Locally advanced rectal cancer: MR imaging for restaging after neoadjuvant radiation therapy with concomitant chemotherapy part II. What are the criteria to predict involved lymph nodes?

Radiology

Volumn 252, Issue 1, 2009, Pages 81-91

  Lahaye, Max J ^a   Beets, Geerard L ^a   Engelen, Sanne M E ^a   Kessels, Alfons G H ^a   De Bruïne, Adriaan P ^a   Kwee, Herry W S ^b   Van Engelshoven, Jos M A ^a   Van De Velde, Cornelis J H ^c   Beets Tan, Regina G H ^a,d  

^a MAASTRICHT UNIVERSITY MEDICAL CENTER   (Netherlands)

^b LAURENTIUS HOSPITAL   (Netherlands)

^c LEIDEN UNIVERSITY MEDICAL CENTER   (Netherlands)

^d MEMORIAL SLOAN KETTERING CANCER CENTER   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

FLUOROURACIL; ULTRASMALL SUPERPARAMAGNETIC IRON OXIDE;

ADULT; ADVANCED CANCER; AGED; AREA UNDER THE CURVE; ARTICLE; BACKACHE; CANCER ADJUVANT THERAPY; CANCER CHEMOTHERAPY; CANCER RADIOTHERAPY; CANCER STAGING; CLINICAL ARTICLE; CLINICAL TRIAL; CONTRAST ENHANCEMENT; CONTROLLED STUDY; DIAGNOSTIC ACCURACY; FEMALE; HEADACHE; HISTOPATHOLOGY; HUMAN; HUMAN TISSUE; LYMPH NODE METASTASIS; MALE; NUCLEAR MAGNETIC RESONANCE IMAGING; PREDICTOR VARIABLE; PRIORITY JOURNAL; RECTUM CANCER; RECTUM SURGERY; ROC CURVE; SENSITIVITY AND SPECIFICITY; TREATMENT RESPONSE; URTICARIA;

ADULT; AGED; AGED, 80 AND OVER; CARCINOMA; DRUG THERAPY; FEMALE; HUMANS; LYMPHATIC METASTASIS; MAGNETIC RESONANCE IMAGING; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; NEOADJUVANT THERAPY; NEOPLASM STAGING; RADIOTHERAPY, ADJUVANT; RECTAL NEOPLASMS; REPRODUCIBILITY OF RESULTS; SENSITIVITY AND SPECIFICITY; TREATMENT OUTCOME;

EID: 67650081524     PISSN: 00338419     EISSN: 15271315     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1148/radiol.2521081364     Document Type: Article

References (33)

1. Lehnert T, Methner M, Pollok A, Schaible A, Hinz U, Herfarth C. Multivisceral resection for locally advanced primary colon and rectal cancer: an analysis of prognostic factors in 201 patients. Ann Surg 2002;235:217-225.
2. Sauer R, Becker H, Hohenberger W, et al. Preoperative versus postoperative chemoradiotherapy for rectal cancer. N Engl J Med 2004;351:1731-1740.
3. Govindarajan A, Coburn NG, Kiss A, Rabeneck L, Smith AJ, Law CH. Population-based assessment of the surgical management of locally advanced colorectal cancer. J Natl Cancer Inst 2006;98:1474-1481.
4. Reerink O, Verschueren RC, Szabo BG, Hospers GA, Mulder NH. A favourable pathological stage after neoadjuvant radiochemotherapy in patients with initially irresectable rectal cancer correlates with a favourable prognosis. Eur J Cancer 2003;39:192-195.
5. Dresen RC, Beets GL, Rutten HJT, et al. Locally advanced rectal cancer: MR imaging for restaging after neoadjuvant radiation therapy with concomitant chemotherapy. I. Are we able to predict tumor confined to the rectal wall? Radiology 2009;252(1):XXX-XXX.
6. Coco C, Manno A, Mattana C, et al. The role of local excision in rectal cancer after complete response to neoadjuvant treatment. Surg Oncol 2007;16(suppl 1):S101-S104.
7. Hughes R, Glynne-Jones R, Grainger J, et al. Can pathological complete response in the primary tumour following pre-operative pelvic chemoradiotherapy for T3-T4 rectal cancer predict for sterilisation of pelvic lymph nodes, a low risk of local recurrence and the appropriateness of local excision? Int J Colorectal Dis 2006;21:11-17.
8. Lahaye MJ, Engelen SM, Nelemans PJ, et al. Imaging for predicting the risk factors - the circumferential resection margin and nodal disease - of local recurrence in rectal cancer: a meta-analysis. Semin Ultrasound CT MR 2005;26:259-268.
9. Bipat S, Glas AS, Slors FJ, Zwinderman AH, Bossuyt PM, Stoker J. Rectal cancer: local staging and assessment of lymph node involvement with endoluminal US, CT, and MR imaging - a meta-analysis. Radiology 2004;232:773-783.
10. Brown G, Richards CJ, Bourne MW, et al. Morphologic predictors of lymph node status in rectal cancer with use of high-spatial-resolution MR imaging with histopathologic comparison. Radiology 2003;227:371-377.
11. Will O, Purkayastha S, Chan C, et al. Diagnostic precision of nanoparticle-enhanced MRI for lymph-node metastases: a meta-analysis. Lancet Oncol 2006;7:52-60.
12. Lahaye MJ, Engelen SME, Kessels AGH, et al. USPIO-enhancedMRimaging for nodal staging in patients with primary rectal cancer: predictive criteria. Radiology 2008;246:804-811.
13. Suppiah A, Hunter IA, Cowley J, et al. Magnetic resonance imaging accuracy in assessing tumour down-staging following chemoradiation in rectal cancer. Colorectal Dis 2009;11:249-253.
14. Koh DM, Chau I, Tait D, Wotherspoon A, Cunningham D, Brown G. Evaluating mesorectal lymph nodes in rectal cancer before and after neoadjuvant chemoradiation using thin-section T2-weighted magnetic resonance imaging. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2008;71:456-461.
15. Maretto I, Pomerri F, Pucciarelli S, et al. The potential of restaging in the prediction of pathologic response after preoperative chemoradiotherapy for rectal cancer. Ann Surg Oncol 2007;14:455-461.
16. Chen CC, Lee RC, Lin JK, Wang LW, Yang SH. How accurate is magnetic resonance imaging in restaging rectal cancer in patients receiving preoperative combined chemoradiotherapy? Dis Colon Rectum 2005;48:722-728.
17. Harisinghani MG, Dixon WT, Saksena MA, et al. MR lymphangiography: imaging strategies to optimize the imaging of lymph nodes with ferumoxtran-10. RadioGraphics 2004;24:867-878.
18. Harisinghani MG, Barentsz JO, Hahn PF, et al. MR lymphangiography for detection of minimal nodal disease in patients with prostate cancer. Acad Radiol 2002;9(suppl 2):S312-S313.
19. Heald RJ. A new approach to rectal cancer. Br J Hosp Med 1979;22:277-281.
20. DeLong ER, DeLong DM, Clarke-Pearson DL. Comparing the areas under two or more correlated receiver operating curves: a non-parametric approach. Biometrics 1988;44:837-845.
21. Cohen J. A coefficient of agreement for nominal scales. Educ Psychol Meas 1960;20:37-46.
22. Cohen J. Weighted kappa: nominal scale agreement with provision for scaled disagreement or partial credit. Psychol Bull 1968;70:213-230.
23. Shrout PE, Fleiss JL. Intraclass correlations: uses in assessing rater reliability. Psychol Bull 1979;86:420-428.
24. Landis JR, Koch GG. The measurement of observer agreement for categorical data. Biometrics 1977;33:159-174.
25. Kuo LJ, Chern MC, Tsou MH, et al. Interpretation of magnetic resonance imaging for locally advanced rectal carcinoma after preoperative chemoradiation therapy. Dis Colon Rectum 2005;48:23-28.
26. Habr-Gama A, Perez RO, Proscurshim I, et al. Absence of lymph nodes in the resected specimen after radical surgery for distal rectal cancer and neoadjuvant chemoradiation therapy: what does it mean? Dis Colon Rectum 2008;51:277-283.
27. Koh DM, Brown G, Temple L, et al. Rectal cancer: mesorectal lymph nodes at MR imaging with USPIO versus histopathologic findings - initial observations. Radiology 2004;231:91-99.
28. Capirci C, Rubello D, Chierichetti F, et al. Restaging after neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy for rectal adenocarcinoma: role of F18-FDG PET. Biomed Pharmacother 2004;58:451-457.
29. Kristiansen C, Loft A, Berthelsen AK, et al. PET/CT and histopathologic response to preoperative chemoradiation therapy in locally advanced rectal cancer. Dis Colon Rectum 2008;51:21-25.
30. Abdel-Nabi H, Doerr RJ, Lamonica DM, et al. Staging of primary colorectal carcinomas with fluorine-18 fluorodeoxyglucose whole-body PET: correlation with histopathologic and CT findings. Radiology 1998;206:755-760.
31. Llamas-Elvira JM, Rodriguez-Fernandez A, Gutierrez-Sainz J, et al. Fluorine-18 fluorodeoxyglucose PET in the preoperative staging of colorectal cancer. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 2007;34:859-867.
32. Borschitz T, Wachtlin D, Mohler M, Schmidberger H, Junginger T. Neoadjuvant chemoradiation and local excision for T2-3 rectal cancer. Ann Surg Oncol 2008;15:712-720.
33. O'Neill BD, Brown G, Heald RJ, Cunningham D, Tait DM. Non-operative treatment after neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy for rectal cancer. Lancet Oncol 2007;8:625-633.