Redefining the Positive Circumferential Resection Margin by Incorporating Preoperative Chemoradiotherapy Treatment Response in Locally Advanced Rectal Cancer: A Multicenter Validation Study
2
조회
0
다운로드
0
인용
0
참고문헌
키워드
초록
Purpose This study was conducted to validate the prognostic influence of treatment response among patients with positive circumferential resection margin for locally advanced rectal cancer. Materials and Methods Clinical data of 197 patients with positive circumferential resection margin defined as 2 mm after preoperative chemoradiotherapy followed by total mesorectal excision between 2004 and 2009 were collected for this multicenter validation study. All patients underwent median 50.4 Gy radiation with concurrent fluoropyrimidine based chemotherapy. Treatment response was dichotomized to good response, including treatment response of grade 2 or 3, and poor response, including grade 0 or 1. Results After 52 months median follow-up, 5-year overall survival (OS) for good responders and poor responders was 79.1% and 48.4%, respectively (p < 0.001). In multivariate analysis, circumferential resection margin involvement and treatment response were a prognosticator for OS and locoregional recurrence-free survival. In subgroup analysis, good responders with close margin showed significantly better survival outcomes for survival. Good responders with involved margin and poor responders with close margin shared similar results, whereas poor responders with involved margin had worst survival (5-year OS, 81.2%, 57.0%, 50.0%, and 32.4%, respectively; p < 0.001). Conclusion Among patients with positive circumferential resection margin after preoperative chemoradiotherapy, survival of the good responders was significantly better than poor responders. Subgroup analysis revealed that definition of positive circumferential resection margin may be individualized as involvement for good responders, whereas 2 mm for poor responders.
Abstract
Purpose This study was conducted to validate the prognostic influence of treatment response among patients with positive circumferential resection margin for locally advanced rectal cancer. Materials and Methods Clinical data of 197 patients with positive circumferential resection margin defined as 2 mm after preoperative chemoradiotherapy followed by total mesorectal excision between 2004 and 2009 were collected for this multicenter validation study. All patients underwent median 50.4 Gy radiation with concurrent fluoropyrimidine based chemotherapy. Treatment response was dichotomized to good response, including treatment response of grade 2 or 3, and poor response, including grade 0 or 1. Results After 52 months median follow-up, 5-year overall survival (OS) for good responders and poor responders was 79.1% and 48.4%, respectively (p < 0.001). In multivariate analysis, circumferential resection margin involvement and treatment response were a prognosticator for OS and locoregional recurrence-free survival. In subgroup analysis, good responders with close margin showed significantly better survival outcomes for survival. Good responders with involved margin and poor responders with close margin shared similar results, whereas poor responders with involved margin had worst survival (5-year OS, 81.2%, 57.0%, 50.0%, and 32.4%, respectively; p < 0.001). Conclusion Among patients with positive circumferential resection margin after preoperative chemoradiotherapy, survival of the good responders was significantly better than poor responders. Subgroup analysis revealed that definition of positive circumferential resection margin may be individualized as involvement for good responders, whereas 2 mm for poor responders.
참고문헌 (22)
- Adam IJ, "Role of circumferential margin involvement in the local recurrence of rectal cancer", Lancet, 344, pp.707~711 (1994)[DOI]
- Quirke P, "Local recurrence of rectal adenocarcinoma due to inadequate surgical resection: histopathological study of lateral tumour spread and surgical excision", Lancet, 2, pp.996~999 (1986)
- Nagtegaal ID, "Circumferential margin involvement is still an important predictor of local recurrence in rectal carcinoma: not one millimeter but two millimeters is the limit", Am J Surg Pathol, 26, pp.350~357 (2002)[DOI]
- Trakarnsanga A, "What is the significance of the circumferential margin in locally advanced rectal cancer after neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy?", Ann Surg Oncol, 20, pp.1179~1184 (2013)[DOI]
- Wibe A, "Prognostic significance of the circumferential resection margin following total mesorectal excision for rectal cancer", Br J Surg, 89, pp.327~334 (2002)[DOI]
- [URL]
- Lee JH, "The influence of the treatment response on the impact of resection margin status after preoperative chemoradiotherapy in locally advanced rectal cancer", BMC Cancer, 13, pp.576~ (2013)[DOI]
- Bernstein TE, "Circumferential resection margin as a prognostic factor in rectal cancer", Br J Surg, 96, pp.1348~1357 (2009)[DOI]
- Glynne-Jones R, "The clinical significance of the circumferential resection margin following preoperative pelvic chemo-radiotherapy in rectal cancer: why we need a common language", Colorectal Dis, 8, pp.800~807 (2006)[DOI]
- Rodel C, "Prognostic significance of tumor regression after preoperative chemoradiotherapy for rectal cancer", J Clin Oncol, 23, pp.8688~8696 (2005)[DOI]
- Ruo L, "Long-term prognostic significance of extent of rectal cancer response to preoperative radiation and chemotherapy", Ann Surg, 236, pp.75~81 (2002)[DOI]
- Bouzourene H, "Importance of tumor regression assessment in predicting the outcome in patients with locally advanced rectal carcinoma who are treated with preoperative radiotherapy", Cancer, 94, pp.1121~1130 (2002)[DOI]
- Edge SB, "AJCC cancer staging manual, 7th ed" (2010), Springer-Verlag
- Dworak O, "Pathological features of rectal cancer after preoperative radiochemotherapy", Int J Colorectal Dis, 12, pp.19~23 (1997)[DOI]
- Kim TH, "Pathologic nodal classification is the most discriminating prognostic factor for disease-free survival in rectal cancer patients treated with preoperative chemoradiotherapy and curative resection", Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys, 77, pp.1158~1165 (2010)[DOI]
- Sebag-Montefiore D, "Preoperative radiotherapy versus selective postoperative chemoradiotherapy in patients with rectal cancer (MRC CR07 and NCIC-CTG C016): a multicentre, randomised trial", Lancet, 373, pp.811~820 (2009)[DOI]
- Marijnen CA, "Radiotherapy does not compensate for positive resection margins in rectal cancer patients: report of a multicenter randomized trial", Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys, 55, pp.1311~1320 (2003)[DOI]
- Alberda WJ, "Intraoperative radiation therapy reduces local recurrence rates in patients with microscopically involved circumferential resection margins after resection of locally advanced rectal cancer", Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys, 88, pp.1032~1040 (2014)[DOI]
- Gerard JP, "Comparison of two neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy regimens for locally advanced rectal cancer: results of the phase III trial ACCORD 12", 0405-Prodige 2, 2010, pp.28, 1638~1644
- Rodel C, "Preoperative chemoradiotherapy and postoperative chemotherapy with fluorouracil and oxaliplatin versus fluorouracil alone in locally advanced rectal cancer: initial results of the German CAO", ARO, Lancet Oncol, pp.2012, 13[DOI]
- Aschele C, "Primary tumor response to preoperative chemoradiation with or without oxaliplatin in locally advanced rectal cancer: pathologic results of the STAR-01 randomized phase III trial", J Clin Oncol, 29, pp.2773~2780 (2011)[DOI]
- O'Connell MJ, "Capecitabine and oxaliplatin in the preoperative multimodality treatment of rectal cancer: surgical end points from National Surgical Adjuvant Breast and Bowel Project trial R-04", J Clin Oncol, 32, pp.1927~1934 (2014)[DOI]