderland Medical Centre, Sittard-Geleen, The Netherlands
| | - Jean H T Daemen
- Department of Surgery, Zuyderland Medical Centre, Sittard-Geleen, The Netherlands
| | - Loeki Aldenhoven
- Department of Surgery, Zuyderland Medical Centre, Sittard-Geleen, The Netherlands
| | | | - Alfred Janssen
- Department of Surgery, Zuyderland Medical Centre, Sittard-Geleen, The Netherlands
| | - Yvonne L J Vissers
- Department of Surgery, Zuyderland Medical Centre, Sittard-Geleen, The Netherlands
| | - Geerard L Beets
- Department of Surgery, Netherlands Cancer Institute, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
- GROW School for Oncology and Developmental Biology, University of Maastricht, Maastricht, The Netherlands
| | - James van Bastelaar
- Department of Surgery, Zuyderland Medical Centre, Sittard-Geleen, The Netherlands
| |
Collapse
|
10
|
Willemse JRJ, Lahaye MJ, Kok NFM, Grotenhuis BA, Aalbers AGJ, Beets GL, Rijsemus C, Maas M, van Golen LW, Beets-Tan RGH, Lambregts DMJ. Whole-body MRI with diffusion-weighted imaging as an adjunct to 18 F-fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography and CT in patients with suspected recurrent colorectal cancer. Colorectal Dis 2024; 26:290-299. [PMID: 38145899 DOI: 10.1111/codi.16840] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 08/31/2023] [Revised: 11/14/2023] [Accepted: 11/20/2023] [Indexed: 12/27/2023]
Abstract
AIM The aim was to explore how findings of whole-body MRI including diffusion-weighted imaging (DW-MRI) compared to the routine diagnostic workup with CT and/or 18 F-fluorodeoxyglucose (FDG) positron emission tomography (PET)/CT in patients with suspected recurrent colorectal cancer (CRC). METHOD This was an exploratory retrospective analysis of 55 patients with a clinical suspicion of recurrent CRC who underwent DW-MRI following CT and/or FDG-PET/CT. Two readers in consensus interpreted all clinical imaging reports and converted each described lesion into a confidence score (1 = definitely benign to 5 = definitely malignant). DW-MRI findings were compared to the most recent previous CT or PET/CT. Any discrepant or additional DW-MRI findings were documented and compared with histology and/or clinical follow-up (if available). RESULTS Whole-body MRI including diffusion-weighted imaging (DW-MRI) resulted in discrepant/additional findings in 26/55 (47%) cases; 23/37 (62%) compared to previous CT and 3/18 (17%) compared to previous PET/CT. These included 10 cases where DW-MRI converted previously inconclusive CT (n = 8) or PET/CT (n = 2) findings into a conclusive diagnosis, one where it contradicted a previous CT diagnosis of recurrence, five where DW-MRI diagnosed recurrent disease not previously reported on CT and 10 cases where DW-MRI detected additional lesions compared to CT (n = 9) or PET/CT (n = 1). Eighty-eight per cent of cases with discrepant/additional findings concerned patients with recurrent/metachronous peritoneal metastases. In total, DW-MRI resulted in 42 discrepant/additional lesions; the DW-MRI diagnosis was correct in 76% of these lesions and incorrect (false positive) in 7%. In the remaining 17%, no standard of reference was available. CONCLUSIONS This explorative study suggests that DW-MRI may be of added value to patients with a clinical suspicion for recurrent CRC, in particular to identify patients with peritoneal metastases. DW-MRI mainly has potential as a 'problem-solver' in patients with inconclusive or negative findings on previous imaging (in particular CT) and to detect additional disease sites in patients already diagnosed with recurrent disease.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Jeroen R J Willemse
- Department of Radiology, Netherlands Cancer Institute, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
- GROW School for Oncology and Reproduction, Maastricht University, Maastricht, The Netherlands
| | - Max J Lahaye
- Department of Radiology, Netherlands Cancer Institute, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
- GROW School for Oncology and Reproduction, Maastricht University, Maastricht, The Netherlands
| | - Niels F M Kok
- Department of Surgical Oncology, Netherlands Cancer Institute, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Brechtje A Grotenhuis
- Department of Surgical Oncology, Netherlands Cancer Institute, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Arend G J Aalbers
- Department of Surgical Oncology, Netherlands Cancer Institute, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Geerard L Beets
- GROW School for Oncology and Reproduction, Maastricht University, Maastricht, The Netherlands
- Department of Surgical Oncology, Netherlands Cancer Institute, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Charlotte Rijsemus
- Department of Radiology, Netherlands Cancer Institute, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
- GROW School for Oncology and Reproduction, Maastricht University, Maastricht, The Netherlands
- Department of Surgical Oncology, Netherlands Cancer Institute, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Monique Maas
- Department of Radiology, Netherlands Cancer Institute, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
- GROW School for Oncology and Reproduction, Maastricht University, Maastricht, The Netherlands
| | - Larissa W van Golen
- Department of Nuclear Medicine, Netherlands Cancer Institute, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Regina G H Beets-Tan
- Department of Radiology, Netherlands Cancer Institute, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
- GROW School for Oncology and Reproduction, Maastricht University, Maastricht, The Netherlands
| | - Doenja M J Lambregts
- Department of Radiology, Netherlands Cancer Institute, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
- GROW School for Oncology and Reproduction, Maastricht University, Maastricht, The Netherlands
| |
Collapse
|
11
|
Hazen SMJA, Sluckin TC, Intven MPW, Beets GL, Beets-Tan RGH, Borstlap WAA, Buffart TE, Buijsen J, Burger JWA, van Dieren S, Furnée EJB, Geijsen ED, Hompes R, Horsthuis K, Leijtens JWA, Maas M, Melenhorst J, Nederend J, Peeters KCMJ, Rozema T, Tuynman JB, Verhoef C, de Vries M, van Westreenen HL, de Wilt JH, Zimmerman DDE, Marijnen CAM, Tanis PJ, Kusters M. Abandonment of Routine Radiotherapy for Nonlocally Advanced Rectal Cancer and Oncological Outcomes. JAMA Oncol 2024; 10:202-211. [PMID: 38127337 PMCID: PMC10739079 DOI: 10.1001/jamaoncol.2023.5444] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 06/06/2023] [Accepted: 08/30/2023] [Indexed: 12/23/2023]
Abstract
Importance Neoadjuvant short-course radiotherapy was routinely applied for nonlocally advanced rectal cancer (cT1-3N0-1M0 with >1 mm distance to the mesorectal fascia) in the Netherlands following the Dutch total mesorectal excision trial. This policy has shifted toward selective application after guideline revision in 2014. Objective To determine the association of decreased use of neoadjuvant radiotherapy with cancer-related outcomes and overall survival at a national level. Design, Setting, and Participants This multicenter, population-based, nationwide cross-sectional cohort study analyzed Dutch patients with rectal cancer who were treated in 2011 with a 4-year follow-up. A similar study was performed in 2021, analyzing all patients that were surgically treated in 2016. From these cohorts, all patients with cT1-3N0-1M0 rectal cancer and radiologically unthreatened mesorectal fascia were included in the current study. The data of the 2011 cohort were collected between May and October 2015, and the data of the 2016 cohort were collected between October 2020 and November 2021. The data were analyzed between May and October 2022. Main Outcomes and Measures The main outcomes were 4-year local recurrence and overall survival rates. Results Among the 2011 and 2016 cohorts, 1199 (mean [SD] age, 68 [11] years; 430 women [36%]) of 2095 patients (57.2%) and 1576 (mean [SD] age, 68 [10] years; 547 women [35%]) of 3057 patients (51.6%) had cT1-3N0-1M0 rectal cancer and were included, with proportions of neoadjuvant radiotherapy of 87% (2011) and 37% (2016). Four-year local recurrence rates were 5.8% and 5.5%, respectively (P = .99). Compared with the 2011 cohort, 4-year overall survival was significantly higher in the 2016 cohort (79.6% vs 86.4%; P < .001), with lower non-cancer-related mortality (13.8% vs 6.3%; P < .001). Conclusions and Relevance The results of this cross-sectional study suggest that an absolute 50% reduction in radiotherapy use for nonlocally advanced rectal cancer did not compromise cancer-related outcomes at a national level. Optimizing clinical staging and surgery following the Dutch total mesorectal excision trial has potentially enabled safe deintensification of treatment.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Sanne-Marije J. A. Hazen
- Amsterdam UMC location Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, Surgery, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
- Department of Treatment and Quality of Life, Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
- Department of Imaging and Biomarkers, Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - Tania C. Sluckin
- Amsterdam UMC location Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, Surgery, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
- Department of Treatment and Quality of Life, Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
- Department of Imaging and Biomarkers, Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - Martijn P. W. Intven
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht, the Netherlands
| | - Geerard L. Beets
- Department of Surgery, the Netherlands Cancer Institute, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
- GROW School of Oncology and Developmental Biology, University of Maastricht, Maastricht, the Netherlands
| | - Regina G. H. Beets-Tan
- GROW School of Oncology and Developmental Biology, University of Maastricht, Maastricht, the Netherlands
- Department of Radiology, the Netherlands Cancer Institute, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - Wernard A. A. Borstlap
- Department of Surgery, Amsterdam UMC location of the University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - Tineke E. Buffart
- Department of Treatment and Quality of Life, Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
- Department of Medical Oncology, Amsterdam UMC location Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, De Boelelaan 1117, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - Jeroen Buijsen
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Maastricht University Medical Centre, Maastricht, the Netherlands
- Department of Radiation Oncology (Maastro), GROW School for Oncology, Maastricht University Medical Centre, Maastricht, the Netherlands
| | | | - Susan van Dieren
- Department of Treatment and Quality of Life, Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
- Department of Surgery and Clinical Epidemiology, Amsterdam UMC location University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - Edgar J. B. Furnée
- Department of Surgery, University Medical Centre Groningen, Groningen, the Netherlands
| | - E. Debby Geijsen
- Department of Treatment and Quality of Life, Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Amsterdam UMC location of the University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - Roel Hompes
- Department of Treatment and Quality of Life, Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
- Department of Surgery, Amsterdam UMC location of the University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - Karin Horsthuis
- Department of Imaging and Biomarkers, Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
- Department of Radiology, Amsterdam UMC location of Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | | | - Monique Maas
- Department of Radiology, the Netherlands Cancer Institute, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - Jarno Melenhorst
- GROW School of Oncology and Developmental Biology, University of Maastricht, Maastricht, the Netherlands
- Department of Surgery, Maastricht University Medical Centre, Maastricht, the Netherlands
| | - Joost Nederend
- Department of Radiology, Catharina Hospital Eindhoven, Eindhoven, the Netherlands
| | | | - Tom Rozema
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Verbeeten Institute, Tilburg, the Netherlands
| | - Jurriaan B. Tuynman
- Amsterdam UMC location Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, Surgery, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
- Department of Treatment and Quality of Life, Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
- Department of Imaging and Biomarkers, Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - Cornelis Verhoef
- Department of Surgical Oncology and Gastrointestinal Surgery, Erasmus Medical Center, Rotterdam, the Netherlands
| | - Marianne de Vries
- Department of Radiology, Erasmus Medical Center, Rotterdam, the Netherlands
| | | | - Johannes H.W. de Wilt
- Department of Surgery, Radboud University Medical Centre, Radboud Institute for Health Sciences, Nijmegen, the Netherlands
| | | | - Corrie A. M. Marijnen
- Department of Radiation Oncology, the Netherlands Cancer Institute, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, the Netherlands
| | - Pieter J. Tanis
- Department of Treatment and Quality of Life, Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
- Department of Imaging and Biomarkers, Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
- Department of Surgery, Amsterdam UMC location of the University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
- Department of Surgical Oncology and Gastrointestinal Surgery, Erasmus Medical Center, Rotterdam, the Netherlands
| | - Miranda Kusters
- Amsterdam UMC location Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, Surgery, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
- Department of Treatment and Quality of Life, Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
- Department of Imaging and Biomarkers, Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| |
Collapse
|
12
|
Cai L, Lambregts DMJ, Beets GL, Mass M, Pooch EHP, Guérendel C, Beets-Tan RGH, Benson S. An automated deep learning pipeline for EMVI classification and response prediction of rectal cancer using baseline MRI: a multi-centre study. NPJ Precis Oncol 2024; 8:17. [PMID: 38253770 PMCID: PMC10803303 DOI: 10.1038/s41698-024-00516-x] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 08/16/2023] [Accepted: 12/14/2023] [Indexed: 01/24/2024] Open
Abstract
The classification of extramural vascular invasion status using baseline magnetic resonance imaging in rectal cancer has gained significant attention as it is an important prognostic marker. Also, the accurate prediction of patients achieving complete response with primary staging MRI assists clinicians in determining subsequent treatment plans. Most studies utilised radiomics-based methods, requiring manually annotated segmentation and handcrafted features, which tend to generalise poorly. We retrospectively collected 509 patients from 9 centres, and proposed a fully automated pipeline for EMVI status classification and CR prediction with diffusion weighted imaging and T2-weighted imaging. We applied nnUNet, a self-configuring deep learning model, for tumour segmentation and employed learned multiple-level image features to train classification models, named MLNet. This ensures a more comprehensive representation of the tumour features, in terms of both fine-grained detail and global context. On external validation, MLNet, yielding similar AUCs as internal validation, outperformed 3D ResNet10, a deep neural network with ten layers designed for analysing spatiotemporal data, in both CR and EMVI tasks. For CR prediction, MLNet showed better results than the current state-of-the-art model using imaging and clinical features in the same external cohort. Our study demonstrated that incorporating multi-level image representations learned by a deep learning based tumour segmentation model on primary MRI improves the results of EMVI classification and CR prediction with good generalisation to external data. We observed variations in the contributions of individual feature maps to different classification tasks. This pipeline has the potential to be applied in clinical settings, particularly for EMVI classification.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Lishan Cai
- Department of Radiology, The Netherlands Cancer Institute, Plesmanlaan 121, 1066 CX, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
- GROW School for Oncology and Developmental Biology, Maastricht University Medical Centre, P. Debyelaan 25, 66202 AZ, Maastricht, The Netherlands
| | - Doenja M J Lambregts
- Department of Radiology, The Netherlands Cancer Institute, Plesmanlaan 121, 1066 CX, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
- GROW School for Oncology and Developmental Biology, Maastricht University Medical Centre, P. Debyelaan 25, 66202 AZ, Maastricht, The Netherlands
| | - Geerard L Beets
- GROW School for Oncology and Developmental Biology, Maastricht University Medical Centre, P. Debyelaan 25, 66202 AZ, Maastricht, The Netherlands
- Department of Surgery, The Netherlands Cancer Institute, Plesmanlaan 121, 1066 CX, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Monique Mass
- Department of Radiology, The Netherlands Cancer Institute, Plesmanlaan 121, 1066 CX, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
- GROW School for Oncology and Developmental Biology, Maastricht University Medical Centre, P. Debyelaan 25, 66202 AZ, Maastricht, The Netherlands
| | - Eduardo H P Pooch
- Department of Radiology, The Netherlands Cancer Institute, Plesmanlaan 121, 1066 CX, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
- GROW School for Oncology and Developmental Biology, Maastricht University Medical Centre, P. Debyelaan 25, 66202 AZ, Maastricht, The Netherlands
| | - Corentin Guérendel
- Department of Radiology, The Netherlands Cancer Institute, Plesmanlaan 121, 1066 CX, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
- GROW School for Oncology and Developmental Biology, Maastricht University Medical Centre, P. Debyelaan 25, 66202 AZ, Maastricht, The Netherlands
| | - Regina G H Beets-Tan
- Department of Radiology, The Netherlands Cancer Institute, Plesmanlaan 121, 1066 CX, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
- GROW School for Oncology and Developmental Biology, Maastricht University Medical Centre, P. Debyelaan 25, 66202 AZ, Maastricht, The Netherlands
| | - Sean Benson
- Department of Radiology, The Netherlands Cancer Institute, Plesmanlaan 121, 1066 CX, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
| |
Collapse
|
13
|
Verheij FS, Yuval JB, Kok NFM, Lin ST, Qin LX, Omer DM, Thompson HM, Wei IH, Widmar M, Pappou EP, Weiser MR, Nash GM, Smith JJ, Paty PB, Beets GL, Garcia-Aguilar J. Nonoperative management of the primary tumor in patients with unresectable stage IV colon cancer treated with systemic chemotherapy: Higher complication rates for left-sided colon tumors. Eur J Surg Oncol 2024; 50:107294. [PMID: 38039906 PMCID: PMC10841609 DOI: 10.1016/j.ejso.2023.107294] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 07/30/2023] [Revised: 11/02/2023] [Accepted: 11/17/2023] [Indexed: 12/03/2023]
Abstract
INTRODUCTION Treatment of the primary tumor in asymptomatic patients with unresectable colorectal metastases remains controversial. METHODS Data from patients with synchronous stage IV colon cancer and an untreated primary tumor who started treatment aimed at metastatic disease at a specialized cancer center between 2014 and 2018 were analyzed retrospectively. Main outcome was primary tumor-related complications comparing left-sided and right-sided colon cancer. A competing-risk regression model was used to identify predictors of complications. RESULTS Of 523 patients with metastatic colon cancer at presentation, 221 started treatment aimed at metastatic disease; these patients constituted the study cohort. The primary tumor was left-sided in 109 patients (49%) and right-sided in 112 patients (51%). In total, 46 patients (21%) developed a complication that required invasive intervention. Complications occurred more frequently in patients with left-sided tumors than in patients with right-sided tumors (29% vs 13%, P = 0.003). Eighteen patients (8%) underwent non-surgical intervention. Six patients (33%) failed non-surgical management and underwent surgery. Of 34 patients (15%) who underwent surgical intervention, 20 underwent an emergency colectomy and 14 underwent diversion with a permanent stoma. Overall, 10% of patients ended up with a permanent stoma. In competing-risk analysis, only left-sided primary tumor (hazard ratio 2.62; 95% CI 1.40-4.89; P = 0.003) was significantly associated with primary tumor-related complications requiring invasive intervention. CONCLUSIONS Patients with asymptomatic metastatic left-sided tumors have a higher risk for primary tumor-related complications than patients with right-sided tumors. Close monitoring and early surgical rescue should be considered for patients with left-sided colon cancer who are managed nonoperatively.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Floris S Verheij
- Department of Surgery, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA; Department of Surgical Oncology, Netherlands Cancer Institute, Amsterdam, the Netherlands; GROW School for Oncology and Reproduction, Maastricht University, Maastricht, the Netherlands
| | - Jonathan B Yuval
- Department of Surgery, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA
| | - Niels F M Kok
- Department of Surgical Oncology, Netherlands Cancer Institute, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - Sabrina T Lin
- Department of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA
| | - Li-Xuan Qin
- Department of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA
| | - Dana M Omer
- Department of Surgery, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA
| | - Hannah M Thompson
- Department of Surgery, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA
| | - Iris H Wei
- Department of Surgery, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA
| | - Maria Widmar
- Department of Surgery, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA
| | - Emmanouil P Pappou
- Department of Surgery, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA
| | - Martin R Weiser
- Department of Surgery, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA
| | - Garrett M Nash
- Department of Surgery, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA
| | - J Joshua Smith
- Department of Surgery, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA
| | - Philip B Paty
- Department of Surgery, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA
| | - Geerard L Beets
- Department of Surgical Oncology, Netherlands Cancer Institute, Amsterdam, the Netherlands; GROW School for Oncology and Reproduction, Maastricht University, Maastricht, the Netherlands
| | - Julio Garcia-Aguilar
- Department of Surgery, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA.
| |
Collapse
|
14
|
Geubels BM, van Triest B, Peters FP, Maas M, Beets GL, Marijnen CAM, Custers PA, Rutten HJT, Theuws JCM, Verrijssen ASE, Cnossen JS, Burger JWA, Grotenhuis BA. Optimisation of Organ Preservation treatment strategies in patients with rectal cancer with a good clinical response after neoadjuvant (chemo)radiotherapy: Additional contact X-ray brachytherapy versus eXtending the observation period and local excision (OPAXX) - protocol for two multicentre, parallel, single-arm, phase II studies. BMJ Open 2023; 13:e076866. [PMID: 38159950 PMCID: PMC10759064 DOI: 10.1136/bmjopen-2023-076866] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 06/19/2023] [Accepted: 12/05/2023] [Indexed: 01/03/2024] Open
Abstract
INTRODUCTION Standard treatment for patients with intermediate or locally advanced rectal cancer is (chemo)radiotherapy followed by total mesorectal excision (TME) surgery. In recent years, organ preservation aiming at improving quality of life has been explored. Patients with a complete clinical response to (chemo)radiotherapy can be managed safely with a watch-and-wait approach. However, the optimal organ-preserving treatment strategy for patients with a good, but not complete clinical response remains unclear. The aim of the OPAXX study is to determine the rate of organ preservation that can be achieved in patients with rectal cancer with a good clinical response after neoadjuvant (chemo)radiotherapy by additional local treatment options. METHODS AND ANALYSIS The OPAXX study is a Dutch multicentre study that investigates the efficacy of two additional local treatments aiming at organ preservation in patients with a good, but not complete response to neoadjuvant treatment (ie near-complete response or a small residual tumour mass <3 cm). The sample size will be 168 patients in total. Patients will be randomised (1:1) between two parallel single-arm phase II studies: study arm 1 involves additional contact X-ray brachytherapy (an intraluminal radiation boost), while in study arm 2 the observation period is extended followed by a second response evaluation and optional transanal local excision. The primary endpoint of the study is the rate of successful organ preservation at 1 year following randomisation. Secondary endpoints include toxicity, morbidity, oncological and functional outcomes at 1 and 2 years of follow-up. Finally, an observational cohort study for patients who are not eligible for randomisation is conducted. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION The trial protocol has been approved by the medical ethics committee of the Netherlands Cancer Institute (METC20.1276/M20PAX). Informed consent will be obtained from all participants. The trial results will be published in an international peer-reviewed journal. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER NCT05772923.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Barbara M Geubels
- Surgery, Netherlands Cancer Institute, Amsterdam, Netherlands
- Surgery, Catharina Hospital, Eindhoven, Netherlands
- GROW School for Oncology and Reproduction, Maastricht University, Maastricht, Netherlands
| | | | - Femke P Peters
- Radiation-Oncology, Netherlands Cancer Institute, Amsterdam, Netherlands
| | - Monique Maas
- Radiology, Netherlands Cancer Institute, Amsterdam, Netherlands
| | - Geerard L Beets
- Surgery, Netherlands Cancer Institute, Amsterdam, Netherlands
- GROW School for Oncology and Reproduction, Maastricht University, Maastricht, Netherlands
| | - Corrie A M Marijnen
- Radiation-Oncology, Netherlands Cancer Institute, Amsterdam, Netherlands
- Radiation-Oncology, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, Netherlands
| | - Petra A Custers
- Surgery, Netherlands Cancer Institute, Amsterdam, Netherlands
| | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Collapse
|
15
|
Pennings AJ, van der Velden BA, Kloft M, Kooreman LFS, Kleijnen JMP, Breukink SO, Beets GL, Grabsch HI, Melenhorst J. The Role of Nonmetastatic Lymph Nodes in the Survival of Colorectal Cancer: A Systematic Review. Ann Surg Open 2023; 4:e336. [PMID: 38144501 PMCID: PMC10735087 DOI: 10.1097/as9.0000000000000336] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 05/02/2023] [Accepted: 08/11/2023] [Indexed: 12/26/2023] Open
Abstract
Objective In this review, we aim to provide an overview of literature on lymph node (LN) histomorphological features and their relationship with the prognosis in colorectal cancer (CRC). Background Lymph nodes play a crucial role in the treatment and prognosis of CRC. The presence of LN metastases considerably worsens the prognosis in CRC patients. Literature has shown that the total number of LNs and the number negative LNs (LNnegs) has prognostic value in CRC patients. In esophageal carcinoma, LN size seems to be surrogate of the host antitumor response and a potentially clinically useful new prognostic biomarker for (y)pN0 esophageal carcinoma. Methods A comprehensive search was performed in Pubmed, Embase, Medline, CINAHL, and the Cochrane library in March 2021. The PRISMA guidelines were followed. Only studies focusing on histomorphological features and LN size and their relation to overall survival were selected. Results A total of 9 unique articles met all inclusion criteria and were therefore included in this systematic review. Six of these studies investigated HMF (eg, paracortical hyperplasia, germinal center predominance, and sinus histiocytosis) and 4 studies LNneg size and their relationship with overall survival. The presence of paracortical hyperplasia and an increased number of large LNnegs is related to a more favorable prognosis in CRC. Conclusion The results of this systematic review seem to support the hypothesis that there is a relationship between the host antitumor response reflected in different histomorphological reaction patterns visible in LNnegs and LNneg size related to survival in CRC patients.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Alexander J. Pennings
- From the Department of Surgery, Maastricht University Medical Center, Maastricht, the Netherlands
- GROW School for Oncology and Reproduction, Maastricht University, Maastricht, the Netherlands
| | - Brecht A. van der Velden
- NUTRIM, School for Nutrition and Translational Research in Metabolism, Maastricht University, Maastricht, the Netherlands
| | - Maximilian Kloft
- Department of Pathology, Maastricht University Medical Center, Maastricht, the Netherlands
- Department of Internal Medicine IV, Justus-Liebig-University, University Hospital Giessen and Marburg, Giessen, Germany
| | - Loes F. S. Kooreman
- GROW School for Oncology and Reproduction, Maastricht University, Maastricht, the Netherlands
- Department of Pathology, Maastricht University Medical Center, Maastricht, the Netherlands
| | - Jos M. P. Kleijnen
- Faculty of Health, Medicine and Life Sciences, Maastricht University, Maastricht, the Netherlands
| | - Stephanie O. Breukink
- From the Department of Surgery, Maastricht University Medical Center, Maastricht, the Netherlands
- GROW School for Oncology and Reproduction, Maastricht University, Maastricht, the Netherlands
- NUTRIM, School for Nutrition and Translational Research in Metabolism, Maastricht University, Maastricht, the Netherlands
| | - Geerard L. Beets
- GROW School for Oncology and Reproduction, Maastricht University, Maastricht, the Netherlands
- Department of Surgery, Netherlands Cancer Institute, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - Heike I. Grabsch
- GROW School for Oncology and Reproduction, Maastricht University, Maastricht, the Netherlands
- Department of Pathology, Maastricht University Medical Center, Maastricht, the Netherlands
- Pathology & Data Analytics, Leeds Institute of Research at St James’s, University of Leeds, Leeds, United Kingdom
| | - Jarno Melenhorst
- From the Department of Surgery, Maastricht University Medical Center, Maastricht, the Netherlands
- GROW School for Oncology and Reproduction, Maastricht University, Maastricht, the Netherlands
| |
Collapse
|
16
|
Schurink NW, van Kranen SR, van Griethuysen JJM, Roberti S, Snaebjornsson P, Bakers FCH, de Bie SH, Bosma GPT, Cappendijk VC, Geenen RWF, Neijenhuis PA, Peterson GM, Veeken CJ, Vliegen RFA, Peters FP, Bogveradze N, El Khababi N, Lahaye MJ, Maas M, Beets GL, Beets-Tan RGH, Lambregts DMJ. Development and multicenter validation of a multiparametric imaging model to predict treatment response in rectal cancer. Eur Radiol 2023; 33:8889-8898. [PMID: 37452176 PMCID: PMC10667134 DOI: 10.1007/s00330-023-09920-6] [Citation(s) in RCA: 2] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 07/18/2023]
Abstract
OBJECTIVES To develop and validate a multiparametric model to predict neoadjuvant treatment response in rectal cancer at baseline using a heterogeneous multicenter MRI dataset. METHODS Baseline staging MRIs (T2W (T2-weighted)-MRI, diffusion-weighted imaging (DWI) / apparent diffusion coefficient (ADC)) of 509 patients (9 centres) treated with neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy (CRT) were collected. Response was defined as (1) complete versus incomplete response, or (2) good (Mandard tumor regression grade (TRG) 1-2) versus poor response (TRG3-5). Prediction models were developed using combinations of the following variable groups: (1) Non-imaging: age/sex/tumor-location/tumor-morphology/CRT-surgery interval (2) Basic staging: cT-stage/cN-stage/mesorectal fascia involvement, derived from (2a) original staging reports, or (2b) expert re-evaluation (3) Advanced staging: variables from 2b combined with cTN-substaging/invasion depth/extramural vascular invasion/tumor length (4) Quantitative imaging: tumour volume + first-order histogram features (from T2W-MRI and DWI/ADC) Models were developed with data from 6 centers (n = 412) using logistic regression with the Least Absolute Shrinkage and Selector Operator (LASSO) feature selection, internally validated using repeated (n = 100) random hold-out validation, and externally validated using data from 3 centers (n = 97). RESULTS After external validation, the best model (including non-imaging and advanced staging variables) achieved an area under the curve of 0.60 (95%CI=0.48-0.72) to predict complete response and 0.65 (95%CI=0.53-0.76) to predict a good response. Quantitative variables did not improve model performance. Basic staging variables consistently achieved lower performance compared to advanced staging variables. CONCLUSIONS Overall model performance was moderate. Best results were obtained using advanced staging variables, highlighting the importance of good-quality staging according to current guidelines. Quantitative imaging features had no added value (in this heterogeneous dataset). CLINICAL RELEVANCE STATEMENT Predicting tumour response at baseline could aid in tailoring neoadjuvant therapies for rectal cancer. This study shows that image-based prediction models are promising, though are negatively affected by variations in staging quality and MRI acquisition, urging the need for harmonization. KEY POINTS This multicenter study combining clinical information and features derived from MRI rendered disappointing performance to predict response to neoadjuvant treatment in rectal cancer. Best results were obtained with the combination of clinical baseline information and state-of-the-art image-based staging variables, highlighting the importance of good quality staging according to current guidelines and staging templates. No added value was found for quantitative imaging features in this multicenter retrospective study. This is likely related to acquisition variations, which is a major problem for feature reproducibility and thus model generalizability.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Niels W Schurink
- Department of Radiology, The Netherlands Cancer Institute, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
- GROW School for Oncology & Developmental Biology, University of Maastricht, Maastricht, The Netherlands
| | - Simon R van Kranen
- Department of Radiation Oncology, The Netherlands Cancer Institute, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Joost J M van Griethuysen
- Department of Radiology, The Netherlands Cancer Institute, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
- GROW School for Oncology & Developmental Biology, University of Maastricht, Maastricht, The Netherlands
| | - Sander Roberti
- Department of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, The Netherlands Cancer Institute, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Petur Snaebjornsson
- Department of Pathology, The Netherlands Cancer Institute, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Frans C H Bakers
- Department of Radiology, Maastricht University Medical Centre, Maastricht, The Netherlands
| | - Shira H de Bie
- Department of Radiology, Deventer Ziekenhuis, Schalkhaar, The Netherlands
| | - Gerlof P T Bosma
- Department of Interventional Radiology, Elisabeth Tweesteden Hospital, Tilburg, The Netherlands
| | - Vincent C Cappendijk
- Department of Radiology, Jeroen Bosch Hospital, 's-Hertogenbosch, The Netherlands
| | - Remy W F Geenen
- Department of Radiology, Northwest Clinics, Alkmaar, The Netherlands
| | | | | | - Cornelis J Veeken
- Department of Radiology, IJsselland Hospital, Capelle aan den IJssel, The Netherlands
| | - Roy F A Vliegen
- Department of Radiology, Zuyderland Medical Center, Heerlen, The Netherlands
| | - Femke P Peters
- Department of Radiation Oncology, The Netherlands Cancer Institute, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Nino Bogveradze
- Department of Radiology, The Netherlands Cancer Institute, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
- GROW School for Oncology & Developmental Biology, University of Maastricht, Maastricht, The Netherlands
- Department of Radiology, Acad. F. Todua Medical Center, Research Institute of Clinical Medicine, Tbilisi, Georgia
| | - Najim El Khababi
- Department of Radiology, The Netherlands Cancer Institute, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
- GROW School for Oncology & Developmental Biology, University of Maastricht, Maastricht, The Netherlands
| | - Max J Lahaye
- Department of Radiology, The Netherlands Cancer Institute, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
- GROW School for Oncology & Developmental Biology, University of Maastricht, Maastricht, The Netherlands
| | - Monique Maas
- Department of Radiology, The Netherlands Cancer Institute, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
- GROW School for Oncology & Developmental Biology, University of Maastricht, Maastricht, The Netherlands
| | - Geerard L Beets
- GROW School for Oncology & Developmental Biology, University of Maastricht, Maastricht, The Netherlands
- Department of Surgery, The Netherlands Cancer Institute, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Regina G H Beets-Tan
- Department of Radiology, The Netherlands Cancer Institute, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
- GROW School for Oncology & Developmental Biology, University of Maastricht, Maastricht, The Netherlands
- Institute of Regional Health Research, University of Southern Denmark, Vejle, Denmark
| | - Doenja M J Lambregts
- Department of Radiology, The Netherlands Cancer Institute, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
- GROW School for Oncology & Developmental Biology, University of Maastricht, Maastricht, The Netherlands.
| |
Collapse
|
17
|
West CT, West MA, Mirnezami AH, Drami I, Denys A, Glyn T, Sutton PA, Tiernan J, Behrenbruch C, Guerra G, Waters PS, Woodward N, Applin S, Charles SJ, Rose SA, Pape E, van Ramshorst GH, Aalbers AGJ, Abdul AN, Abecasis N, Abraham-Nordling M, Akiyoshi T, Alahmadi R, Alberda W, Albert M, Andric M, Angeles M, Angenete E, Antoniou A, Armitage J, Auer R, Austin KK, Aytac E, Aziz O, Bacalbasa N, Baker RP, Bali M, Baransi S, Baseckas G, Bebington B, Bedford M, Bednarski BK, Beets GL, Berg PL, Bergzoll C, Biondo S, Boyle K, Bordeianou L, Brecelj E, Bremers AB, Brown K, Brunner M, Buchwald P, Bui A, Burgess A, Burger JWA, Burling D, Burns E, Campain N, Carvalhal S, Castro L, Caycedo-Marulanda A, Ceelen W, Chan KKL, Chang GJ, Chew MH, Chok AK, Chong P, Christensen HK, Clouston H, Collins D, Colquhoun AJ, Constantinides J, Corr A, Coscia M, Cosimelli M, Cotsoglou C, Coyne PE, Croner RS, Damjanovic L, Daniels IR, Davies M, Davies RJ, Delaney CP, de Wilt JHW, Denost QD, Deutsch C, Dietz D, Domingo S, Dozois EJ, Drozdov E, Duff M, Egger E, Eglinton T, Enrique-Navascues JM, Espín-Basany E, Evans MD, Eyjólfsdóttir B, Fahy M, Fearnhead NS, Fichtner-Feigl S, Flatmark K, Fleming F, Flor B, Folkesson J, Foskett K, Frizelle FA, Funder J, Gallego MA, García-Granero E, García-Sabrido JL, Gargiulo M, Gava VG, Gentilini L, George ML, George V, Georgiou P, Ghosh A, Ghouti L, Gil-Moreno A, Giner F, Ginther N, Glover T, Goffredo P, Golda T, Gomez CM, Griffiths B, Gwenaël F, Harris C, Harris DA, Hagemans JAW, Hanchanale V, Harji DP, Helbren C, Helewa RM, Hellawell G, Heriot AG, Hochman D, Hohenberger W, Holm T, Holmström A, Hompes R, Hornung B, Hurton S, Hyun E, Ito M, Iversen LH, Jenkins JT, Jourand K, Kaffenberger S, Kandaswamy GV, Kapur S, Kanemitsu Y, Kaufman M, Kazi M, Kelley SR, Keller DS, Kelly ME, Kersting S, Ketelaers SHJ, Khan MS, Khaw J, Kim H, Kim HJ, Kiran R, Koh CE, Kok NFM, Kokelaar R, Kontovounisios C, Kose F, Koutra M, Kraft M, Kristensen HØ, Kumar S, Kusters M, Lago V, Lakkis Z, Lampe B, Langheinrich MC, Larach T, Larsen SG, Larson DW, Law WL, Laurberg S, Lee PJ, Limbert M, Loria A, Lydrup ML, Lyons A, Lynch AC, Mackintosh M, Mann C, Mantyh C, Mathis KL, Margues CFS, Martinez A, Martling A, Meijerink WJHJ, Merchea A, Merkel S, Mehta AM, McArthur DR, McCormick JJ, McDermott FD, McGrath JS, McPhee A, Maciel J, Malde S, Manfredelli S, Mikalauskas S, Modest D, Monson JRT, Morton JR, Mullaney TG, Navarro AS, Neeff H, Negoi I, Neto JWM, Nguyen B, Nielsen MB, Nieuwenhuijzen GAP, Nilsson PJ, Nordkamp S, O’Dwyer ST, Paarnio K, Palmer G, Pappou E, Park J, Patsouras D, Peacock A, Pellino G, Peterson AC, Pfeffer F, Piqeur F, Pinson J, Poggioli G, Proud D, Quinn M, Oliver A, Quyn A, Radwan RW, Rajendran N, Rao C, Rasheed S, Rasmussen PC, Rausa E, Regenbogen SE, Reims HM, Renehan A, Rintala J, Rocha R, Rochester M, Rohila J, Rothbarth J, Rottoli M, Roxburgh C, Rutten HJT, Safar B, Sagar PM, Sahai A, Saklani A, Sammour T, Sayyed R, Schizas AMP, Schwarzkopf E, Scripcariu D, Scripcariu V, Seifert G, Selvasekar C, Shaban M, Shaikh I, Shida D, Simpson A, Skeie-Jensen T, Smart NJ, Smart P, Smith JJ, Smith T, Solbakken AM, Solomon MJ, Sørensen MM, Spasojevic M, Steele SR, Steffens D, Stitzenberg K, Stocchi L, Stylianides NA, Swartling T, Sumrien H, Swartking T, Takala H, Tan EJ, Taylor C, Taylor D, Tejedor P, Tekin A, Tekkis PP, Teras J, Thanapal MR, Thaysen HV, Thorgersen E, Thurairaja R, Toh EL, Tsarkov P, Tolenaar J, Tsukada Y, Tsukamoto S, Tuech JJ, Turner G, Turner WH, Tuynman JB, Valente M, van Rees J, van Zoggel D, Vásquez-Jiménez W, Verhoef C, Vierimaa M, Vizzielli G, Voogt ELK, Uehara K, Wakeman C, Warrier S, Wasmuth HH, Weber K, Weiser MR, Westney OL, Wheeler JMD, Wild J, Wilson M, Wolthuis A, Yano H, Yip B, Yip J, Yoo RN, Zappa MA, Winter DC. Empty pelvis syndrome: PelvEx Collaborative guideline proposal. Br J Surg 2023; 110:1730-1731. [PMID: 37757457 PMCID: PMC10805575 DOI: 10.1093/bjs/znad301] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 07/20/2023] [Revised: 08/22/2023] [Accepted: 08/28/2023] [Indexed: 09/29/2023]
|
18
|
Ou X, van der Reijd DJ, Lambregts DMJ, Grotenhuis BA, van Triest B, Beets GL, Beets-Tan RGH, Maas M. Sense and non-sense of imaging in the era of organ preservation for rectal cancer. Br J Radiol 2023; 96:20230318. [PMID: 37750870 PMCID: PMC10607404 DOI: 10.1259/bjr.20230318] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/06/2023] [Revised: 07/17/2023] [Accepted: 08/01/2023] [Indexed: 09/27/2023] Open
Abstract
This review summarizes the current applications and benefits of imaging modalities for organ preservation in the treatment of rectal cancer. The concept of organ preservation in the treatment of rectal cancer has revolutionized the way rectal cancer is managed. Initially, organ preservation was limited to patients with locally advanced rectal cancer who needed neoadjuvant therapy to reduce tumor size before surgery and achieved complete response. However, neoadjuvant therapy is now increasingly utilized for smaller and less aggressive tumors to achieve primary organ preservation. Additionally, more intensive neoadjuvant strategies are employed to improve complete response rates and increase the chances of successful organ preservation. The selection of patients for organ preservation is a critical component of treatment, and imaging techniques such as digital rectal exam, endoscopy, and MRI are commonly used for this purpose. In this review, we provide an overview of what imaging modalities should be chosen and how they can aid in the selection and follow-up of patients undergoing organ-preserving strategies.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
| | | | | | | | - Baukelien van Triest
- Department of Radiation Oncology, The Netherlands Cancer Institute, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | | | | | | |
Collapse
|
19
|
Fernandez LM, São Julião GP, Renehan AG, Beets GL, Papoila AL, Vailati BB, Kranenbarg EMK, Roodvoets AGH, Figueiredo NL, Van De Velde CJH, Habr-Gama A, Perez RO. Rectal Cancer and Organ-Preservation: Safety First, Then the King. Dis Colon Rectum 2023; 66:e1054-e1055. [PMID: 37493212 DOI: 10.1097/dcr.0000000000003020] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 07/27/2023]
Affiliation(s)
- Laura M Fernandez
- Colorectal Surgery, Digestive Department, Champalimaud Foundation, Lisbon, Portugal
| | - Guilherme P São Julião
- Angelita and Joaquim Gama Institute, São Paulo, Brazil, Department of Surgical Oncology, Hospital Beneficencia Portuguesa, São Paulo, Brazil, Hospital Alemão Oswaldo Cruz, São Paulo, Brazil
| | - Andrew G Renehan
- Manchester Cancer Research Centre, National Institute of Health and Research Manchester Biomedical Research Centre, Division of Cancer Sciences, School of Medical Sciences, Faculty of Biology, Medicine, and Health, University of Manchester, Manchester, United Kingdom, Colorectal and Peritoneal Oncology Centre, The Christie National Health Service Foundation Trust, Manchester, United Kingdom
| | - Geerard L Beets
- Department of Surgery, Netherlands Cancer institute, Amsterdam, The Netherlands, GROW School for Oncology and Developmental Biology, Maastricht University, The Netherlands
| | - Ana L Papoila
- NOVA Medical School, Faculdade de Ciências Médicas (NMS|FCM), Lisbon, Portugal
| | - Bruna B Vailati
- Angelita and Joaquim Gama Institute, São Paulo, Brazil, Department of Surgical Oncology, Hospital Beneficencia Portuguesa, São Paulo, Brazil, Hospital Alemão Oswaldo Cruz, São Paulo, Brazil
| | | | - Annet G H Roodvoets
- Department of Surgery, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, The Netherlands
| | - Nuno L Figueiredo
- Colorectal Surgery, Digestive Department, Champalimaud Foundation, Lisbon, Portugal, Colorectal Surgery, Hospital Lusiadas, Lisbon, Portugal
| | - Cornelis J H Van De Velde
- Department of Surgery, Netherlands Cancer institute, Amsterdam, The Netherlands, Department of Surgery, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, The Netherlands
| | - Angelita Habr-Gama
- Angelita and Joaquim Gama Institute, São Paulo, Brazil, Hospital Alemão Oswaldo Cruz, São Paulo, Brazil, University of São Paulo School of Medicine, São Paulo, Brazil
| | - Rodrigo O Perez
- Colorectal Surgery Division, Angelita and Joaquim Gama Institute, São Paulo, Brazil, Department of Surgical Oncology, Hospital Beneficencia Portuguesa, São Paulo, Brazil, Colorectal Surgery Division, Hospital Alemão Oswaldo Cruz, São Paulo, Brazil, Ludwig Institute for Cancer Research, São Paulo Branch, Brazil
| |
Collapse
|
20
|
el Khababi N, Beets-Tan RG, Curvo-Semedo L, Tissier R, Nederend J, Lahaye MJ, Maas M, Beets GL, Lambregts DM. Pearls and pitfalls of structured staging and reporting of rectal cancer on MRI: an international multireader study. Br J Radiol 2023; 96:20230091. [PMID: 38696592 PMCID: PMC10546463 DOI: 10.1259/bjr.20230091] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 01/27/2023] [Revised: 05/31/2023] [Accepted: 06/21/2023] [Indexed: 05/04/2024] Open
Abstract
OBJECTIVES To investigate uniformity and pitfalls in structured radiological staging of rectal cancer. METHODS Twenty-one radiologists (12 countries) staged 75 rectal cancers on MRI using a structured reporting template. Interobserver agreement (IOA) was calculated as the percentage agreement between readers (categorical variables) and Krippendorff's α (continuous variables). Agreement with an expert consensus served as a surrogate standard of reference to estimate diagnostic accuracy. Polychoric correlation coefficients were used to assess correlations between diagnostic confidence and accuracy (=agreement with expert consensus). RESULTS Uniformity to diagnose high-risk (≥cT3 ab) versus low-risk (≤cT3 cd) cT-stage, cN0 versus cN+, lateral nodes and tumour deposits, MRF and sphincter involvement, and solid versus mucinous tumours was high with IOA > 80% in the majority of cases (and >80% agreement with expert consensus). Results for assessing extramural vascular invasion, cT-stage (cT1-2/cT3/cT4a/cT4b), cN-stage (cN0/N1/N2), relation to the peritoneal reflection, extent of sphincter involvement (internal/intersphincteric/external) and morphology (solid/annular/semi-annular) were considerably poorer. IOA was high (α = 0.72-0.84) for tumour height/length and extramural invasion depth, but low for tumour-MRF distance and number of (suspicious) nodes (α = 0.05-0.55). There was a significant positive correlation between diagnostic confidence and accuracy (=agreement with expert consensus) (p < 0.001-p = 0.003). CONCLUSIONS - Several staging items lacked sufficient reproducibility.- Results for cT- and N-staging g improved when using a dichotomized stratification.- Considering the significant correlation between diagnostic confidence and accuracy, a confidence level may be incorporated into structured reporting for specific items with low reproducibility. ADVANCES IN KNOWLEDGE Although structured reporting aims to achieve uniformity in reporting, several items lack sufficient reproducibility and might benefit from dichotomized assessment and incorporating confidence levels.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
| | | | - Luís Curvo-Semedo
- Department of Medical Imaging, Centro Hospitalar e Universitário de Coimbra EPE, Faculty of Medicine, University of Coimbra, Coimbra, Portugal
| | - Renaud Tissier
- Biostatistics Unit, The Netherlands Cancer Institute, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Joost Nederend
- Department of Radiology, Catharina Hospital, Eindhoven, The Netherlands
| | | | | | | | | |
Collapse
|
21
|
El Khababi N, Beets-Tan RGH, Tissier R, Lahaye MJ, Maas M, Curvo-Semedo L, Dresen RC, Nougaret S, Beets GL, Lambregts DMJ. Predicting response to chemoradiotherapy in rectal cancer via visual morphologic assessment and staging on baseline MRI: a multicenter and multireader study. Abdom Radiol (NY) 2023; 48:3039-3049. [PMID: 37358604 PMCID: PMC10480283 DOI: 10.1007/s00261-023-03961-7] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/13/2023] [Revised: 05/11/2023] [Accepted: 05/13/2023] [Indexed: 06/27/2023]
Abstract
PURPOSE Pre-treatment knowledge of the anticipated response of rectal tumors to neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy (CRT) could help to further optimize the treatment. Van Griethuysen et al. proposed a visual 5-point confidence score to predict the likelihood of response on baseline MRI. Aim was to evaluate this score in a multicenter and multireader study setting and compare it to two simplified (4-point and 2-point) adaptations in terms of diagnostic performance, interobserver agreement (IOA), and reader preference. METHODS Twenty-two radiologists from 14 countries (5 MRI-experts,17 general/abdominal radiologists) retrospectively reviewed 90 baseline MRIs to estimate if patients would likely achieve a (near-)complete response (nCR); first using the 5-point score by van Griethuysen (1=highly unlikely to 5=highly likely to achieve nCR), second using a 4-point adaptation (with 1-point each for high-risk T-stage, obvious mesorectal fascia invasion, nodal involvement, and extramural vascular invasion), and third using a 2-point score (unlikely/likely to achieve nCR). Diagnostic performance was calculated using ROC curves and IOA using Krippendorf's alpha (α). RESULTS Areas under the ROC curve to predict the likelihood of a nCR were similar for the three methods (0.71-0.74). IOA was higher for the 5- and 4-point scores (α=0.55 and 0.57 versus 0.46 for the 2-point score) with best results for the MRI-experts (α=0.64-0.65). Most readers (55%) favored the 4-point score. CONCLUSIONS Visual morphologic assessment and staging methods can predict neoadjuvant treatment response with moderate-good performance. Compared to a previously published confidence-based scoring system, study readers preferred a simplified 4-point risk score based on high-risk T-stage, MRF involvement, nodal involvement, and EMVI.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Najim El Khababi
- Department of Radiology, The Netherlands Cancer Institute, P.O. Box 90203, 1106 BE, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
- GROW School for Oncology & Developmental Biology, University of Maastricht, Maastricht, The Netherlands
| | - Regina G H Beets-Tan
- Department of Radiology, The Netherlands Cancer Institute, P.O. Box 90203, 1106 BE, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
- GROW School for Oncology & Developmental Biology, University of Maastricht, Maastricht, The Netherlands
| | - Renaud Tissier
- Biostatistics Unit, The Netherlands Cancer Institute, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Max J Lahaye
- Department of Radiology, The Netherlands Cancer Institute, P.O. Box 90203, 1106 BE, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
- GROW School for Oncology & Developmental Biology, University of Maastricht, Maastricht, The Netherlands
| | - Monique Maas
- Department of Radiology, The Netherlands Cancer Institute, P.O. Box 90203, 1106 BE, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
- GROW School for Oncology & Developmental Biology, University of Maastricht, Maastricht, The Netherlands
| | - Luís Curvo-Semedo
- Department of Radiology, Faculty of Medicine, Centro Hospitalar e Universitario de Coimbra EPE, University of Coimbra, Coimbra, Portugal
| | - Raphaëla C Dresen
- Department of Radiology, University Hospitals Leuven, Leuven, Belgium
| | - Stephanie Nougaret
- Medical Imaging Department, Montpellier Cancer Institute, Montpellier Cancer Research Institute (U1194), University of Montpellier, Montpellier, France
| | - Geerard L Beets
- GROW School for Oncology & Developmental Biology, University of Maastricht, Maastricht, The Netherlands
- Department of Surgery, The Netherlands Cancer Institute, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Doenja M J Lambregts
- Department of Radiology, The Netherlands Cancer Institute, P.O. Box 90203, 1106 BE, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
- GROW School for Oncology & Developmental Biology, University of Maastricht, Maastricht, The Netherlands.
| |
Collapse
|
22
|
Sluckin TC, Hekhuis M, Kol SQ, Nederend J, Horsthuis K, Beets-Tan RGH, Beets GL, Burger JWA, Tuynman JB, Rutten HJT, Kusters M, Benson S. A Deep Learning Framework with Explainability for the Prediction of Lateral Locoregional Recurrences in Rectal Cancer Patients with Suspicious Lateral Lymph Nodes. Diagnostics (Basel) 2023; 13:3099. [PMID: 37835842 PMCID: PMC10572128 DOI: 10.3390/diagnostics13193099] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 07/31/2023] [Revised: 09/01/2023] [Accepted: 09/16/2023] [Indexed: 10/15/2023] Open
Abstract
Malignant lateral lymph nodes (LLNs) in low, locally advanced rectal cancer can cause (ipsi-lateral) local recurrences ((L)LR). Accurate identification is, therefore, essential. This study explored LLN features to create an artificial intelligence prediction model, estimating the risk of (L)LR. This retrospective multicentre cohort study examined 196 patients diagnosed with rectal cancer between 2008 and 2020 from three tertiary centres in the Netherlands. Primary and restaging T2W magnetic resonance imaging and clinical features were used. Visible LLNs were segmented and used for a multi-channel convolutional neural network. A deep learning model was developed and trained for the prediction of (L)LR according to malignant LLNs. Combined imaging and clinical features resulted in AUCs of 0.78 and 0.80 for LR and LLR, respectively. The sensitivity and specificity were 85.7% and 67.6%, respectively. Class activation map explainability methods were applied and consistently identified the same high-risk regions with structural similarity indices ranging from 0.772-0.930. This model resulted in good predictive value for (L)LR rates and can form the basis of future auto-segmentation programs to assist in the identification of high-risk patients and the development of risk stratification models.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Tania C. Sluckin
- Department of Surgery, Amsterdam UMC Location Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, 1081 HV Amsterdam, The Netherlands; (T.C.S.)
- Cancer Center Amsterdam, Treatment and Quality of Life, 1081 HV Amsterdam, The Netherlands
- Cancer Center Amsterdam, Imaging and Biomarkers, 1081 HV Amsterdam, The Netherlands;
| | - Marije Hekhuis
- Department of Surgery, Amsterdam UMC Location Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, 1081 HV Amsterdam, The Netherlands; (T.C.S.)
| | - Sabrine Q. Kol
- Department of Radiology, Amsterdam UMC Location Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, 1081 HV Amsterdam, The Netherlands;
| | - Joost Nederend
- Department of Radiology, Catharina Hospital, 5623 EJ Eindhoven, The Netherlands
| | - Karin Horsthuis
- Cancer Center Amsterdam, Imaging and Biomarkers, 1081 HV Amsterdam, The Netherlands;
- Department of Radiology, Amsterdam UMC Location Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, 1081 HV Amsterdam, The Netherlands;
| | - Regina G. H. Beets-Tan
- GROW School for Oncology & Developmental Biology, Maastricht University, 6211 LK Maastricht, The Netherlands
- Department of Radiology, Netherlands Cancer Institute, 1066 CX Amsterdam, The Netherlands
- Department of Clinical Radiology, University of Southern Denmark, Odense University Hospital, 5000 Odense, Denmark
| | - Geerard L. Beets
- GROW School for Oncology & Developmental Biology, Maastricht University, 6211 LK Maastricht, The Netherlands
- Department of Surgery, Netherlands Cancer Institute, 1066 CX Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | | | - Jurriaan B. Tuynman
- Department of Surgery, Amsterdam UMC Location Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, 1081 HV Amsterdam, The Netherlands; (T.C.S.)
- Cancer Center Amsterdam, Treatment and Quality of Life, 1081 HV Amsterdam, The Netherlands
- Cancer Center Amsterdam, Imaging and Biomarkers, 1081 HV Amsterdam, The Netherlands;
| | - Harm J. T. Rutten
- Department of Surgery, Catharina Hospital, 5623 EJ Eindhoven, The Netherlands
| | - Miranda Kusters
- Department of Surgery, Amsterdam UMC Location Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, 1081 HV Amsterdam, The Netherlands; (T.C.S.)
- Cancer Center Amsterdam, Treatment and Quality of Life, 1081 HV Amsterdam, The Netherlands
- Cancer Center Amsterdam, Imaging and Biomarkers, 1081 HV Amsterdam, The Netherlands;
| | - Sean Benson
- Department of Radiology, Netherlands Cancer Institute, 1066 CX Amsterdam, The Netherlands
- Department of Cardiology, Amsterdam University Medical Centers, University of Amsterdam, 1075 AX Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| |
Collapse
|
23
|
van der Stel SD, van den Berg JG, Snaebjornsson P, Seignette IM, Witteveen M, Grotenhuis BA, Beets GL, Post AL, Ruers TJM. Size and depth of residual tumor after neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy in rectal cancer - implications for the development of new imaging modalities for response assessment. Front Oncol 2023; 13:1209732. [PMID: 37736547 PMCID: PMC10509550 DOI: 10.3389/fonc.2023.1209732] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/21/2023] [Accepted: 08/21/2023] [Indexed: 09/23/2023] Open
Abstract
With the shift towards organ preserving treatment strategies in rectal cancer it has become increasingly important to accurately discriminate between a complete and good clinical response after neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy (CRT). Standard of care imaging techniques such as CT and MRI are well equipped for initial staging of rectal tumors, but discrimination between a good clinical and complete response remains difficult due to their limited ability to detect small residual vital tumor fragments. To identify new promising imaging techniques that could fill this gap, it is crucial to know the size and invasion depth of residual vital tumor tissue since this determines the requirements with regard to the resolution and imaging depth of potential new optical imaging techniques. We analyzed 198 pathology slides from 30 rectal cancer patients with a Mandard tumor regression grade 2 or 3 after CRT that underwent surgery. For each patient we determined response pattern, size of the largest vital tumor fragment or bulk and the shortest distance from the vital tumor to the luminal surface. The response pattern was shrinkage in 14 patients and fragmentation in 16 patients. For both groups combined, the largest vital tumor fragment per patient was smaller than 1mm for 38% of patients, below 0.2mm for 12% of patients and for one patient as small as 0.06mm. For 29% of patients the vital tumor remnant was present within the first 0.01mm from the luminal surface and for 87% within 0.5mm. Our results explain why it is difficult to differentiate between a good clinical and complete response in rectal cancer patients using endoscopy and MRI, since in many patients submillimeter tumor fragments remain below the luminal surface. To detect residual vital tumor tissue in all patients included in this study a technique with a spatial resolution of 0.06mm and an imaging depth of 8.9mm would have been required. Optical imaging techniques offer the possibility of detecting majority of these cases due to the potential of both high-resolution imaging and enhanced contrast between tissue types. These techniques could thus serve as a complimentary tool to conventional methods for rectal cancer response assessment.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Stefan D. van der Stel
- Faculty Technische Natuurwetenschappen (TNW), Group Nanobiophysics, Twente University, Enschede, Netherlands
- Department of Surgery, Netherlands Cancer Institute, Amsterdam, Netherlands
| | | | - Petur Snaebjornsson
- Department of Pathology, Netherlands Cancer Institute, Amsterdam, Netherlands
- Faculty of Medicine, University of Iceland, Reykjavik, Iceland
| | - Iris M. Seignette
- Department of Pathology, Netherlands Cancer Institute, Amsterdam, Netherlands
| | - Mark Witteveen
- Faculty Technische Natuurwetenschappen (TNW), Group Nanobiophysics, Twente University, Enschede, Netherlands
- Department of Surgery, Netherlands Cancer Institute, Amsterdam, Netherlands
| | | | - Geerard L. Beets
- Department of Surgery, Netherlands Cancer Institute, Amsterdam, Netherlands
- GROW School for Oncology and Developmental Biology, University of Maastricht, Maastricht, Netherlands
| | - Anouk L. Post
- Department of Surgery, Netherlands Cancer Institute, Amsterdam, Netherlands
- Department of Biomedical Engineering and Physics, Amsterdam Cardiovascular Sciences, Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam Universitair Medisch Centrum (UMC), University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, Netherlands
| | - Theo J. M. Ruers
- Faculty Technische Natuurwetenschappen (TNW), Group Nanobiophysics, Twente University, Enschede, Netherlands
- Department of Surgery, Netherlands Cancer Institute, Amsterdam, Netherlands
| |
Collapse
|
24
|
El Khababi N, Beets-Tan RGH, Tissier R, Lahaye MJ, Maas M, Curvo-Semedo L, Dresen RC, Nougaret S, Beets GL, Lambregts DMJ. Sense and nonsense of yT-staging on MRI after chemoradiotherapy in rectal cancer. Colorectal Dis 2023; 25:1878-1887. [PMID: 37545140 DOI: 10.1111/codi.16698] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 11/21/2022] [Revised: 05/02/2023] [Accepted: 06/08/2023] [Indexed: 08/08/2023]
Abstract
AIM The aim of this work was to investigate the value of rectal cancer T-staging on MRI after chemoradiotherapy (ymrT-staging) in relation to the degree of fibrotic transformation of the tumour bed as assessed using the pathological tumour regression grade (pTRG) of Mandard as a standard of reference. METHOD Twenty two radiologists, including five rectal MRI experts and 17 'nonexperts' (general/abdominal radiologists), evaluated the ymrT stage on the restaging MRIs of 90 rectal cancer patients after chemoradiotherapy. The ymrT stage was compared with the final ypT stage at histopathology; the percentages of correct staging (ymrT = ypT), understaging (ymrT < ypT) and overstaging (ymrT > ypT) were calculated and compared between patients with predominant tumour at histopathology (pTRG4-5) and patients with predominant fibrosis (pTRG1-3). Interobserver agreement (IOA) was computed using Krippendorff's alpha. RESULTS Average ymrT/ypT stage concordance was 48% for the experts and 43% for the nonexperts; ymrT/ypT stage concordance was significantly higher in the pTRG4-5 subgroup (58% vs. 41% for the pTRG1-3 group; p = 0.01), with the best results for the MRI experts. Overstaging was the main source of error, especially in the pTRG1-3 subgroup (average overstaging rate 38%-44% vs. 13%-55% in the pTRG4-5 subgroup). IOA was higher for the expert versus nonexpert readers (α = 0.67 vs. α = 0.39). CONCLUSIONS ymrT-staging is moderately accurate; accuracy is higher in poorly responding patients with predominant tumour but low in good responders with predominant fibrosis, resulting in significant overstaging. Radiologists should shift their focus from ymrT-staging to detecting gross residual (and progressive) disease, and identifying potential candidates for organ preservation who would benefit from further clinical and endoscopic evaluation to guide final treatment planning.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Najim El Khababi
- Department of Radiology, The Netherlands Cancer Institute, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
- GROW School for Oncology and Reproduction, University of Maastricht, Maastricht, The Netherlands
| | - Regina G H Beets-Tan
- Department of Radiology, The Netherlands Cancer Institute, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
- GROW School for Oncology and Reproduction, University of Maastricht, Maastricht, The Netherlands
| | - Renaud Tissier
- Biostatistics Unit, The Netherlands Cancer Institute, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Max J Lahaye
- Department of Radiology, The Netherlands Cancer Institute, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
- GROW School for Oncology and Reproduction, University of Maastricht, Maastricht, The Netherlands
| | - Monique Maas
- Department of Radiology, The Netherlands Cancer Institute, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
- GROW School for Oncology and Reproduction, University of Maastricht, Maastricht, The Netherlands
| | - Luís Curvo-Semedo
- Department of Radiology, Centro Hospitalar e Universitario de Coimbra EPE, Faculty of Medicine, University of Coimbra, Coimbra, Portugal
| | - Raphaëla C Dresen
- Department of Radiology, University Hospitals Leuven, Leuven, Belgium
| | - Stephanie Nougaret
- Medical Imaging Department, Montpellier Cancer Institute, Montpellier Cancer Research Institute (U1194), University of Montpellier, Montpellier, France
| | - Geerard L Beets
- GROW School for Oncology and Reproduction, University of Maastricht, Maastricht, The Netherlands
- Department of Surgery, The Netherlands Cancer Institute, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Doenja M J Lambregts
- Department of Radiology, The Netherlands Cancer Institute, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
- GROW School for Oncology and Reproduction, University of Maastricht, Maastricht, The Netherlands
| |
Collapse
|
25
|
De Rooij L, Kimman ML, Spiekerman van Weezelenburg MA, van Kuijk SMJ, Granzier RWY, Hintzen KFH, Heymans C, Theunissen LLB, van Haaren ERM, Janssen A, Vissers YLJ, Beets GL, van Bastelaar J. Economic evaluation of flap fixation techniques after mastectomy: Results of a double-blind randomized controlled trial (SAM-trial). Eur J Surg Oncol 2023; 49:107003. [PMID: 37542999 DOI: 10.1016/j.ejso.2023.107003] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 06/07/2023] [Revised: 07/14/2023] [Accepted: 07/31/2023] [Indexed: 08/07/2023]
Abstract
BACKGROUND An economic evaluation was performed alongside an RCT investigating flap fixation in reducing seroma formation after mastectomy. The evaluation focused on the first year following mastectomy and assessed cost-effectiveness from a health care and societal perspective. METHODS The economic evaluation was conducted between 2014 and 2018 in four Dutch breast clinics. Patients with an indication for mastectomy or modified radical mastectomy were randomly assigned to: conventional closure (CON), flap fixation with sutures (FFS) or flap fixation with tissue glue (FFG). Health care costs, patient and family costs and costs due to productivity losses were assessed. Outcomes were expressed in incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs): the incremental cost per quality-adjusted life year (QALY). Bootstrapping techniques, sensitivity and secondary analyses were employed to address uncertainty. RESULTS The FFS-group yielded most QALYs (0.810; 95%-CI 0.755-0.856), but also incurred the highest mean costs at twelve months (€10.416; 95%-CI 8.231-12.930). CON was the next best alternative with 0.794 QALYs (95%-CI 0.733-0.841) and mean annual costs of €10.051 (95%-CI 8.255-12.044). FFG incurred fewer QALYs and higher costs, when compared to the CON group. The ICER of FFS compared to CON was €22.813/QALY. Applying a willingness to pay threshold in the Netherlands of €20.000/QALY, the probability that FFS was cost-effective was 42%, compared to 37% and 21% for CON and FFG, respectively. CONCLUSION The cost-effectiveness of FFS following mastectomy, versus CON and FFG, is uncertain from a societal perspective. Yet, from a health care and hospital perspective FFS is likely to be the most cost-effective intervention.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- L De Rooij
- Department of Surgery, Zuyderland Medical Center, Sittard, the Netherlands
| | - M L Kimman
- Department of Clinical Epidemiology and Medical Technology Assessment, Care and Public Health Research Institute (CAPHRI), Maastricht University Medical Center, Maastricht, the Netherlands
| | | | - S M J van Kuijk
- Department of Clinical Epidemiology and Medical Technology Assessment, Care and Public Health Research Institute (CAPHRI), Maastricht University Medical Center, Maastricht, the Netherlands
| | - R W Y Granzier
- Department of Surgery, Zuyderland Medical Center, Sittard, the Netherlands
| | - K F H Hintzen
- Department of Surgery, Zuyderland Medical Center, Sittard, the Netherlands
| | - C Heymans
- Department of Surgery, Zuyderland Medical Center, Sittard, the Netherlands
| | - L L B Theunissen
- Department of Surgery, Zuyderland Medical Center, Sittard, the Netherlands
| | - E R M van Haaren
- Department of Surgery, Zuyderland Medical Center, Sittard, the Netherlands
| | - A Janssen
- Department of Surgery, Zuyderland Medical Center, Sittard, the Netherlands
| | - Y L J Vissers
- Department of Surgery, Zuyderland Medical Center, Sittard, the Netherlands
| | - G L Beets
- Department of Surgery, Netherlands Cancer Institute, Amsterdam, the Netherlands; GROW School for Oncology and Developmental Biology, University of Maastricht, Maastricht, the Netherlands
| | - J van Bastelaar
- Department of Surgery, Zuyderland Medical Center, Sittard, the Netherlands
| |
Collapse
|
26
|
Sluckin TC, Hazen SMJA, Horsthuis K, Beets-Tan RGH, Aalbers AGJ, Beets GL, Boerma EJG, Borstlap J, van Breest Smallenburg V, Burger JWA, Crolla RMPH, Daniëls-Gooszen AW, Davids PHP, Dunker MS, Fabry HFJ, Furnée EJB, van Gils RAH, de Haas RJ, Hoogendoorn S, van Koeverden S, de Korte FI, Oosterling SJ, Peeters KCMJ, Posma LAE, Pultrum BB, Rothbarth J, Rutten HJT, Schasfoort RA, Schreurs WH, Simons PCG, Smits AB, Talsma AK, The GYM, van Tilborg F, Tuynman JB, Vanhooymissen IJ, van de Ven AWH, Verdaasdonk EGG, Vermaas M, Vliegen RFA, Vogelaar FJ, de Vries M, Vroemen JC, van Vugt ST, Westerterp M, van Westreenen HL, de Wilt JHW, van der Zaag ES, Zimmerman DDE, Marijnen CAM, Tanis PJ, Kusters M. ASO Visual Abstract: Evaluation of National Surgical Practice for Lateral Lymph Nodes in Rectal Cancer in an Untrained Setting. Ann Surg Oncol 2023; 30:5486-5488. [PMID: 37394674 DOI: 10.1245/s10434-023-13666-2] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 07/04/2023]
Affiliation(s)
- Tania C Sluckin
- Department of Surgery, Amsterdam UMC, Vrije Universiteit, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
- Cancer Center Amsterdam, Treatment and Quality of Life, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
- Cancer Center Amsterdam, Imaging and Biomarkers, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - Sanne-Marije J A Hazen
- Department of Surgery, Amsterdam UMC, Vrije Universiteit, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
- Cancer Center Amsterdam, Treatment and Quality of Life, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
- Cancer Center Amsterdam, Imaging and Biomarkers, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - Karin Horsthuis
- Cancer Center Amsterdam, Imaging and Biomarkers, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
- Department of Radiology and Nuclear Medicine, Amsterdam UMC, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - Regina G H Beets-Tan
- Department of Radiology, The Netherlands Cancer Institute, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
- GROW School for Oncology and Reproduction, University of Maastricht, Maastricht, the Netherlands
- Department of Radiology, Department of Clinical Research, Odense University Hospital, University of Southern Denmark, Odense, Denmark
| | - Arend G J Aalbers
- Department of Surgery, The Netherlands Cancer Institute, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - Geerard L Beets
- GROW School for Oncology and Reproduction, University of Maastricht, Maastricht, the Netherlands
- Department of Surgery, The Netherlands Cancer Institute, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - Evert-Jan G Boerma
- Department of Surgery, Zuyderland Medical Center, Sittard-Geleen, the Netherlands
| | - Jaap Borstlap
- Department of Radiology, Treant Zorggroep, Hoogeveen, the Netherlands
| | | | | | | | | | - Paul H P Davids
- Department of Surgery, Diakonessenhuis, Utrecht, the Netherlands
| | - Michalda S Dunker
- Department of Surgery, Northwest Clinics, NWZ Alkmaar, Alkmaar, the Netherlands
| | - Hans F J Fabry
- Department of Surgery, Bravis Hospital, Roosendaal, the Netherlands
| | - Edgar J B Furnée
- Department of Surgery, Division of Abdominal Surgery, University Medical Center Groningen, University of Groningen, Groningen, the Netherlands
| | | | - Robbert J de Haas
- Department of Radiology, University of Groningen, University Medical Center Groningen, Groningen, the Netherlands
| | | | | | - Fleur I de Korte
- Department of Radiology, Haaglanden Medical Centre, The Hague, the Netherlands
| | | | - Koen C M J Peeters
- Department of Surgery, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, the Netherlands
| | - Lisanne A E Posma
- Department of Surgery, Slingeland Hospital, Doetinchem, the Netherlands
| | - Bareld B Pultrum
- Department of Surgery, Martini Hospital, Groningen, the Netherlands
| | - Joost Rothbarth
- Department of Surgical Oncology and Gastrointestinal Surgery, Erasmus MC, Rotterdam, the Netherlands
| | - Harm J T Rutten
- GROW School for Oncology and Reproduction, University of Maastricht, Maastricht, the Netherlands
- Department of Surgery, Catharina Hospital, Eindhoven, the Netherlands
| | | | | | - Petra C G Simons
- Department of Radiology, VieCuri Medical Centre, Venlo, the Netherlands
| | - Anke B Smits
- Department of Surgery, St. Antonius Hospital, Nieuwegein, the Netherlands
| | - Aaldert K Talsma
- Department of Surgery, Deventer Hospital, Deventer, the Netherlands
| | - G Y Mireille The
- Department of Radiology, Bravis Hospital, Roosendaal, the Netherlands
| | - Fiek van Tilborg
- Department of Radiology, Elisabeth-TweeSteden Hospital, Tilburg, the Netherlands
| | - Jurriaan B Tuynman
- Department of Surgery, Amsterdam UMC, Vrije Universiteit, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
- Cancer Center Amsterdam, Treatment and Quality of Life, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
- Cancer Center Amsterdam, Imaging and Biomarkers, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - Inge J Vanhooymissen
- Department of Radiology and Nuclear Medicine, Amsterdam UMC, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | | | | | - Maarten Vermaas
- Department of Surgery, IJsselland Hospital, Capelle aan den IJssel, the Netherlands
| | - Roy F A Vliegen
- Department of Radiology, Zuyderland Medical Center, Sittard-Geleen, the Netherlands
| | - F Jeroen Vogelaar
- Department of Surgery, VieCuri Medical Centre, Venlo, the Netherlands
| | | | - Joy C Vroemen
- Department of Radiology, Flevoziekenhuis, Almere, the Netherlands
| | | | - Marinke Westerterp
- Department of Surgery, Haaglanden Medical Centre, The Hague, the Netherlands
| | | | - Johannes H W de Wilt
- Department of Surgery, Radboud University Medical Center, Nijmegen, the Netherlands
| | | | - David D E Zimmerman
- Department of Surgery, Elisabeth-TweeSteden Hospital, Tilburg, the Netherlands
| | - Corrie A M Marijnen
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Netherlands Cancer Institute, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, the Netherlands
| | - Pieter J Tanis
- Cancer Center Amsterdam, Treatment and Quality of Life, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
- Cancer Center Amsterdam, Imaging and Biomarkers, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
- Department of Surgical Oncology and Gastrointestinal Surgery, Erasmus MC, Rotterdam, the Netherlands
- Department of Surgery, Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - Miranda Kusters
- Department of Surgery, Amsterdam UMC, Vrije Universiteit, Amsterdam, the Netherlands.
- Cancer Center Amsterdam, Treatment and Quality of Life, Amsterdam, the Netherlands.
- Cancer Center Amsterdam, Imaging and Biomarkers, Amsterdam, the Netherlands.
| |
Collapse
|
27
|
Sluckin TC, Hazen SMJA, Horsthuis K, Beets-Tan RGH, Aalbers AGJ, Beets GL, Boerma EJG, Borstlap J, van Breest Smallenburg V, Burger JWA, Crolla RMPH, Daniëls-Gooszen AW, Davids PHP, Dunker MS, Fabry HFJ, Furnée EJB, van Gils RAH, de Haas RJ, Hoogendoorn S, van Koeverden S, de Korte FI, Oosterling SJ, Peeters KCMJ, Posma LAE, Pultrum BB, Rothbarth J, Rutten HJT, Schasfoort RA, Schreurs WH, Simons PCG, Smits AB, Talsma AK, The GYM, van Tilborg F, Tuynman JB, Vanhooymissen IJS, van de Ven AWH, Verdaasdonk EGG, Vermaas M, Vliegen RFA, Vogelaar FJ, de Vries M, Vroemen JC, van Vugt ST, Westerterp M, van Westreenen HL, de Wilt JHW, van der Zaag ES, Zimmerman DDE, Marijnen CAM, Tanis PJ, Kusters M. Evaluation of National Surgical Practice for Lateral Lymph Nodes in Rectal Cancer in an Untrained Setting. Ann Surg Oncol 2023; 30:5472-5485. [PMID: 37340200 PMCID: PMC10409808 DOI: 10.1245/s10434-023-13460-0] [Citation(s) in RCA: 3] [Impact Index Per Article: 3.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 11/08/2022] [Accepted: 02/12/2023] [Indexed: 06/22/2023]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Involved lateral lymph nodes (LLNs) have been associated with increased local recurrence (LR) and ipsi-lateral LR (LLR) rates. However, consensus regarding the indication and type of surgical treatment for suspicious LLNs is lacking. This study evaluated the surgical treatment of LLNs in an untrained setting at a national level. METHODS Patients who underwent additional LLN surgery were selected from a national cross-sectional cohort study regarding patients undergoing rectal cancer surgery in 69 Dutch hospitals in 2016. LLN surgery consisted of either 'node-picking' (the removal of an individual LLN) or 'partial regional node dissection' (PRND; an incomplete resection of the LLN area). For all patients with primarily enlarged (≥7 mm) LLNs, those undergoing rectal surgery with an additional LLN procedure were compared to those undergoing only rectal resection. RESULTS Out of 3057 patients, 64 underwent additional LLN surgery, with 4-year LR and LLR rates of 26% and 15%, respectively. Forty-eight patients (75%) had enlarged LLNs, with corresponding recurrence rates of 26% and 19%, respectively. Node-picking (n = 40) resulted in a 20% 4-year LLR, and a 14% LLR after PRND (n = 8; p = 0.677). Multivariable analysis of 158 patients with enlarged LLNs undergoing additional LLN surgery (n = 48) or rectal resection alone (n = 110) showed no significant association of LLN surgery with 4-year LR or LLR, but suggested higher recurrence risks after LLN surgery (LR: hazard ratio [HR] 1.5, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.7-3.2, p = 0.264; LLR: HR 1.9, 95% CI 0.2-2.5, p = 0.874). CONCLUSION Evaluation of Dutch practice in 2016 revealed that approximately one-third of patients with primarily enlarged LLNs underwent surgical treatment, mostly consisting of node-picking. Recurrence rates were not significantly affected by LLN surgery, but did suggest worse outcomes. Outcomes of LLN surgery after adequate training requires further research.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Tania C Sluckin
- Department of Surgery, Amsterdam UMC, Location Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
- Cancer Center Amsterdam, Treatment and Quality of Life, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
- Cancer Center Amsterdam, Imaging and Biomarkers, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - Sanne-Marije J A Hazen
- Department of Surgery, Amsterdam UMC, Location Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
- Cancer Center Amsterdam, Treatment and Quality of Life, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
- Cancer Center Amsterdam, Imaging and Biomarkers, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - Karin Horsthuis
- Cancer Center Amsterdam, Imaging and Biomarkers, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
- Department of Radiology and Nuclear Medicine, Amsterdam UMC Location 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 Reproduction, University of Maastricht, Maastricht, the Netherlands
- Department of Radiology, Odense University Hospital, Odense, Denmark
- Department of Clinical Research, University of Southern Denmark, Odense, Denmark
| | - Arend G J Aalbers
- Department of Surgery, The Netherlands Cancer Institute, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - Geerard L Beets
- GROW School for Oncology and Reproduction, University of Maastricht, Maastricht, the Netherlands
- Department of Surgery, The Netherlands Cancer Institute, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - Evert-Jan G Boerma
- Department of Surgery, Zuyderland Medical Center, Sittard-Geleen, the Netherlands
| | - Jaap Borstlap
- Department of Radiology, Treant Zorggroep, Hoogeveen, the Netherlands
| | | | | | | | | | - Paul H P Davids
- Department of Surgery, Diakonessenhuis, Utrecht, the Netherlands
| | - Michalda S Dunker
- Department of Surgery, Northwest Clinics, NWZ Alkmaar, Alkmaar, the Netherlands
| | - Hans F J Fabry
- Department of Surgery, Bravis Hospital, Roosendaal, the Netherlands
| | - Edgar J B Furnée
- Division of Abdominal Surgery, Department of Surgery, University of Groningen, University Medical Center Groningen, Groningen, the Netherlands
| | | | - Robbert J de Haas
- Department of Radiology, University of Groningen, University Medical Center Groningen, Groningen, the Netherlands
| | | | | | - Fleur I de Korte
- Department of Radiology, Haaglanden Medical Centre, The Hague, the Netherlands
| | | | - Koen C M J Peeters
- Department of Surgery, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, the Netherlands
| | - Lisanne A E Posma
- Department of Surgery, Slingeland Hospital, Doetinchem, the Netherlands
| | - Bareld B Pultrum
- Department of Surgery, Martini Hospital, Groningen, the Netherlands
| | - Joost Rothbarth
- Department of Surgical Oncology and Gastrointestinal Surgery, Rotterdam, the Netherlands
| | - Harm J T Rutten
- GROW School for Oncology and Reproduction, University of Maastricht, Maastricht, the Netherlands
- Department of Surgery, Catharina Hospital, Eindhoven, the Netherlands
| | | | | | - Petra C G Simons
- Department of Radiology, VieCuri Medical Centre, Venlo, the Netherlands
| | - Anke B Smits
- Department of Surgery, St. Antonius Hospital, Nieuwegein, the Netherlands
| | - Aaldert K Talsma
- Department of Surgery, Deventer Hospital, Deventer, the Netherlands
| | - G Y Mireille The
- Department of Radiology, Bravis Hospital, Roosendaal, the Netherlands
| | - Fiek van Tilborg
- Department of Radiology, Elisabeth-TweeSteden Hospital, Tilburg, the Netherlands
| | - Jurriaan B Tuynman
- Department of Surgery, Amsterdam UMC, Location Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
- Cancer Center Amsterdam, Treatment and Quality of Life, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
- Cancer Center Amsterdam, Imaging and Biomarkers, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - Inge J S Vanhooymissen
- Department of Radiology and Nuclear Medicine, Amsterdam UMC Location Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | | | | | - Maarten Vermaas
- Department of Surgery, IJsselland Hospital, Capelle aan den IJssel, the Netherlands
| | - Roy F A Vliegen
- Department of Radiology, Zuyderland Medical Center, Sittard-Geleen, the Netherlands
| | - F Jeroen Vogelaar
- Department of Surgery, VieCuri Medical Centre, Venlo, the Netherlands
| | | | - Joy C Vroemen
- Department of Radiology, Flevoziekenhuis, Almere, the Netherlands
| | | | - Marinke Westerterp
- Department of Surgery, Haaglanden Medical Centre, The Hague, the Netherlands
| | | | - Johannes H W de Wilt
- Department of Surgery, Radboud University Medical Center, Nijmegen, the Netherlands
| | | | - David D E Zimmerman
- Department of Surgery, Elisabeth-TweeSteden Hospital, Tilburg, the Netherlands
| | - Corrie A M Marijnen
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Netherlands Cancer Institute, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, the Netherlands
| | - Pieter J Tanis
- Cancer Center Amsterdam, Treatment and Quality of Life, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
- Cancer Center Amsterdam, Imaging and Biomarkers, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
- Department of Surgical Oncology and Gastrointestinal Surgery, Rotterdam, the Netherlands
- Department of Surgery, Amsterdam UMC Location University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - Miranda Kusters
- Department of Surgery, Amsterdam UMC, Location Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, Amsterdam, the Netherlands.
- Cancer Center Amsterdam, Treatment and Quality of Life, Amsterdam, the Netherlands.
- Cancer Center Amsterdam, Imaging and Biomarkers, Amsterdam, the Netherlands.
| |
Collapse
|
28
|
Beets GL. Near-complete response following neoadjuvant therapy in rectal cancer: wait a bit longer? Br J Surg 2023:znad165. [PMID: 37364285 DOI: 10.1093/bjs/znad165] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 05/03/2023] [Accepted: 05/12/2023] [Indexed: 06/28/2023]
Affiliation(s)
- Geerard L Beets
- Department of Surgery, Netherlands Cancer Institute, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
- GROW School for Oncology and Reproduction, Maastricht University, Maastricht, the Netherlands
| |
Collapse
|
29
|
Temmink SJD, Peeters KCMJ, Bahadoer RR, Kranenbarg EMK, Roodvoets AGH, Melenhorst J, Burger JWA, Wolthuis A, Renehan AG, Figueiredo NL, Pares O, Martling A, Perez RO, Beets GL, van de Velde CJH, Nilsson PJ. Watch and wait after neoadjuvant treatment in rectal cancer: comparison of outcomes in patients with and without a complete response at first reassessment in the International Watch & Wait Database (IWWD). Br J Surg 2023; 110:676-684. [PMID: 36972213 PMCID: PMC10364523 DOI: 10.1093/bjs/znad051] [Citation(s) in RCA: 7] [Impact Index Per Article: 7.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 10/28/2022] [Revised: 01/13/2023] [Accepted: 02/05/2023] [Indexed: 03/29/2023]
Abstract
BACKGROUND In rectal cancer, watch and wait for patients with a cCR after neoadjuvant treatment has an established evidence base. However, there is a lack of consensus on the definition and management of a near-cCR. This study aimed to compare outcomes in patients who achieved a cCR at first reassessment versus later reassessment. METHODS This registry study included patients from the International Watch & Wait Database. Patients were categorized as having a cCR at first reassessment or at later reassessment (that is near-cCR at first reassessment) based on MRI and endoscopy. Organ preservation, distant metastasis-free survival, and overall survival rates were calculated. Subgroup analyses were done for near-cCR groups based on the response evaluation according to modality. RESULTS A total of 1010 patients were identified. At first reassessment, 608 patients had a cCR; 402 had a cCR at later reassessment. Median follow-up was 2.6 years for patients with a cCR at first reassessment and 2.9 years for those with a cCR at later reassessment. The 2-year organ preservation rate was 77.8 (95 per cent c.i. 74.2 to 81.5) and 79.3 (75.1 to 83.7) per cent respectively (P = 0.499). Similarly, no differences were found between groups in distant metastasis-free survival or overall survival rate. Subgroup analyses showed a higher organ preservation rate in the group with a near-cCR categorized exclusively by MRI. CONCLUSION Oncological outcomes for patients with a cCR at later reassessment are no worse than those of patients with a cCR at first reassessment.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Sofieke J D Temmink
- Department of Molecular Medicine and Surgery, Karolinska Institutet, Stockholm, Sweden
| | - Koen C M J Peeters
- Department of Surgery, Leiden University Medical Centre, Leiden, the Netherlands
| | - Renu R Bahadoer
- Department of Surgery, Leiden University Medical Centre, Leiden, the Netherlands
| | | | - Annet G H Roodvoets
- Department of Surgery, Leiden University Medical Centre, Leiden, the Netherlands
| | - Jarno Melenhorst
- Department of Surgery, Maastricht Universitair Medisch Centrum+, Maastricht, the Netherlands
| | | | - Albert Wolthuis
- Department of Abdominal Surgery, University Hospitals Leuven, Leuven, Belgium
| | - Andrew G Renehan
- Manchester Cancer Research Centre, National Institute for Health Research Manchester Biomedical Research Centre, Division of Cancer Sciences, School of Medical Sciences, Faculty of Biology, Medicine, and Health, University of Manchester, Manchester, UK
- Colorectal and Peritoneal Oncology Centre, Christie National Health Service Foundation Trust, Manchester, UK
| | | | - Oriol Pares
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Champalimaud Foundation, Lisbon, Portugal
| | - Anna Martling
- Department of Molecular Medicine and Surgery, Karolinska Institutet, Stockholm, Sweden
| | - Rodrigo O Perez
- Department of Colorectal Surgery, Angelita and Joaquim Gama Institute, São Paulo, Brazil
- Department of Surgical Oncology, Hospital Beneficencia Portuguesa, São Paulo, Brazil
- Colorectal Surgery Division, Hospital Alemão Oswaldo Cruz, São Paulo, Brazil
- Ludwig Institute for Cancer Research, São Paulo Branch, São Paulo, Brazil
| | - Geerard L Beets
- Department of Surgery, Netherlands Cancer Institute—Antoni van Leeuwenhoek, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
- GROW School for Oncology and Developmental Biology, Maastricht University, Maastricht, the Netherlands
| | | | - Per J Nilsson
- Department of Molecular Medicine and Surgery, Karolinska Institutet, Stockholm, Sweden
| |
Collapse
|
30
|
Custers PA, van der Sande ME, Grotenhuis BA, Peters FP, van Kuijk SMJ, Beets GL, Breukink SO. Long-term Quality of Life and Functional Outcome of Patients With Rectal Cancer Following a Watch-and-Wait Approach. JAMA Surg 2023; 158:e230146. [PMID: 36988922 PMCID: PMC10061319 DOI: 10.1001/jamasurg.2023.0146] [Citation(s) in RCA: 8] [Impact Index Per Article: 8.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 06/16/2022] [Accepted: 11/17/2022] [Indexed: 03/30/2023]
Abstract
Importance A watch-and-wait approach for patients with rectal cancer and a clinical complete response after neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy or radiotherapy is associated with better quality of life and functional outcome. Nevertheless, prospective data on both parameters are scarce. Objective To prospectively evaluate quality of life and functional outcome, including bowel, urinary, and sexual function, of patients following a watch-and-wait approach. Design, Setting, and Participants A total of 278 patients with rectal cancer and a clinical complete response or near-complete response after neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy or radiotherapy were included in 2 prospective cohort studies: a single-center study (March 2014 to October 2017) and an ongoing multicenter study (from September 2017). Patients were observed by a watch-and-wait approach. Additional local excision or total mesorectal excision was performed for residual disease or regrowth. Data were analyzed between April 1, 2021, and August 27, 2021, for patients with a minimum follow-up of 24 months. Main Outcomes and Measures Quality of life was evaluated with the European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer-Quality of Life Questionnaire-C30 (EORTC-QLQ-C30), EORTC-QLQ-CR38, or EORTC-QLQ-CR29 and 36-Item Short-Form Health Survey. The score for the questionnaires and 36-Item Short-Form Health Survey ranges from 0 to 100. For some scales, a high score indicates a high level of functioning, and for others it indicates a high level of complaints and symptomatology. Functional outcome was assessed by the Low Anterior Resection Syndrome score, Vaizey incontinence score, International Prostate Symptom Score, International Index of Erectile Function, and Female Sexual Function Index. Results Of 278 patients included, 187 were male (67%), and the median age was 66 years (range, 34-85 years). In the first 24 months, 221 patients (80%) were observed by a watch-and-wait approach without requiring surgery, 18 patients (6%) underwent additional local excision, and 39 patients (14%) underwent total mesorectal excision. In general, patients observed by a watch-and-wait approach reported good quality of life, with limited variation over time. At 3 months, 56 of 221 patients (25.3%) reported major bowel dysfunction; at 12 months, 53 patients (24.0%) reported it; and at 24 months, 55 patients (24.9%) reported it. At 24 months, 48 of 151 male patients (31.8%) reported severe erectile dysfunction. For female patients, sexual satisfaction and overall sexual function decreased during follow-up. Patients who underwent local excision reported more major bowel dysfunction (10 of 18 patients [55.6%]) compared with those without additional surgery. Quality-of-life scores, however, were comparable. After total mesorectal excision, patients scored significantly worse on several quality-of-life subscales. Conclusions and Relevance Results of this study suggest that patients with rectal cancer who were observed by a watch-and-wait approach had good quality of life, with some patients reporting bowel and sexual dysfunction. Quality of life and functional outcome deteriorated when patients required surgery. These data will be useful in daily care to counsel patients on what to expect from a watch-and-wait approach.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Petra A. Custers
- Department of Surgery, Netherlands Cancer Institute–Antoni van Leeuwenhoek, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
- GROW School for Oncology and Reproduction, Maastricht University, Maastricht, the Netherlands
| | - Marit E. van der Sande
- Department of Surgery, Netherlands Cancer Institute–Antoni van Leeuwenhoek, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
- GROW School for Oncology and Reproduction, Maastricht University, Maastricht, the Netherlands
| | - Brechtje A. Grotenhuis
- Department of Surgery, Netherlands Cancer Institute–Antoni van Leeuwenhoek, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - Femke P. Peters
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Netherlands Cancer Institute–Antoni van Leeuwenhoek, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Leiden University Medical Centre, Leiden, the Netherlands
| | - Sander M. J. van Kuijk
- Department of Clinical Epidemiology and Medical Technology Assessment, Maastricht University Medical Centre, Maastricht, the Netherlands
| | - Geerard L. Beets
- Department of Surgery, Netherlands Cancer Institute–Antoni van Leeuwenhoek, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
- GROW School for Oncology and Reproduction, Maastricht University, Maastricht, the Netherlands
| | - Stéphanie O. Breukink
- GROW School for Oncology and Reproduction, Maastricht University, Maastricht, the Netherlands
- Department of Surgery, Maastricht University Medical Centre, Maastricht, the Netherlands
- NUTRIM School of Nutrition and Translational Research in Metabolism, Maastricht University, Maastricht, the Netherlands
| |
Collapse
|
31
|
Meyer VM, Meuzelaar RR, Schoenaker IJH, de Groot JWB, Reerink O, de Vos Tot Nederveen Cappel WH, Beets GL, van Westreenen HL. Delayed TME Surgery in a Watch-and-Wait Strategy After Neoadjuvant Chemoradiotherapy for Rectal Cancer: An Analysis of Hospital Costs and Surgical and Oncological Outcomes. Dis Colon Rectum 2023; 66:671-680. [PMID: 34856587 DOI: 10.1097/dcr.0000000000002259] [Citation(s) in RCA: 2] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 01/03/2023]
Abstract
BACKGROUND A watch-and-wait strategy for patients with rectal cancer with a clinical complete response after neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy is a valuable alternative for rectal resection. However, there are patients who will have residual tumor or regrowth during watch and wait. OBJECTIVE The aim of this study was to investigate safety and costs for patients who underwent delayed surgery after neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy. DESIGN This is a retrospective cohort study with prospectively collected data. SETTINGS The study was conducted at a large teaching hospital. PATIENTS Between January 2015 and May 2020, 622 new rectal cancer patients were seen, of whom 200 received neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy. Ninety-four patients were included, 65 of whom underwent immediate surgery and 29 of whom required delayed surgery after an initial watch-and-wait approach. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES Outcome measures included 30-day postoperative morbidity rate, hospital costs. 2-year overall and disease-free survival. RESULTS There was no difference in length of stay (9 vs 8; p = 0.83), readmissions (27.6% vs 10.0%; p = 0.10), surgical re-interventions (15.0% vs 3.4%; p = 0.16), or stoma-free rate (52.6% vs 31.0%; p = 0.09) between immediate and delayed surgery groups. Hospital costs were similar in the delayed group (€11,913 vs €13,769; p = 0.89). Two-year overall survival (93% vs 100%; p = 0.23) and disease-free survival (78% vs 81%; p = 0.47) rates were comparable. LIMITATIONS Limitations included small sample size, follow-up time and retrospective design. CONCLUSION Delayed surgery for regrowth in a watch-and-wait program or for persistent residual disease after a repeated assessment is not associated with an increased risk of postoperative morbidity or a significant rise in costs compared to immediate total mesorectal excision. There also appears to be no evident compromise in oncological outcome. Repeated response assessment in patients with a near complete clinical response after neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy is a useful approach to identify more patients who can benefit from a watch-and-wait strategy. See Video Abstract at http://links.lww.com/DCR/B836 . CIRUGA DE TME RETRASADA EN UNA ESTRATEGIA DE WATCH AND WAIT DESPUS DE LA QUIMIORRADIOTERAPIA NEOADYUVANTE PARA CNCER DE RECTO UN ANLISIS DE COSTOS HOSPITALARIOS, Y DE RESULTADOS QUIRRGICOS Y ONCOLGICOS ANTECEDENTES: Una estrategia de Watch and Wait para pacientes con cáncer de recto con una respuesta clínica completa después de quimiorradioterapia neoadyuvante es una alternativa valiosa en vez de resección rectal. Sin embargo, hay pacientes que tendrán tumor residual o un recrecimiento durante el Watch and Wait .OBJETIVO: El objetivo fue investigar la seguridad y los costos para los pacientes que se sometieron a una cirugía diferida después de la quimiorradioterapia neoadyuvante.DISEÑO: Este es un estudio de cohorte retrospectivo con datos recolectados prospectivamente.AJUSTE: El estudio se llevó a cabo en un gran hospital universitario.PACIENTES: Entre enero de 2015 y mayo de 2020, se atendieron 622 nuevos pacientes con cáncer de recto, de los cuales 200 recibieron quimiorradioterapia neoadyuvante. Se incluyeron 94 pacientes, de los cuales 65 se sometieron a cirugía inmediata y 29 pacientes requirieron cirugía diferida después de un enfoque inicial de observación y espera.PRINCIPALES MEDIDAS DE RESULTADO: se incluyeron la tasa de morbilidad posoperatoria a 30 días, los costos hospitalarios y las sobrevidas general y libre de enfermedad a dos años.RESULTADOS: No hubo diferencia en la duración de la estancia (9 vs 8, p = 0,83), reingresos (27,6% vs 10,0%, p = 0,10), reintervenciones quirúrgicas (15,0% vs 3,4%, p = 0,16) y tasa libre de estoma (52,6% vs 31,0%, p = 0,09) entre los grupos de cirugía inmediata y tardía. Los costos hospitalarios fueron similares en el grupo retrasado (11913 € frente a 13769 €, p = 0,89). Las tasas de sobrevida general a dos años (93% frente a 100%, p = 0,23) y sobrevida libre de enfermedad (78% frente a 81%, p = 0,47) fueron comparables.LIMITACIONES: Tamaño de muestra pequeño, tiempo de seguimiento y diseño retrospectivo.CONCLUSIÓN: La cirugía tardía para el recrecimiento en un programa de Watch and Wait o para la enfermedad residual persistente después de una evaluación repetida no se asocia con un riesgo mayor de morbilidad posoperatoria ni con un aumento significativo en los costos, en comparación con la escisión total de mesorrecto inmediata. Tampoco parece haber un compromiso evidente en el resultado oncológico. La evaluación repetida de la respuesta en pacientes con una respuesta clínica casi completa después de la quimiorradioterapia neoadyuvante es un enfoque útil para identificar más pacientes que pueden beneficiarse de una estrategia de Watch and Wait . Consulte Video Resumen en http://links.lww.com/DCR/B836 . (Traducción-Dr. Juan Carlos Reyes ).
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Vincent M Meyer
- Department of Surgery, Isala Hospitals, Zwolle, The Netherlands
| | - Richtje R Meuzelaar
- Department of Surgery, Isala Hospitals, Zwolle, The Netherlands
- Department of Oncology, Isala Hospitals, Zwolle, The Netherlands
- Department of Radiotherapy, Isala Hospitals, Zwolle, The Netherlands
- Department of Gastroenterology, Isala Hospitals, Zwolle, The Netherlands
- Department of Surgery, Netherlands Cancer Institute, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
- GROW School for Oncology and Developmental Biology, Maastricht University, The Netherlands
| | | | | | - Onne Reerink
- Department of Radiotherapy, Isala Hospitals, Zwolle, The Netherlands
| | | | - Geerard L Beets
- Department of Surgery, Netherlands Cancer Institute, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
- GROW School for Oncology and Developmental Biology, Maastricht University, The Netherlands
| | | |
Collapse
|
32
|
Bogveradze N, Maas M, El Khababi N, Schurink NW, Lahaye MJ, Bakers FC, Tanis PJ, Kusters M, Beets GL, Beets-Tan RG, Lambregts DM. Pelvic CT in addition to MRI to differentiate between rectal and sigmoid cancer on imaging using the sigmoid take-off as a landmark. Acta Radiol 2023; 64:467-472. [PMID: 35404168 DOI: 10.1177/02841851221091209] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/16/2022]
Abstract
BACKGROUND The sigmoid take-off (STO) is a recently established landmark to discern rectal from sigmoid cancer on imaging. STO-assessment can be challenging on magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) due to varying axial planes. PURPOSE To establish the benefit of using computed tomography (CT; with consistent axial planes), in addition to MRI, to anatomically classify rectal versus sigmoid cancer using the STO. MATERIAL AND METHODS A senior and junior radiologist retrospectively classified 40 patients with rectal/rectosigmoid cancers using the STO, first on MRI-only (sagittal and oblique-axial views) and then using a combination of MRI and axial CT. Tumors were classified as rectal/rectosigmoid/sigmoid (according to published STO definitions) and then dichotomized into rectal versus sigmoid. Diagnostic confidence was documented using a 5-point scale. RESULTS Adding CT resulted in a change in anatomical tumor classification in 4/40 cases (10%) for the junior reader and in 6/40 cases (15%) for the senior reader. Diagnostic confidence increased significantly after adding CT for the junior reader (mean score 3.85 vs. 4.27; P < 0.001); confidence of the senior reader was not affected (4.28 vs. 4.25; P = 0.80). Inter-observer agreement was similarly good for MRI only (κ=0.77) and MRI + CT (κ=0.76). Readers reached consensus on the classification of rectal versus sigmoid cancer in 78%-85% of cases. CONCLUSION Availability of a consistent axial imaging plane - in the case of this study provided by CT - in addition to a standard MRI protocol with sagittal and oblique-axial imaging views can be helpful to more confidently localize tumors using the STO as a landmark, especially for more junior readers.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Nino Bogveradze
- Department of Radiology, 1228The Netherlands Cancer Institute, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.,GROW School for Oncology & Developmental Biology, 5211University of Maastricht, Maastricht, The Netherlands.,Department of Radiology, American Hospital Tbilisi, Tbilisi, Georgia
| | - Monique Maas
- Department of Radiology, 1228The Netherlands Cancer Institute, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Najim El Khababi
- Department of Radiology, 1228The Netherlands Cancer Institute, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.,GROW School for Oncology & Developmental Biology, 5211University of Maastricht, Maastricht, The Netherlands
| | - Niels W Schurink
- Department of Radiology, 1228The Netherlands Cancer Institute, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.,GROW School for Oncology & Developmental Biology, 5211University of Maastricht, Maastricht, The Netherlands
| | - Max J Lahaye
- Department of Radiology, 1228The Netherlands Cancer Institute, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Frans Ch Bakers
- Department of Radiology, 199236Maastricht University Medical Centre, Maastricht, The Netherlands
| | - Pieter J Tanis
- Department of Surgery, Amsterdam UMC, Cancer Centre Amsterdam, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.,Department of Surgical Oncology and Gastrointestinal Surgery, 6993Erasmus MC, Rotterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Miranda Kusters
- Department of Surgery, Amsterdam University Medical Centres, Cancer Centre Amsterdam, 1209University of Amsterdam and VU University, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Geerard L Beets
- GROW School for Oncology & Developmental Biology, 5211University of Maastricht, Maastricht, The Netherlands.,Department of Surgery, 1228The Netherlands Cancer Institute, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Regina Gh Beets-Tan
- Department of Radiology, 1228The Netherlands Cancer Institute, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.,GROW School for Oncology & Developmental Biology, 5211University of Maastricht, Maastricht, The Netherlands.,Institute of Regional Health Research, University of Southern Denmark, Denmark
| | - Doenja Mj Lambregts
- Department of Radiology, 1228The Netherlands Cancer Institute, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| |
Collapse
|
33
|
Grotenhuis BA, Beets GL. Watch-and-Wait is an Option in Rectal Cancer Patients: From Controversy to Common Clinical Practice. Clin Oncol (R Coll Radiol) 2023; 35:124-129. [PMID: 36481218 DOI: 10.1016/j.clon.2022.11.011] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/26/2022] [Revised: 10/26/2022] [Accepted: 11/14/2022] [Indexed: 12/12/2022]
Abstract
Overview of the introduction of organ preservation in rectal cancer patients and future challenges.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- B A Grotenhuis
- Department of Surgical Oncology, Netherlands Cancer Institute/Antoni van Leeuwenhoek Hospital, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - G L Beets
- GROW - School for Oncology and Reproduction, Maastricht University, Maastricht, The Netherlands.
| |
Collapse
|
34
|
Bogveradze N, Snaebjornsson P, Grotenhuis BA, van Triest B, Lahaye MJ, Maas M, Beets GL, Beets-Tan RGH, Lambregts DMJ. MRI anatomy of the rectum: key concepts important for rectal cancer staging and treatment planning. Insights Imaging 2023; 14:13. [PMID: 36652149 PMCID: PMC9849549 DOI: 10.1186/s13244-022-01348-8] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 08/31/2022] [Accepted: 12/04/2022] [Indexed: 01/19/2023] Open
Abstract
A good understanding of the MRI anatomy of the rectum and its surroundings is pivotal to ensure high-quality diagnostic evaluation and reporting of rectal cancer. With this pictorial review, we aim to provide an image-based overview of key anatomical concepts essential for treatment planning, response evaluation and post-operative assessment. These concepts include the cross-sectional anatomy of the rectal wall in relation to T-staging; differences in staging and treatment between anal and rectal cancer; landmarks used to define the upper and lower boundaries of the rectum; the anatomy of the pelvic floor and anal canal, the mesorectal fascia, peritoneum and peritoneal reflection; and guides to help discern different pelvic lymph node stations on MRI to properly stage regional and non-regional rectal lymph node metastases. Finally, this review will highlight key aspects of post-treatment anatomy, including the assessment of radiation-induced changes and the evaluation of the post-operative pelvis after different surgical resection and reconstruction techniques.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Nino Bogveradze
- grid.430814.a0000 0001 0674 1393Department of Radiology, The Netherlands Cancer Institute, P.O. Box 90203, 1006 BE Amsterdam, The Netherlands ,grid.5012.60000 0001 0481 6099GROW School for Oncology and Developmental Biology, University of Maastricht, Maastricht, The Netherlands ,Department of Radiology, American Hospital Tbilisi, Tbilisi, Georgia
| | - Petur Snaebjornsson
- grid.430814.a0000 0001 0674 1393Department of Pathology, Netherlands Cancer Institute, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Brechtje A. Grotenhuis
- grid.430814.a0000 0001 0674 1393Department of Surgery, Netherlands Cancer Institute, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Baukelien van Triest
- grid.430814.a0000 0001 0674 1393Department of Radiation Oncology, Netherlands Cancer Institute, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Max J. Lahaye
- grid.430814.a0000 0001 0674 1393Department of Radiology, The Netherlands Cancer Institute, P.O. Box 90203, 1006 BE Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Monique Maas
- grid.430814.a0000 0001 0674 1393Department of Radiology, The Netherlands Cancer Institute, P.O. Box 90203, 1006 BE Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Geerard L. Beets
- grid.5012.60000 0001 0481 6099GROW School for Oncology and Developmental Biology, University of Maastricht, Maastricht, The Netherlands ,grid.430814.a0000 0001 0674 1393Department of Surgery, Netherlands Cancer Institute, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Regina G. H. Beets-Tan
- grid.430814.a0000 0001 0674 1393Department of Radiology, The Netherlands Cancer Institute, P.O. Box 90203, 1006 BE Amsterdam, The Netherlands ,grid.5012.60000 0001 0481 6099GROW School for Oncology and Developmental Biology, University of Maastricht, Maastricht, The Netherlands ,grid.10825.3e0000 0001 0728 0170Institute of Regional Health Research, University of Southern Denmark, Odense, Denmark
| | - Doenja M. J. Lambregts
- grid.430814.a0000 0001 0674 1393Department of Radiology, The Netherlands Cancer Institute, P.O. Box 90203, 1006 BE Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| |
Collapse
|
35
|
Fernandez LM, São Julião GP, Renehan AG, Beets GL, Papoila AL, Vailati BB, Bahadoer RR, Kranenbarg EMK, Roodvoets AGH, Figueiredo NL, Van De Velde CJH, Habr-Gama A, Perez RO. The Risk of Distant Metastases in Patients With Clinical Complete Response Managed by Watch and Wait After Neoadjuvant Therapy for Rectal Cancer: The Influence of Local Regrowth in the International Watch and Wait Database. Dis Colon Rectum 2023; 66:41-49. [PMID: 36515514 DOI: 10.1097/dcr.0000000000002494] [Citation(s) in RCA: 16] [Impact Index Per Article: 16.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/15/2022]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Nearly 30% of patients with rectal cancer develop local regrowth after initial clinical complete response managed by watch and wait. These patients might be at higher risk for distant metastases. OBJECTIVE This study aimed to investigate risk factors for distant metastases using time-dependent analyses. DESIGN Data from an international watch and wait database were retrospectively reviewed. Cox regression analysis was used to determine risk factors for worse distant metastases-free survival. Conditional survival modeling was used to investigate the impact of risk factors on the development of distant metastases. SETTING Retrospective, multicenter database. PATIENTS A total of 793 patients (47 institutions) with rectal cancer and clinical complete response to neoadjuvant treatment from the International Watch & Wait Database were included. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES Distant metastases-free survival. RESULTS Of the 793 patients managed with watch and wait (median follow-up 55.2 mo)' 85 patients (10.7%) had distant metastases. Fifty-one of 85 patients (60%) had local regrowth at any time. Local regrowth was an independent factor associated with worse distant metastases-free survival in the multivariable model. Using conditional estimates, patients with local regrowth without distant metastases for 5 years (from decision to watch and wait) remained at higher risk for development of distant metastases for 1 subsequent year compared to patients without local regrowth (5-year conditional distant metastases-free survival 94.9% vs 98.4%). LIMITATIONS Lack of information on adjuvant chemotherapy, salvage surgery for local regrowth, and heterogeneity of individual surveillance/follow-up strategies used may have affected results. CONCLUSIONS In patients with clinical complete response managed by watch and wait, development of local regrowth at any time is a risk factor for distant metastases. The risk of distant metastases remains higher for 5 years after development of local regrowth. See Video Abstract at http://links.lww.com/DCR/C53. EL RIESGO DE METSTASIS A DISTANCIA EN PACIENTES CON RESPUESTA CLNICA COMPLETA MANEJADA POR WATCH AND WAIT DESPUS DE LA TERAPIA NEOADYUVANTE PARA EL CNCER DE RECTO LA INFLUENCIA DEL NUEVO CRECIMIENTO LOCAL EN LA BASE DE DATOS INTERNACIONAL WATCH AND WAIT ANTECEDENTES:Casi el 30 % de los pacientes con cáncer de recto desarrollan un nuevo crecimiento local después de la respuesta clínica completa inicial manejada por watch and wait. Estos pacientes podrían tener un mayor riesgo de metástasis a distancia.OBJETIVO:Investigar los factores de riesgo de metástasis a distancia mediante análisis dependientes del tiempo.DISEÑO:Se revisó retrospectivamente los datos de la base de datos internacional de Watch and Wait. Se utilizó el análisis de regresión de Cox para determinar los factores de riesgo de peor sobrevida libre de metástasis a distancia. Se utilizó un modelo de sobrevida condicional para investigar el impacto de los factores de riesgo en el desarrollo de metástasis a distancia. El tiempo transcurrido hasta el evento se calculó utilizando la fecha de decisión para watch and wait y la fecha del nuevo crecimiento local para el diagnóstico de metástasis a distancia.ESCENARIOBase de datos multicéntrica retrospectiva.PACIENTES:Se incluyeron un total de 793 pacientes (47 instituciones) con cáncer de recto y respuesta clínica completa al tratamiento neoadyuvante de la base de datos internacional de Watch and Wait.PRINCIPALES MEDIDAS DE RESULTADO:Desarrollo de metástasis a distancia.RESULTADOS:De los 793 pacientes tratados con watch and wait (mediana de seguimiento de 55,2 meses), 85 (10,7%) tenían metástasis a distancia. 51 de 85 (60%) tuvieron recrecimiento local en algún momento. El recrecimiento local fue un factor independiente asociado a una peor supervivencia libre de metástasis a distancia en el modelo multivariable. Además, al usar estimaciones condicionales, los pacientes con recrecimiento local sin metástasis a distancia durante 5 años (desde la decisión de watch and wait) permanecieron en mayor riesgo de desarrollar metástasis a distancia durante un año subsiguiente en comparación con los pacientes sin recrecimiento local (sobrevida libre de metástasis a distancia a 5 años: recrecimiento local 94,9% frente a no recrecimiento local 98,4%).LIMITACIONES:La falta de información relacionada con el uso de quimioterapia adyuvante, las características específicas de la cirugía de rescate para el nuevo crecimient o local y la heterogeneidad de las estrategias individuales de vigilancia/seguimiento utilizadas pueden haber afectado los resultados observados.CONCLUSIONES:En pacientes con respuesta clínica completa manejados por Watch and Wait, el desarrollo de recrecimiento local en cualquier momento es un factor de riesgo para metástasis a distancia. El riesgo de metástasis a distancia sigue siendo mayor durante 5 años después del desarrollo de un nuevo crecimiento local. Consulte Video Resumen en http://links.lww.com/DCR/C53. (Traducción-Dr. Felipe Bellolio).
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Laura M Fernandez
- Colorectal Surgery, Digestive Department, Champalimaud Foundation, Lisbon, Portugal
| | - Guilherme P São Julião
- Colorectal Surgery Division, Angelita and Joaquim Gama Institute, São Paulo, Brazil
- Department of Surgical Oncology, Colorectal Surgery Division, Hospital Beneficencia Portuguesa, São Paulo, Brazil
- Colorectal Surgery Division, Hospital Alemão Oswaldo Cruz, São Paulo, Brazil
| | - Andrew G Renehan
- Manchester Cancer Research Centre, National Institute of Health and Research Manchester Biomedical Research Centre, Division of Cancer Sciences, School of Medical Sciences, Faculty of Biology, Medicine, and Health, University of Manchester, Manchester, United Kingdom
- Colorectal and Peritoneal Oncology Centre, The Christie National Health Service Foundation Trust, Manchester, United Kingdom
| | - Geerard L Beets
- Department of Surgery, Netherlands Cancer Institute, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
- GROW School for Oncology and Developmental Biology, Maastricht University, the Netherlands
| | - Ana L Papoila
- NOVA Medical School, Faculdade de Ciências Médicas (NMS|FCM), Lisbon, Portugal
| | - Bruna B Vailati
- Colorectal Surgery Division, Angelita and Joaquim Gama Institute, São Paulo, Brazil
- Department of Surgical Oncology, Colorectal Surgery Division, Hospital Beneficencia Portuguesa, São Paulo, Brazil
- Colorectal Surgery Division, Hospital Alemão Oswaldo Cruz, São Paulo, Brazil
| | - Renu R Bahadoer
- Department of Surgery, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, the Netherlands
| | | | - Annet G H Roodvoets
- Department of Surgery, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, the Netherlands
| | - Nuno L Figueiredo
- Colorectal Surgery, Digestive Department, Champalimaud Foundation, Lisbon, Portugal
- Colorectal Surgery, Hospital Lusiadas, Lisbon, Portugal
| | - Cornelis J H Van De Velde
- Department of Surgery, Netherlands Cancer Institute, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
- Department of Surgery, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, the Netherlands
| | - Angelita Habr-Gama
- Colorectal Surgery Division, Angelita and Joaquim Gama Institute, São Paulo, Brazil
- Colorectal Surgery Division, Hospital Alemão Oswaldo Cruz, São Paulo, Brazil
- University of São Paulo School of Medicine, São Paulo, Brazil
| | - Rodrigo O Perez
- Colorectal Surgery Division, Angelita and Joaquim Gama Institute, São Paulo, Brazil
- Department of Surgical Oncology, Colorectal Surgery Division, Hospital Beneficencia Portuguesa, São Paulo, Brazil
- Colorectal Surgery Division, Hospital Alemão Oswaldo Cruz, São Paulo, Brazil
- Ludwig Institute for Cancer Research, São Paulo Branch, Brazil
| |
Collapse
|
36
|
El Khababi N, Beets-Tan RGH, Tissier R, Lahaye MJ, Maas M, Curvo-Semedo L, Dresen RC, Nougaret S, Beets GL, Lambregts DMJ. Comparison of MRI response evaluation methods in rectal cancer: a multicentre and multireader validation study. Eur Radiol 2022; 33:4367-4377. [PMID: 36576549 DOI: 10.1007/s00330-022-09342-w] [Citation(s) in RCA: 4] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 07/07/2022] [Revised: 09/30/2022] [Accepted: 11/29/2022] [Indexed: 12/29/2022]
Abstract
OBJECTIVES To compare four previously published methods for rectal tumor response evaluation after chemoradiotherapy on MRI. METHODS Twenty-two radiologists (5 rectal MRI experts, 17 general/abdominal radiologists) retrospectively reviewed the post-chemoradiotherapy MRIs of 90 patients, scanned at 10 centers (with non-standardized protocols). They applied four response methods; two based on T2W-MRI only (MRI tumor regression grade (mrTRG); split-scar sign), and two based on T2W-MRI+DWI (modified-mrTRG; DWI-patterns). Image quality was graded using a 0-6-point score (including slice thickness and in-plane resolution; sequence angulation; DWI b-values, signal-to-noise, and artefacts); scores < 4 were classified below average. Mixed model linear regression was used to calculate average sensitivity/specificity/accuracy to predict a complete response (versus residual tumor) and assess the impact of reader experience and image quality. Group interobserver agreement (IOA) was calculated using Krippendorff's alpha. Readers were asked to indicate their preferred scoring method(s). RESULTS Average sensitivity/specificity/accuracy was 57%/64%/62% (mrTRG), 36%/79%/66% (split-scar), 40%/79%/67% (modified-mrTRG), and 37%/82%/68% (DWI-patterns); mrTRG showed higher sensitivity but lower specificity and accuracy (p < 0.001) compared to the other methods. IOA was lower for the split scar method (0.18 vs. 0.39-0.43). Higher reader experience had a significant positive effect on diagnostic performance and IOA (except for the split scar sign); below-average imaging quality had a significant negative effect on diagnostic performance. DWI pattern was selected as the preferred method by 73% of readers. CONCLUSIONS Methods incorporating DWI showed the most favorable results when combining diagnostic performance, IOA, and reader preference. Reader experience and image quality clearly impacted diagnostic performance emphasizing the need for state-of-the-art imaging and dedicated radiologist training. KEY POINTS • In a multireader study comparing 4 MRI methods for rectal tumor response evaluation, those incorporating DWI showed the best results when combining diagnostic performance, IOA, and reader preference. • The most preferred method (by 73% of readers) was the "DWI patterns" approach with an accuracy of 68%, high specificity of 82%, and group IOA of 0.43. • Reader experience level and MRI quality had an evident effect on diagnostic performance and IOA.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Najim El Khababi
- Department of Radiology, The Netherlands Cancer Institute, P.O. Box 90203, 1106, BE, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.,GROW School for Oncology & Developmental Biology, University of Maastricht, Maastricht, The Netherlands
| | - Regina G H Beets-Tan
- Department of Radiology, The Netherlands Cancer Institute, P.O. Box 90203, 1106, BE, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.,GROW School for Oncology & Developmental Biology, University of Maastricht, Maastricht, The Netherlands
| | - Renaud Tissier
- Department of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, The Netherlands Cancer Institute, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Max J Lahaye
- Department of Radiology, The Netherlands Cancer Institute, P.O. Box 90203, 1106, BE, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.,GROW School for Oncology & Developmental Biology, University of Maastricht, Maastricht, The Netherlands
| | - Monique Maas
- Department of Radiology, The Netherlands Cancer Institute, P.O. Box 90203, 1106, BE, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.,GROW School for Oncology & Developmental Biology, University of Maastricht, Maastricht, The Netherlands
| | - Luís Curvo-Semedo
- Department of Radiology, Centro Hospitalar e Universitario de Coimbra EPE, Faculty of Medicine, University of Coimbra, Coimbra, Portugal
| | - Raphaëla C Dresen
- Department of Radiology, University Hospitals Leuven, Leuven, Belgium
| | - Stephanie Nougaret
- Medical Imaging Department, Montpellier Cancer Institute, Montpellier Cancer Research Institute (U1194), University of Montpellier, Montpellier, France
| | - Geerard L Beets
- GROW School for Oncology & Developmental Biology, University of Maastricht, Maastricht, The Netherlands.,Department of Surgery, The Netherlands Cancer Institute, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Doenja M J Lambregts
- Department of Radiology, The Netherlands Cancer Institute, P.O. Box 90203, 1106, BE, Amsterdam, The Netherlands. .,GROW School for Oncology & Developmental Biology, University of Maastricht, Maastricht, The Netherlands.
| | | |
Collapse
|
37
|
Custers PA, Geubels BM, Beets GL, Lambregts DMJ, van Leerdam ME, van Triest B, Maas M. Defining near-complete response following (chemo)radiotherapy for rectal cancer: systematic review. Br J Surg 2022; 110:43-49. [PMID: 36349555 DOI: 10.1093/bjs/znac372] [Citation(s) in RCA: 10] [Impact Index Per Article: 5.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 06/10/2022] [Revised: 08/09/2022] [Accepted: 10/12/2022] [Indexed: 11/10/2022]
Abstract
BACKGROUND A uniform definition of a clinical near-complete response (near-CR) after neoadjuvant (chemo)radiotherapy for rectal cancer is lacking. A clear definition is necessary for uniformity in clinical practice and trial enrolment for organ-preserving treatments. This review aimed to provide an overview of the terminology, criteria, and features used in the literature to define a near-CR. METHODS A systematic review was performed based on the PRISMA statement. PubMed and Embase were searched up to May 2021 to identify the terminology, criteria, and features used to define a near-CR after (chemo)radiotherapy for rectal cancer. Studies with no clear cut-off point between a cCR and near-CR, studies using Response Evaluation Criteria In Solid Tumours, and studies including only complete responders were excluded. RESULTS A total of 1876 articles were found, of which 23 were included. Patients were managed by watchful waiting and/or additional local treatment in 11 and 17 of 23 studies respectively. Response evaluation included digital rectal examination (DRE) and/or endoscopy with MRI in 18 studies. The majority of studies used the term 'near-complete response'. In most studies, minor irregularities or a smooth induration with DRE and a small flat ulcer on endoscopy were considered to indicate a near-CR. On MRI, five studies used features (obvious downstaging with or without heterogeneous/irregular fibrosis on T2-weighted MRI or small spot of high signal on diffusion-weighted imaging), five studies used TNM criteria (ycT2), and four used magnetic resonance tumour regression grade (mrTRG) (mrTRG1-2/mrTRG2) to describe a near-CR. CONCLUSION The terminology, criteria, and features used to describe a near-CR vary substantially, which can partly be explained by the different treatment strategies patients are selected for (watchful waiting or additional local treatment). A reproducible definition of near-CR is required.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Petra A Custers
- Department of Surgery, Netherlands Cancer Institute-Antoni van Leeuwenhoek, Amsterdam, the Netherlands.,GROW School for Oncology and Reproduction, Maastricht University, Maastricht, the Netherlands
| | - Barbara M Geubels
- Department of Surgery, Netherlands Cancer Institute-Antoni van Leeuwenhoek, Amsterdam, the Netherlands.,GROW School for Oncology and Reproduction, Maastricht University, Maastricht, the Netherlands.,Department of Surgery, Catharina Hospital, Eindhoven, the Netherlands
| | - Geerard L Beets
- Department of Surgery, Netherlands Cancer Institute-Antoni van Leeuwenhoek, Amsterdam, the Netherlands.,GROW School for Oncology and Reproduction, Maastricht University, Maastricht, the Netherlands
| | - Doenja M J Lambregts
- Department of Radiology, Netherlands Cancer Institute-Antoni van Leeuwenhoek, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - Monique E van Leerdam
- Department of Gastroenterology, Netherlands Cancer Institute-Antoni van Leeuwenhoek, Amsterdam, the Netherlands.,Department of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Leiden University Medical Centre, Leiden, the Netherlands
| | - Baukelien van Triest
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Netherlands Cancer Institute-Antoni van Leeuwenhoek, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - Monique Maas
- Department of Radiology, Netherlands Cancer Institute-Antoni van Leeuwenhoek, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| |
Collapse
|
38
|
Spiekerman van Weezelenburg MA, de Rooij L, Aldenhoven L, Broos PP, van Kuijk SM, van Haaren ER, Janssen A, Vissers YL, Beets GL, van Bastelaar J. Evaluating HEmopatch® in Reducing Seroma-Related Complications following Axillary Lymph Node DIssection: A Pilot Study (HEIDI). Breast Care (Basel) 2022; 17:567-572. [PMID: 36590141 PMCID: PMC9801401 DOI: 10.1159/000525839] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 05/06/2022] [Accepted: 06/29/2022] [Indexed: 01/04/2023] Open
Abstract
Purpose Axillary lymph node dissection (ALND) is performed to treat locoregional metastatic disease in breast cancer and melanoma patients. However, it is notorious for its complications, most commonly seroma formation and its sequelae. Ample research has been done to evaluate seroma formation after ALND; these results, however, have not been conclusive. Hence, this pilot study aimed to evaluate a readily available haemostatic patch, Hemopatch®, to assess its effect on seroma formation following ALND. Methods In this pilot study, a prospective cohort of 20 patients receiving Hemopatch® following ALND was compared to a retrospective cohort of patients who underwent ALND between 2014 and 2019. The primary outcome measure was the number of patients developing clinically significant seroma (CSS) after ALND. Additionally, the number of wound complications, subsequent interventions, additional outpatient clinic visits, and drain output was assessed. Differences between groups were deemed clinically relevant if the proportions differed >50% between groups. Results In total, 20 prospective and 42 retrospective patients were included. In the Hemopatch® group, 30% of the patients developed CSS, compared to 43% in the control group. Three patients in both groups developed a surgical site infection. Thirty-five percent of patients in the Hemopatch® group required additional unscheduled visits versus 62% of patients in the control group. Conclusion The application of Hemopatch® after ALND did not lead to a clinically relevant reduction of CSS and wound complications. However, fewer Hemopatch® patients required additional outpatient clinic visits. Due to the limited amount of participants, the true value of Hemopatch® in ALND remains unclear.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
| | - Lisa de Rooij
- Department of Surgery, Zuyderland Medical Centre, Sittard-Geleen, The Netherlands
| | - Loeki Aldenhoven
- Department of Surgery, Zuyderland Medical Centre, Sittard-Geleen, The Netherlands
| | - Pieter P.H.L. Broos
- Department of Surgery, Zuyderland Medical Centre, Sittard-Geleen, The Netherlands
| | - Sander M.J. van Kuijk
- Department of Clinical Epidemiology and Medical Technology Assessment, Maastricht University Medical Centre, Maastricht, The Netherlands
| | | | - Alfred Janssen
- Department of Surgery, Zuyderland Medical Centre, Sittard-Geleen, The Netherlands
| | - Yvonne L.J. Vissers
- Department of Surgery, Zuyderland Medical Centre, Sittard-Geleen, The Netherlands
| | - Geerard L. Beets
- Department of Surgery, Netherlands Cancer Institute, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
- GROW School for Oncology and Developmental Biology, University of Maastricht, Maastricht, The Netherlands
| | - James van Bastelaar
- Department of Surgery, Zuyderland Medical Centre, Sittard-Geleen, The Netherlands
| |
Collapse
|
39
|
Fahy MR, Kelly ME, Aalbers AGJ, Abdul Aziz N, Abecasis N, Abraham-Nordling M, Akiyoshi T, Alberda W, Albert M, Andric M, Angeles MA, Angenete E, Antoniou A, Auer R, Austin KK, Aytac E, Aziz O, Bacalbasa N, Baker RP, Bali M, Baransi S, Baseckas G, Bebington B, Bedford M, Bednarski BK, Beets GL, Berg PL, Bergzoll C, Beynon J, Biondo S, Boyle K, Bordeianou L, Brecelj E, Bremers AB, Brunner M, Buchwald P, Bui A, Burgess A, Burger JWA, Burling D, Burns E, Campain N, Carvalhal S, Castro L, Caycedo-Marulanda A, Ceelan W, Chan KKL, Chang GJ, Chang M, Chew MH, Chok AY, Chong P, Clouston H, Codd M, Collins D, Colquhoun AJ, Constantinides J, Corr A, Coscia M, Cosimelli M, Cotsoglou C, Coyne PE, Croner RS, Damjanovich L, Daniels IR, Davies M, Delaney CP, de Wilt JHW, Denost Q, Deutsch C, Dietz D, Domingo S, Dozois EJ, Drozdov E, Duff M, Eglinton T, Enriquez-Navascues JM, Espín-Basany E, Evans MD, Eyjólfsdóttir B, Fearnhead NS, Ferron G, Flatmark K, Fleming FJ, Flor B, Folkesson J, Frizelle FA, Funder J, Gallego MA, Gargiulo M, García-Granero E, García-Sabrido JL, Gargiulo M, Gava VG, Gentilini L, George ML, George V, Georgiou P, Ghosh A, Ghouti L, Gil-Moreno A, Giner F, Ginther DN, Glyn T, Glynn R, Golda T, Griffiths B, Harris DA, Hagemans JAW, Hanchanale V, Harji DP, Helewa RM, Hellawell G, Heriot AG, Hochman D, Hohenberger W, Holm T, Hompes R, Hornung B, Hurton S, Hyun E, Ito M, Iversen LH, Jenkins JT, Jourand K, Kaffenberger S, Kandaswamy GV, Kapur S, Kanemitsu Y, Kazi M, Kelley SR, Keller DS, Ketelaers SHJ, Khan MS, Kiran RP, Kim H, Kim HJ, Koh CE, Kok NFM, Kokelaar R, Kontovounisios C, Kose F, Koutra M, Kristensen HØ, Kroon HM, Kumar S, Kusters M, Lago V, Lampe B, Lakkis Z, Larach JT, Larkin JO, Larsen SG, Larson DW, Law WL, Lee PJ, Limbert M, Loria A, Lydrup ML, Lyons A, Lynch AC, Maciel J, Manfredelli S, Mann C, Mantyh C, Mathis KL, Marques CFS, Martinez A, Martling A, Mehigan BJ, Meijerink WJHJ, Merchea A, Merkel S, Mehta AM, Mikalauskas S, McArthur DR, McCormick JJ, McCormick P, McDermott FD, McGrath JS, Malde S, Mirnezami A, Monson JRT, Navarro AS, Negoi I, Neto JWM, Ng JL, Nguyen B, Nielsen MB, Nieuwenhuijzen GAP, Nilsson PJ, Nordkamp S, Nugent T, Oliver A, O’Dwyer ST, O’Sullivan NJ, Paarnio K, Palmer G, Pappou E, Park J, Patsouras D, Peacock O, Pellino G, Peterson AC, Pinson J, Poggioli G, Proud D, Quinn M, Quyn A, Rajendran N, Radwan RW, Rajendran N, Rao C, Rasheed S, Rausa E, Regenbogen SE, Reims HM, Renehan A, Rintala J, Rocha R, Rochester M, Rohila J, Rothbarth J, Rottoli M, Roxburgh C, Rutten HJT, Safar B, Sagar PM, Sahai A, Saklani A, Sammour T, Sayyed R, Schizas AMP, Schwarzkopf E, Scripcariu D, Scripcariu V, Selvasekar C, Shaikh I, Simpson A, Skeie-Jensen T, Smart NJ, Smart P, Smith JJ, Solbakken AM, Solomon MJ, Sørensen MM, Sorrentino L, Steele SR, Steffens D, Stitzenberg K, Stocchi L, Stylianides NA, Swartling T, Spasojevic M, Sumrien H, Sutton PA, Swartking T, Takala H, Tan EJ, Taylor C, Tekin A, Tekkis PP, Teras J, Thaysen HV, Thurairaja R, Thorgersen EB, Toh EL, Tsarkov P, Tsukada Y, Tsukamoto S, Tuech JJ, Turner WH, Tuynman JB, Valente M, van Ramshorst GH, van Zoggel D, Vasquez-Jimenez W, Vather R, Verhoef C, Vierimaa M, Vizzielli G, Voogt ELK, Uehara K, Urrejola G, Wakeman C, Warrier SK, Wasmuth HH, Waters PS, Weber K, Weiser MR, Wheeler JMD, Wild J, Williams A, Wilson M, Wolthuis A, Yano H, Yip B, Yip J, Yoo RN, Zappa MA, Winter DC. Minimum standards of pelvic exenterative practice: PelvEx Collaborative guideline. Br J Surg 2022; 109:1251-1263. [PMID: 36170347 DOI: 10.1093/bjs/znac317] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 01/27/2022] [Revised: 07/18/2022] [Accepted: 08/18/2022] [Indexed: 12/31/2022]
Abstract
This document outlines the important aspects of caring for patients who have been diagnosed with advanced pelvic cancer. It is primarily aimed at those who are establishing a service that adequately caters to this patient group. The relevant literature has been summarized and an attempt made to simplify the approach to management of these complex cases.
Collapse
|
40
|
Aldenhoven L, Frotscher C, Körver-Steeman R, Martens MH, Kuburic D, Janssen A, Beets GL, van Bastelaar J. Sentinel lymph node mapping with superparamagnetic iron oxide for melanoma: a pilot study in healthy participants to establish an optimal MRI workflow protocol. BMC Cancer 2022; 22:1062. [PMID: 36241982 PMCID: PMC9563818 DOI: 10.1186/s12885-022-10146-w] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 07/13/2022] [Accepted: 09/27/2022] [Indexed: 11/10/2022] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND Current pre-operative Sentinel Lymph Node (SLN) mapping using dual tracing is associated with drawbacks (radiation exposure, logistic challenges). Superparamagnetic iron oxide (SPIO) is a non-inferior alternative for SLN mapping in breast cancer patients. Limited research has been performed on SPIO use and pre-operative MRI in melanoma patients to identify SLNs. METHODS: Healthy participants underwent MRI-scanning pre- and post SPIO-injection during 20 min. Workflow protocols varied in dosage, massage duration, route of administration and injection sites. The first lymph node showing a susceptibility artefact caused by SPIO accumulation was considered as SLN. RESULTS Artefacts were identified in 5/6 participants. Two participants received a 0.5 ml subcutaneous injection and 30-s massage, of which one showed an artefact after one hour. Four participants received a 1.0 ml intracutaneous injection and two-minute massage, leading to artefacts in all participants. All SLNs were observed within five minutes, except after lower limb injection (30 min). CONCLUSION SPIO and pre-operative MRI-scanning seems to be a promising alternative for SLN visualization in melanoma patients. An intracutaneous injection of 1.0 ml SPIO tracer, followed by a two-minute massage seems to be the most effective technique, simplifying the pre-operative pathway. Result will be used in a larger prospective study with melanoma patients. TRIAL REGISTRATION ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT05054062) - September 9, 2021.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Loeki Aldenhoven
- Department of Surgery, Zuyderland Medical Center, Dr. H. van der Hoffplein 1, 6262 BG, Sittard-Geleen, the Netherlands. .,Present address: Department of Surgery, Zuyderland Medical Center, Postbus 5500 , 6130 , MB, Sittard, the Netherlands. .,GROW - School for Oncology and Developmental Biology, Maastricht University, Universiteitssingel 40, 6229 ER, Maastricht, the Netherlands.
| | - Caroline Frotscher
- Department of Radiology, Zuyderland Medical Center, Dr. H. van der Hoffplein 1, 6262 BG, Sittard-Geleen, the Netherlands
| | - Rachelle Körver-Steeman
- Department of Radiology, Zuyderland Medical Center, Dr. H. van der Hoffplein 1, 6262 BG, Sittard-Geleen, the Netherlands
| | - Milou H Martens
- Department of Surgery, Zuyderland Medical Center, Dr. H. van der Hoffplein 1, 6262 BG, Sittard-Geleen, the Netherlands
| | - Damir Kuburic
- Department of Radiology, Zuyderland Medical Center, Dr. H. van der Hoffplein 1, 6262 BG, Sittard-Geleen, the Netherlands
| | - Alfred Janssen
- Department of Surgery, Zuyderland Medical Center, Dr. H. van der Hoffplein 1, 6262 BG, Sittard-Geleen, the Netherlands
| | - Geerard L Beets
- Present address: Department of Surgery, Zuyderland Medical Center, Postbus 5500 , 6130 , MB, Sittard, the Netherlands.,Department of Surgery, Netherlands Cancer Institute - Antoni Van Leeuwenhoek, Plesmanlaan 121, 1066 CX, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - James van Bastelaar
- Department of Surgery, Zuyderland Medical Center, Dr. H. van der Hoffplein 1, 6262 BG, Sittard-Geleen, the Netherlands
| |
Collapse
|
41
|
Spiekerman van Weezelenburg MA, Aldenhoven L, van Kuijk SMJ, Beets GL, van Bastelaar J. Technical aspects of flap fixation after mastectomy for breast cancer: Guidelines for improving seroma-related outcome. J Surg Oncol 2022; 127:28-33. [PMID: 36173092 DOI: 10.1002/jso.27109] [Citation(s) in RCA: 2] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 07/05/2022] [Revised: 08/10/2022] [Accepted: 09/18/2022] [Indexed: 11/05/2022]
Abstract
OBJECTIVES Previous studies have identified the added value of flap fixation in reducing seroma formation and its sequelae after mastectomy. The seroma reduction after mastectomy (SAM)-trial proved that sutures were superior to tissue glue. In this article, we will elaborate on the results of the SAM-trial to provide a clear surgical guideline. METHODS All patients in the suture flap fixation cohort from the SAM-trial were analyzed if details regarding flap fixation were available. The most optimal number of sutures was determined using a receiving operator characteristics curve. The incidence of seroma formation between patients receiving the most optimal number of sutures and patients receiving fewer sutures was compared. RESULTS The most optimal number of sutures proved to be 15. Patients with ≥15 sutures had a lower incidence of seroma formation at every time frame during follow-up. There was a significant difference at 6 weeks (odds ratio [OR]: 3.05, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.09-8.56), 3 months (OR: 4.62, 95% CI: 1.34-12.92), and 1 year postoperatively (OR: 20.48, 95% CI: 2.18-192.22). Ten days and 6 months postoperatively did not differ significantly. CONCLUSIONS Flap fixation in general, but also the surgical technique influences the incidence of seroma formation after mastectomy. Results suggest a minimum of 15 sutures, spaced approximately 3.7 cm apart.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
| | - Loeki Aldenhoven
- Department of Surgery, Zuyderland Medical Centre, Sittard-Geleen, the Netherlands
| | - Sander M J van Kuijk
- Department of Clinical Epidemiology and Medical Technology Assessment, Maastricht University Medical Centre, Maastricht, the Netherlands
| | - Geerard L Beets
- Department of Surgery, Netherlands Cancer Institute, Amsterdam, the Netherlands.,GROW School for Oncology and Developmental Biology, University of Maastricht, Maastricht, the Netherlands
| | - James van Bastelaar
- Department of Surgery, Zuyderland Medical Centre, Sittard-Geleen, the Netherlands
| |
Collapse
|
42
|
Custers PA, Beets GL, Melenhorst J. Response to the comment on 'Selected stage IV rectal cancer patients managed by the watch-and-wait approach after pelvic radiotherapy: a good alternative to total mesorectal excision surgery?'. Colorectal Dis 2022; 24:878-879. [PMID: 35258148 DOI: 10.1111/codi.16109] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 02/23/2022] [Accepted: 02/27/2022] [Indexed: 02/08/2023]
Affiliation(s)
- Petra A Custers
- Department of Surgery, Netherlands Cancer Institute - Antoni van Leeuwenhoek, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.,GROW School for Oncology and Developmental Biology - Maastricht University, Maastricht, The Netherlands
| | - Geerard L Beets
- Department of Surgery, Netherlands Cancer Institute - Antoni van Leeuwenhoek, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.,GROW School for Oncology and Developmental Biology - Maastricht University, Maastricht, The Netherlands
| | - Jarno Melenhorst
- Department of Surgery, Maastricht University Medical Centre, Maastricht, The Netherlands
| |
Collapse
|
43
|
Groen HC, den Hartog AG, Heerink WJ, Kuhlmann KFD, Kok NFM, van Veen R, Hiep MAJ, Snaebjornsson P, Grotenhuis BA, Beets GL, Aalbers AGJ, Ruers TJM. Use of Image-Guided Surgical Navigation during Resection of Locally Recurrent Rectal Cancer. Life (Basel) 2022; 12:life12050645. [PMID: 35629313 PMCID: PMC9143650 DOI: 10.3390/life12050645] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/17/2022] [Revised: 04/21/2022] [Accepted: 04/22/2022] [Indexed: 11/16/2022] Open
Abstract
Surgery for locally recurrent rectal cancer (LRRC) presents several challenges, which is why the percentage of inadequate resections of these tumors is high. In this exploratory study, we evaluate the use of image-guided surgical navigation during resection of LRRC. Patients who were scheduled to undergo surgical resection of LRRC who were deemed by the multidisciplinary team to be at a high risk of inadequate tumor resection were selected to undergo surgical navigation. The risk of inadequate surgery was further determined by the proximity of the tumor to critical anatomical structures. Workflow characteristics of the surgical navigation procedure were evaluated, while the surgical outcome was determined by the status of the resection margin. In total, 20 patients were analyzed. For all procedures, surgical navigation was completed successfully and demonstrated to be accurate, while no complications related to the surgical navigation were discerned. Radical resection was achieved in 14 cases (70%). In five cases (25%), a tumor-positive resection margin (R1) was anticipated during surgery, as extensive radical resection was determined to be compromised. These patients all received intraoperative brachytherapy. In one case (5%), an unexpected R1 resection was performed. Surgical navigation during resection of LRRC is thus safe and feasible and enables accurate surgical guidance.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Harald C. Groen
- Department of Surgical Oncology, Netherlands Cancer Institute, 1066 CX Amsterdam, The Netherlands; (A.G.d.H.); (W.J.H.); (K.F.D.K.); (N.F.M.K.); (R.v.V.); (M.A.J.H.); (B.A.G.); (G.L.B.); (A.G.J.A.); (T.J.M.R.)
- Correspondence:
| | - Anne G. den Hartog
- Department of Surgical Oncology, Netherlands Cancer Institute, 1066 CX Amsterdam, The Netherlands; (A.G.d.H.); (W.J.H.); (K.F.D.K.); (N.F.M.K.); (R.v.V.); (M.A.J.H.); (B.A.G.); (G.L.B.); (A.G.J.A.); (T.J.M.R.)
| | - Wouter J. Heerink
- Department of Surgical Oncology, Netherlands Cancer Institute, 1066 CX Amsterdam, The Netherlands; (A.G.d.H.); (W.J.H.); (K.F.D.K.); (N.F.M.K.); (R.v.V.); (M.A.J.H.); (B.A.G.); (G.L.B.); (A.G.J.A.); (T.J.M.R.)
| | - Koert F. D. Kuhlmann
- Department of Surgical Oncology, Netherlands Cancer Institute, 1066 CX Amsterdam, The Netherlands; (A.G.d.H.); (W.J.H.); (K.F.D.K.); (N.F.M.K.); (R.v.V.); (M.A.J.H.); (B.A.G.); (G.L.B.); (A.G.J.A.); (T.J.M.R.)
| | - Niels F. M. Kok
- Department of Surgical Oncology, Netherlands Cancer Institute, 1066 CX Amsterdam, The Netherlands; (A.G.d.H.); (W.J.H.); (K.F.D.K.); (N.F.M.K.); (R.v.V.); (M.A.J.H.); (B.A.G.); (G.L.B.); (A.G.J.A.); (T.J.M.R.)
| | - Ruben van Veen
- Department of Surgical Oncology, Netherlands Cancer Institute, 1066 CX Amsterdam, The Netherlands; (A.G.d.H.); (W.J.H.); (K.F.D.K.); (N.F.M.K.); (R.v.V.); (M.A.J.H.); (B.A.G.); (G.L.B.); (A.G.J.A.); (T.J.M.R.)
| | - Marijn A. J. Hiep
- Department of Surgical Oncology, Netherlands Cancer Institute, 1066 CX Amsterdam, The Netherlands; (A.G.d.H.); (W.J.H.); (K.F.D.K.); (N.F.M.K.); (R.v.V.); (M.A.J.H.); (B.A.G.); (G.L.B.); (A.G.J.A.); (T.J.M.R.)
| | - Petur Snaebjornsson
- Department of Pathology, Netherlands Cancer Institute, 1066 CX Amsterdam, The Netherlands;
| | - Brechtje A. Grotenhuis
- Department of Surgical Oncology, Netherlands Cancer Institute, 1066 CX Amsterdam, The Netherlands; (A.G.d.H.); (W.J.H.); (K.F.D.K.); (N.F.M.K.); (R.v.V.); (M.A.J.H.); (B.A.G.); (G.L.B.); (A.G.J.A.); (T.J.M.R.)
| | - Geerard L. Beets
- Department of Surgical Oncology, Netherlands Cancer Institute, 1066 CX Amsterdam, The Netherlands; (A.G.d.H.); (W.J.H.); (K.F.D.K.); (N.F.M.K.); (R.v.V.); (M.A.J.H.); (B.A.G.); (G.L.B.); (A.G.J.A.); (T.J.M.R.)
| | - Arend G. J. Aalbers
- Department of Surgical Oncology, Netherlands Cancer Institute, 1066 CX Amsterdam, The Netherlands; (A.G.d.H.); (W.J.H.); (K.F.D.K.); (N.F.M.K.); (R.v.V.); (M.A.J.H.); (B.A.G.); (G.L.B.); (A.G.J.A.); (T.J.M.R.)
| | - Theo J. M. Ruers
- Department of Surgical Oncology, Netherlands Cancer Institute, 1066 CX Amsterdam, The Netherlands; (A.G.d.H.); (W.J.H.); (K.F.D.K.); (N.F.M.K.); (R.v.V.); (M.A.J.H.); (B.A.G.); (G.L.B.); (A.G.J.A.); (T.J.M.R.)
- Faculty of Science and Technology (TNW), Nanobiophysics Group (NBP), University of Twente, 7500 AE Enschede, The Netherlands
| |
Collapse
|
44
|
Custers PA, Hupkens BJP, Grotenhuis BA, Kuhlmann KFD, Breukink SO, Beets GL, Melenhorst J, Buijsen J, Festen S, de Graaf EJR, Haak HE, Hilling DE, Hoff C, Intven M, Komen N, Kusters M, van Leerdam ME, Peeters KCMJ, Peters FP, Pronk A, van der Sande ME, Schreurs WH, Sonneveld DJA, Talsma AK, Tuynman JB, Valkenburg‐van Iersel LBJ, Vermaas M, de Vos‐Geelen J, van Westreenen HL, de Wilt JHW, Zimmerman DDE. Selected stage IV rectal cancer patients managed by the watch-and-wait approach after pelvic radiotherapy: a good alternative to total mesorectal excision surgery? Colorectal Dis 2022; 24:401-410. [PMID: 35060263 PMCID: PMC9305558 DOI: 10.1111/codi.16034] [Citation(s) in RCA: 2] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 10/08/2021] [Revised: 12/16/2021] [Accepted: 12/20/2021] [Indexed: 12/18/2022]
Abstract
AIM The aim of this study was to assess the clinical and oncological outcome of a selected group of stage IV rectal cancer patients managed by the watch-and-wait approach following a (near-)complete response of the primary rectal tumour after radiotherapy. METHOD Patients registered in the Dutch watch-and-wait registry since 2004 were selected when diagnosed with synchronous stage IV rectal cancer. Data on patient characteristics, treatment details, follow-up and survival were collected. The 2-year local regrowth rate, organ-preservation rate, colostomy-free rate, metastatic progression-free rate and 2- and 5-year overall survival were analysed. RESULTS After a median follow-up period of 35 months, local regrowth was observed in 17 patients (40.5%). Nine patients underwent subsequent total mesorectal excision, resulting in a permanent colostomy in four patients. The 2-year local regrowth rate was 39.9%, the 2-year organ-preservation rate was 77.1%, the 2-year colostomy-free rate was 88.1%, and the 2-year metastatic progression-free rate was 46.7%. The 2- and 5-year overall survival rates were 92.0% and 67.5%. CONCLUSION The watch-and-wait approach can be considered as an alternative to total mesorectal excision in a selected group of stage IV rectal cancer patients with a (near-)complete response following pelvic radiotherapy. Despite a relatively high regrowth rate, total mesorectal excision and a permanent colostomy can be avoided in the majority of these patients.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Petra A. Custers
- Department of SurgeryNetherlands Cancer Institute – Antoni van LeeuwenhoekAmsterdamThe Netherlands,GROW School for Oncology and Developmental Biology – Maastricht UniversityMaastrichtThe Netherlands
| | - Britt J. P. Hupkens
- Department of RadiotherapyMaastricht University Medical Centre (MAASTRO)MaastrichtThe Netherlands
| | - Brechtje A. Grotenhuis
- Department of SurgeryNetherlands Cancer Institute – Antoni van LeeuwenhoekAmsterdamThe Netherlands
| | - Koert F. D. Kuhlmann
- Department of SurgeryNetherlands Cancer Institute – Antoni van LeeuwenhoekAmsterdamThe Netherlands
| | | | - Geerard L. Beets
- Department of SurgeryNetherlands Cancer Institute – Antoni van LeeuwenhoekAmsterdamThe Netherlands,GROW School for Oncology and Developmental Biology – Maastricht UniversityMaastrichtThe Netherlands
| | - Jarno Melenhorst
- Department of SurgeryMaastricht University Medical CentreMaastrichtThe Netherlands
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Collapse
|
45
|
Lambregts DMJ, Bogveradze N, Blomqvist LK, Fokas E, Garcia-Aguilar J, Glimelius B, Gollub MJ, Konishi T, Marijnen CAM, Nagtegaal ID, Nilsson PJ, Perez RO, Snaebjornsson P, Taylor SA, Tolan DJM, Valentini V, West NP, Wolthuis A, Lahaye MJ, Maas M, Beets GL, Beets-Tan RGH. Current controversies in TNM for the radiological staging of rectal cancer and how to deal with them: results of a global online survey and multidisciplinary expert consensus. Eur Radiol 2022; 32:4991-5003. [PMID: 35254485 PMCID: PMC9213337 DOI: 10.1007/s00330-022-08591-z] [Citation(s) in RCA: 23] [Impact Index Per Article: 11.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 10/04/2021] [Revised: 12/22/2021] [Accepted: 01/13/2022] [Indexed: 12/17/2022]
Abstract
Abstract
Objectives
To identify the main problem areas in the applicability of the current TNM staging system (8th ed.) for the radiological staging and reporting of rectal cancer and provide practice recommendations on how to handle them.
Methods
A global case-based online survey was conducted including 41 image-based rectal cancer cases focusing on various items included in the TNM system. Cases reaching < 80% agreement among survey respondents were identified as problem areas and discussed among an international expert panel, including 5 radiologists, 6 colorectal surgeons, 4 radiation oncologists, and 3 pathologists.
Results
Three hundred twenty-one respondents (from 32 countries) completed the survey. Sixteen problem areas were identified, related to cT staging in low-rectal cancers, definitions for cT4b and cM1a disease, definitions for mesorectal fascia (MRF) involvement, evaluation of lymph nodes versus tumor deposits, and staging of lateral lymph nodes. The expert panel recommended strategies on how to handle these, including advice on cT-stage categorization in case of involvement of different layers of the anal canal, specifications on which structures to include in the definition of cT4b disease, how to define MRF involvement by the primary tumor and other tumor-bearing structures, how to differentiate and report lymph nodes and tumor deposits on MRI, and how to anatomically localize and stage lateral lymph nodes.
Conclusions
The recommendations derived from this global survey and expert panel discussion may serve as a practice guide and support tool for radiologists (and other clinicians) involved in the staging of rectal cancer and may contribute to improved consistency in radiological staging and reporting.
Key Points
• Via a case-based online survey (incl. 321 respondents from 32 countries), we identified 16 problem areas related to the applicability of the TNM staging system for the radiological staging and reporting of rectal cancer.
• A multidisciplinary panel of experts recommended strategies on how to handle these problem areas, including advice on cT-stage categorization in case of involvement of different layers of the anal canal, specifications on which structures to include in the definition of cT4b disease, how to define mesorectal fascia involvement by the primary tumor and other tumor-bearing structures, how to differentiate and report lymph nodes and tumor deposits on MRI, and how to anatomically localize and stage lateral lymph nodes.
• These recommendations may serve as a practice guide and support tool for radiologists (and other clinicians) involved in the staging of rectal cancer and may contribute to improved consistency in radiological staging and reporting.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Doenja M J Lambregts
- Department of Radiology, The Netherlands Cancer Institute, P.O. Box 90203, 1006 BE, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
| | - Nino Bogveradze
- Department of Radiology, The Netherlands Cancer Institute, P.O. Box 90203, 1006 BE, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
- GROW School for Oncology and Developmental Biology, Maastricht University, Maastricht, The Netherlands
- Department of Radiology, American Hospital Tbilisi, Tbilisi, Georgia
| | - Lennart K Blomqvist
- Department of Imaging and Physiology, Karolinska University Hospital, Stockholm, Sweden
| | - Emmanouil Fokas
- Department of Radiooncology, University Hospital, Goethe University Frankfurt am Main, Frankfurt am Main, Germany
- Frankfurt Cancer Institute (FCI), University Hospital, Goethe University Frankfurt am Main, Frankfurt am Main, Germany
| | - Julio Garcia-Aguilar
- Department of Surgery, Colorectal Service, Benno C. Schmidt Chair in Surgical Oncology, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA
| | - Bengt Glimelius
- Department of Immunology, Genetics and Pathology, Uppsala University, Uppsala, Sweden
| | - Marc J Gollub
- Department of Radiology, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA
| | - Tsuyoshi Konishi
- Department of Colon and Rectal Surgery, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, USA
| | - Corrie A M Marijnen
- Department of Radiation Oncology, The Netherlands Cancer Institute, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, The Netherlands
| | - Iris D Nagtegaal
- Department of Pathology, Radboud University Medical Centre, Nijmegen, The Netherlands
| | - Per J Nilsson
- Department of Molecular Medicine and Surgery, Karolinska Institutet, Division of Coloproctology, Pelvic Cancer Center, Karolinska University Hospital, Stockholm, Sweden
| | - Rodrigo O Perez
- Hospital Alemão Oswaldo Cruz & Hospital Beneficência Portuguesa de São Paulo, São Paulo, Brazil
| | - Petur Snaebjornsson
- Department of Pathology, The Netherlands Cancer Institute, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Stuart A Taylor
- Centre for Medical Imaging, University College London Hospital, London, UK
| | - Damian J M Tolan
- Department of Radiology, Leeds Teaching Hospitals NHS Trust, Leeds, UK
| | - Vincenzo Valentini
- Department of Bioimaging, Radiation Oncology and Hematology, Fondazione Policlinico Universitario "A. Gemelli" IRCCS, Università Cattolica S. Cuore, Rome, Italy
| | - Nicholas P West
- Pathology & Data Analytics, Leeds Institute of Medical Research at St James's, University of Leeds, Leeds, UK
| | - Albert Wolthuis
- Department of Abdominal Surgery, University Hospitals Leuven, Leuven, Belgium
| | - Max J Lahaye
- Department of Radiology, The Netherlands Cancer Institute, P.O. Box 90203, 1006 BE, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Monique Maas
- Department of Radiology, The Netherlands Cancer Institute, P.O. Box 90203, 1006 BE, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Geerard L Beets
- GROW School for Oncology and Developmental Biology, Maastricht University, Maastricht, The Netherlands
- Department of Surgery, The Netherlands Cancer Institute, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Regina G H Beets-Tan
- Department of Radiology, The Netherlands Cancer Institute, P.O. Box 90203, 1006 BE, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
- GROW School for Oncology and Developmental Biology, Maastricht University, Maastricht, The Netherlands.
- Institute of Regional Health Research, University of Southern Denmark, Odense, Denmark.
| |
Collapse
|
46
|
Verheij FS, Soares KC, Beets GL, Kok NF, Yuval JB, Kemeny NE, Kingham TP, Jarnagin WR, D’Angelica MI, Garcia-Aguilar J. Timing of Primary Tumor Resection in Synchronous Metastatic Colon Cancer Patients Undergoing Hepatic Arterial Infusion Pump Placement. Ann Surg Oncol 2022; 29:2044-2051. [PMID: 34751873 PMCID: PMC8896144 DOI: 10.1245/s10434-021-11029-3] [Citation(s) in RCA: 5] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/17/2021] [Accepted: 10/05/2021] [Indexed: 01/05/2023]
Abstract
INTRODUCTION Hepatic arterial infusion (HAI) chemotherapy is associated with improved survival in stage IV colon cancer with liver metastases. Whether simultaneous colon resection and HAI pump (HAIP) placement is associated with increased morbidity has not been specifically studied. The purpose of this study was to compare perioperative outcomes of simultaneous colon resection and HAIP placement versus HAIP placement alone. METHODS This was a retrospective study of consecutive patients with colon cancer and synchronous liver metastases who underwent HAIP placement between 2007 and 2018. Clinicopathologic characteristics, operative data, complications, and time to first cycle of HAIP chemotherapy were compared between patients who underwent colon resection simultaneously with HAIP placement and those who underwent HAIP placement alone. RESULTS A total of 258 patients underwent simultaneous colectomy and HAIP placement, and 116 patients underwent HAIP placement alone. Grade 1-2 complications were more common in patients who underwent simultaneous colectomy and HAIP placement (36.8% vs. 19.0%, P < 0.001), but grade 3-4 complications were not observed more frequently (14.3% vs. 12.9%, P = 0.872). The median interval between HAIP placement and start of HAIP chemotherapy did not differ between groups (simultaneous colectomy, 27 days [interquartile range (IQR) 17-34]; HAIP placement alone, 30 days [IQR 21-34]; P = 0.924). Infection of the pump causing either delay of initiation of chemotherapy or explantation of the pump occurred in five patients with simultaneous colectomy and in one patient with HAIP placement alone (P = 0.671). CONCLUSIONS Simultaneous HAIP implantation and colectomy is safe in patients with liver metastases of colon carcinoma.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Floris S. Verheij
- Department of Surgery, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, New York;,Department of Surgical Oncology, Netherlands Cancer Institute, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Kevin C. Soares
- Department of Surgery, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, New York
| | - Geerard L. Beets
- Department of Surgical Oncology, Netherlands Cancer Institute, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Niels F.M. Kok
- Department of Surgical Oncology, Netherlands Cancer Institute, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Jonathan B. Yuval
- Department of Surgery, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, New York;,Department of Surgical Oncology, Netherlands Cancer Institute, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Nancy E. Kemeny
- Department of Medicine, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, New York
| | - T. Peter Kingham
- Department of Surgery, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, New York
| | - William R. Jarnagin
- Department of Surgery, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, New York
| | | | - Julio Garcia-Aguilar
- Department of Surgery, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA.
| |
Collapse
|
47
|
Verheij FS, Soares KC, Beets GL, Kok NFM, Yuval JB, Kemeny NE, Kingham TP, Jarnagin WR, D’Angelica MI, Garcia-Aguilar J. ASO Visual Abstract: Timing of Primary Tumor Resection in Synchronous Metastatic Colon Cancer Patients Undergoing Hepatic Arterial Infusion Pump Placement. Ann Surg Oncol 2022. [DOI: 10.1245/s10434-021-11106-7] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/18/2022]
|
48
|
Bogveradze N, El Khababi N, Schurink NW, van Griethuysen JJM, de Bie S, Bosma G, Cappendijk VC, Geenen RWF, Neijenhuis P, Peterson G, Veeken CJ, Vliegen RFA, Maas M, Lahaye MJ, Beets GL, Beets-Tan RGH, Lambregts DMJ. Evolutions in rectal cancer MRI staging and risk stratification in The Netherlands. Abdom Radiol (NY) 2022; 47:38-47. [PMID: 34605966 PMCID: PMC8776669 DOI: 10.1007/s00261-021-03281-8] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 08/12/2021] [Revised: 09/09/2021] [Accepted: 09/09/2021] [Indexed: 11/25/2022]
Abstract
Purpose To analyze how the MRI reporting of rectal cancer has evolved (following guideline updates) in The Netherlands. Methods Retrospective analysis of 712 patients (2011–2018) from 8 teaching hospitals in The Netherlands with available original radiological staging reports that were re-evaluated by a dedicated MR expert using updated guideline criteria. Original reports were classified as “free-text,” “semi-structured,” or “template” and completeness of reporting was documented. Patients were categorized as low versus high risk, first based on the original reports (high risk = cT3-4, cN+, and/or cMRF+) and then based on the expert re-evaluations (high risk = cT3cd-4, cN+, MRF+, and/or EMVI+). Evolutions over time were studied by splitting the inclusion period in 3 equal time periods. Results A significant increase in template reporting was observed (from 1.6 to 17.6–29.6%; p < 0.001), along with a significant increase in the reporting of cT-substage, number of N+ and extramesorectal nodes, MRF invasion and tumor-MRF distance, EMVI, anal sphincter involvement, and tumor morphology and circumference. Expert re-evaluation changed the risk classification from high to low risk in 18.0% of cases and from low to high risk in 1.7% (total 19.7%). In the majority (17.9%) of these cases, the changed risk classification was likely (at least in part) related to use of updated guideline criteria, which mainly led to a reduction in high-risk cT-stage and nodal downstaging. Conclusion Updated concepts of risk stratification have increasingly been adopted, accompanied by an increase in template reporting and improved completeness of reporting. Use of updated guideline criteria resulted in considerable downstaging (of mainly high-risk cT-stage and nodal stage). Graphic abstract ![]()
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Nino Bogveradze
- Department of Radiology, The Netherlands Cancer Institute, P.O. Box 90203, 1006 BE, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
- GROW School for Oncology & Developmental Biology, University of Maastricht, Maastricht, The Netherlands
- Department of Radiology, Acad. F. Todua Medical Center, Research Institute of Clinical Medicine, Tbilisi, Georgia
| | - Najim El Khababi
- Department of Radiology, The Netherlands Cancer Institute, P.O. Box 90203, 1006 BE, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
- GROW School for Oncology & Developmental Biology, University of Maastricht, Maastricht, The Netherlands
| | - Niels W Schurink
- Department of Radiology, The Netherlands Cancer Institute, P.O. Box 90203, 1006 BE, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
- GROW School for Oncology & Developmental Biology, University of Maastricht, Maastricht, The Netherlands
| | - Joost J M van Griethuysen
- Department of Radiology, The Netherlands Cancer Institute, P.O. Box 90203, 1006 BE, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
- GROW School for Oncology & Developmental Biology, University of Maastricht, Maastricht, The Netherlands
| | - Shira de Bie
- Department of Radiology, Deventer Ziekenhuis, Deventer, The Netherlands
| | - Gerlof Bosma
- Department of Radiology, Elisabeth Tweesteden Hospital, Tilburg, The Netherlands
| | - Vincent C Cappendijk
- Department of Radiology, Jeroen Bosch Hospital, 's Hertogenbosch, The Netherlands
| | - Remy W F Geenen
- Department of Radiology, Northwest Clinics, Alkmaar, The Netherlands
| | - Peter Neijenhuis
- Department of Surgery, Alrijne Hospital, Leiderdorp, The Netherlands
| | - Gerald Peterson
- Department of Radiology, Spaarne Gasthuis, Haarlem, The Netherlands
| | - Cornelis J Veeken
- Department of Radiology, IJsselland Hospital, Capelle aan den IJssel, The Netherlands
| | - Roy F A Vliegen
- Department of Radiology, Zuyderland Medical Center, Heerlen, The Netherlands
| | - Monique Maas
- Department of Radiology, The Netherlands Cancer Institute, P.O. Box 90203, 1006 BE, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Max J Lahaye
- Department of Radiology, The Netherlands Cancer Institute, P.O. Box 90203, 1006 BE, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Geerard L Beets
- GROW School for Oncology & Developmental Biology, University of Maastricht, Maastricht, The Netherlands
- Department of Surgery, The Netherlands Cancer Institute, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Regina G H Beets-Tan
- Department of Radiology, The Netherlands Cancer Institute, P.O. Box 90203, 1006 BE, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
- GROW School for Oncology & Developmental Biology, University of Maastricht, Maastricht, The Netherlands
- Institute of Regional Health Research, University of Southern Denmark, Odense, Denmark
| | - Doenja M J Lambregts
- Department of Radiology, The Netherlands Cancer Institute, P.O. Box 90203, 1006 BE, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
| |
Collapse
|
49
|
Custers PA, Geubels BM, Huibregtse IL, Peters FP, Engelhardt EG, Beets GL, Marijnen CAM, van Leerdam ME, van Triest B. Contact X-ray Brachytherapy for Older or Inoperable Rectal Cancer Patients: Short-Term Oncological and Functional Follow-Up. Cancers (Basel) 2021; 13:cancers13246333. [PMID: 34944953 PMCID: PMC8699080 DOI: 10.3390/cancers13246333] [Citation(s) in RCA: 8] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 11/19/2021] [Revised: 12/09/2021] [Accepted: 12/14/2021] [Indexed: 11/16/2022] Open
Abstract
Total mesorectal excision for rectal cancer is a major operation associated with morbidity and mortality. For older or inoperable patients, alternatives are necessary. This prospective study evaluated the oncological and functional outcome and quality of life of older or inoperable rectal cancer patients treated with a contact X-ray brachytherapy boost to avoid major surgery. During follow-up, tumor response and toxicity on endoscopy were scored. Functional outcome and quality of life were assessed with self-administered questionnaires. Additionally, in-depth interviews regarding patients' experiences were conducted. Nineteen patients were included with a median age of 80 years (range 72-91); nine patients achieved a clinical complete response and in another four local control of the tumor was established. The 12 month organ-preservation rate, progression-free survival, and overall survival were 88%, 78%, and 100%, respectively. A transient decrease in quality of life and bowel function was observed at 3 months, which was generally restored at 6 months. In-depth interviews revealed that patients' experience was positive despite the side-effects shortly after treatment. In older or inoperable rectal cancer patients, contact X-ray brachytherapy can be considered an option to avoid total mesorectal excision. Contact X-ray brachytherapy is well-tolerated and can provide good tumor control.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Petra A. Custers
- Department of Surgery, Netherlands Cancer Institute-Antoni van Leeuwenhoek, 1006 BE Amsterdam, The Netherlands; (P.A.C.); (B.M.G.); (G.L.B.)
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Netherlands Cancer Institute-Antoni van Leeuwenhoek, 1006 BE Amsterdam, The Netherlands; (F.P.P.); (C.A.M.M.)
- GROW School for Oncology and Developmental Biology, Maastricht University, 6200 MD Maastricht, The Netherlands
| | - Barbara M. Geubels
- Department of Surgery, Netherlands Cancer Institute-Antoni van Leeuwenhoek, 1006 BE Amsterdam, The Netherlands; (P.A.C.); (B.M.G.); (G.L.B.)
- GROW School for Oncology and Developmental Biology, Maastricht University, 6200 MD Maastricht, The Netherlands
- Department of Surgery, Catharina Hospital, Postbox 1350, 5602 ZA Eindhoven, The Netherlands
| | - Inge L. Huibregtse
- Department of Gastroenterology, Netherlands Cancer Institute-Antoni van Leeuwenhoek, 1006 BE Amsterdam, The Netherlands; (I.L.H.); (M.E.v.L.)
| | - Femke P. Peters
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Netherlands Cancer Institute-Antoni van Leeuwenhoek, 1006 BE Amsterdam, The Netherlands; (F.P.P.); (C.A.M.M.)
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Leiden University Medical Centre, 2300 RC Leiden, The Netherlands
| | - Ellen G. Engelhardt
- Division of Psychosocial Research and Epidemiology, Netherlands Cancer Institute-Antoni van Leeuwenhoek, 1006 BE Amsterdam, The Netherlands;
| | - Geerard L. Beets
- Department of Surgery, Netherlands Cancer Institute-Antoni van Leeuwenhoek, 1006 BE Amsterdam, The Netherlands; (P.A.C.); (B.M.G.); (G.L.B.)
- GROW School for Oncology and Developmental Biology, Maastricht University, 6200 MD Maastricht, The Netherlands
| | - Corrie A. M. Marijnen
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Netherlands Cancer Institute-Antoni van Leeuwenhoek, 1006 BE Amsterdam, The Netherlands; (F.P.P.); (C.A.M.M.)
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Leiden University Medical Centre, 2300 RC Leiden, The Netherlands
| | - Monique E. van Leerdam
- Department of Gastroenterology, Netherlands Cancer Institute-Antoni van Leeuwenhoek, 1006 BE Amsterdam, The Netherlands; (I.L.H.); (M.E.v.L.)
- Department of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Leiden University Medical Centre, 2300 RC Leiden, The Netherlands
| | - Baukelien van Triest
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Netherlands Cancer Institute-Antoni van Leeuwenhoek, 1006 BE Amsterdam, The Netherlands; (F.P.P.); (C.A.M.M.)
- Correspondence: ; Tel.: +31-(0)20-512-9111
| |
Collapse
|
50
|
van der Sande ME, Beets GL. Response to the Comment on "Predictive Value of Endoscopic Features for a Complete Response After Chemoradiotherapy for Rectal Cancer". Ann Surg 2021; 274:e724-e725. [PMID: 32516235 DOI: 10.1097/sla.0000000000004012] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/25/2022]
|