EURECCA consensus conference highlights about colorectal cancer clinical management: The pathologists expert review

Virchows Archiv

Volumn 464, Issue 2, 2014, Pages 129-134

  Quirke, P ^a,c   West, N P ^a   Nagtegaal, I D ^b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF LEEDS   (United Kingdom)

^b RADBOUD UNIVERSITY MEDICAL CENTER   (Netherlands)

^c UNIVERSITY OF LEEDS   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

Audit; Colorectal cancer; Guidelines; Pathology; Quality of surgery

Indexed keywords

FAT;

ADJUVANT CHEMOTHERAPY; CANCER CLASSIFICATION; CANCER PROGNOSIS; CANCER RECURRENCE; CANCER SCREENING; CANCER STAGING; CANCER SURGERY; CANCER SURVIVAL; CHEMORADIOTHERAPY; CLINICAL PRACTICE; COLORECTAL CANCER; CONSENSUS DEVELOPMENT; DECISION MAKING; EUROPE; EVIDENCE BASED PRACTICE; HUMAN; LOCAL EXCISION; LYMPH NODE; LYMPH NODE RATIO; MALIGNANT NEOPLASTIC DISEASE; MEDICAL AUDIT; MINIMAL RESIDUAL DISEASE; MISMATCH REPAIR; PATHOLOGIST; PRACTICE GUIDELINE; PREOPERATIVE TREATMENT; PRIMARY TUMOR; PRIORITY JOURNAL; QUALITY CONTROL; RADIOLOGIST; RECTUM CANCER; REVIEW; RISK FACTOR; SURGICAL TECHNIQUE; SYSTEMATIC REVIEW (TOPIC); TUMOR DEPOSIT; TUMOR DIFFERENTIATION; TUMOR VOLUME; UNITED KINGDOM;

COLORECTAL NEOPLASMS; CONSENSUS DEVELOPMENT CONFERENCES AS TOPIC; HUMANS;

EID: 84896716052     PISSN: 09456317     EISSN: 14322307     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1007/s00428-013-1534-x     Document Type: Review

References (41)

1. van de Velde CJ, Aristei C, Boelens PG et al (2013) EURECCA colorectal: multidisciplinary mission statement on better care for patients with colon and rectal cancer in Europe. Eur J Cancer 49:2784-2790
2. American Joint Committee for Cancer Staging and End-Results Reporting (1977) Manual for staging of cancer 1977. American Joint Committee, Chicago
3. UICC (Hermanek P, Sobin LH, eds.) TNM classification of malignant tumors. 4th edn. Berlin: Springer; 1987.
4. American Joint Committee on Cancer (AJCC) (Beahrs OH, Henson DE, Hutter RVP, Myers MH, eds.) Manual of staging of cancer. 3rd edn. Philadelphia: Lippincott; 1988.
5. ICC (Sobin LH, Wittekind Ch, eds) TNM classification of malignant tumours. 6th edn. 2002. New York: Wiley; 2002.
6. American Joint Committee on Cancer (AJCC) (Greene FL, Page DL, Fleming ID et al., eds) Cancer Staging Manual, 6th edn. New York: Springer; 2002.
7. Hermanek P, Gall FP, Altendorf A (1980) Prognostic grouping in colorectal carcinoma. J Cancer Res Clin Oncol 98:185-193
8. Newland RC, Chapuis PH, Pheils MT, MacPherson JG (1981) The relationship of survival in staging and grading of colorectal carcinoma. Cancer 47:350-357
9. Wittekind C, Compton C, Quirke P et al (2009) A uniform residual tumor (R) classification: integration of the R classification and the circumferential margin status. Cancer 115:3483-3488
10. Quirke P, Dudley P, Dixon MF, Williams NS (1986) Local recurrence of rectal adenocarcinoma due to inadequate surgical resection. Histopathologic study of lateral tumor spread and surgical excision. Lancet 328:996-999
11. Adam IJ, Mohamdee MO, Margin IG et al (1994) Role of circumferential margin involvement in the local recurrence of rectal cancer. Lancet 344:707-711
12. Nagtegaal ID, Quirke P (2008) What is the role for the circumferential margin in the modern treatment of rectal cancer? J Clin Oncol 26:303-312
13. Nagtegaal ID, Marijnen CA, Kranenbarg EK, van de Velde CJ, van Krieken JH (2002) 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 26:350-357
14. Wibe A, Rendedal PR, Svensson E et al (2002) Prognostic significance of the circumferential resection margin following total mesorectal excision for rectal cancer. Br J Surg 89:327-334
15. Birbeck KF, Macklin CP, Tiffin NJ et al (2002) Rates of circumferential resection margin involvement vary between surgeons and predict outcomes in rectal cancer surgery. Ann Surg 235:449-457
16. Nagtegaal ID, van de Velde CJ, van der Worp E, Kapiteijn E, Quirke P, van Krieken JH (2002) Macroscopic evaluation of rectal cancer resection specimen: clinical significance of the pathologist in quality control. J Clin Oncol 20:1729-1734
17. Quirke P, Steele R, Monson J et al (2009) Effect of the plane of surgery achieved on local recurrence in patients with operable rectal cancer: a prospective study using data from the MRC CR07 and NCIC-CTG CO16 randomised clinical trial. Lance 373:821-828
18. Leite JS, Martins SC, Oliveira J, Cunha MF, Castro-Sousa F (2011) Clinical significance of macroscopic completeness of mesorectal resection in rectal cancer. Color Dis 13:381-386
19. García-Granero E, Faiz O, Muñoz E (2009) Macroscopic assessment of mesorectal excision in rectal cancer: a useful tool for improving quality control in a multidisciplinary team. Cancer 115:3400-3411
20. West NP, Finan PJ, Anderin C, Lindholm J, Holm T, Quirke P (2008) Evidence of the oncologic superiority of cylindrical abdominoperineal excision for low rectal cancer. J Clin Oncol 26:3517-3522
21. West NP, Anderin C, Smith KJ, Holm T, Quirke P (2010) Multicentre experience with extralevator abdominoperineal excision for low rectal cancer. Br J Surg 97:588-599
22. Bosch SL, Nagtegaal ID (2012) The importance of the pathologist's role in assessment of the quality of the mesorectum. Curr Colorectal Cancer Rep 8:90-98
23. Stelzner S, Koehler C, Stelzer J, Sims A, Witzigmann H (2011) Extended abdominoperineal excision vs. standard abdominoperineal excision in rectal cancer - a systematic overview. Int J Color Dis 26:1227-1240
24. Morris EJ, Maughan NJ, Forman D, Quirke P (2007) Identifying stage III colorectal cancer patients: the influence of the patient, surgeon, and pathologist. J Clin Oncol 25:2573-2579
25. Mekenkamp LJ, van Krieken JH, Marijnen CA, van de Velde CJ, Nagtegaal ID (2009) Lymph node retrieval in rectal cancer is dependent on many factors - the role of the tumor, the patient, the surgeon, the radiotherapist, and the pathologist. Am J Surg Pathol 33:1547-1553
26. Baxandall M, Lewis F, Casali G et al (2006) Disappearing lymph nodes, one explanation for the fall in number with increasing age. J Path 208(S1):29A
27. Berg M, Guriby M, Nordgård O, et al. Influence of microsatellite instability, KRAS and BRAF mutations on lymph node harvest in stage I-III colon cancers. Mol Med 2013; published online 21st August.
28. Rullier A, Laurent C, Capdepont M et al (2008) Lymph nodes after preoperative chemoradiotherapy for rectal carcinoma: number, status, and impact on survival. Am J Surg Pathol 32:45-50
29. Baxter NN, Morris AM, Rothenberger DA, Tepper JE (2005) Impact of preoperative radiation for rectal cancer on subsequent lymph node evaluation: a population-based analysis. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 61:426-431
30. Jepsen RK, Ingeholm P, Lund EL (2012) Upstaging of early colorectal cancers following improved lymph node yield after methylene blue injection. Histopathology 61:788-794
31. Iversen LH, Laurberg S, Hagemann-Madsen R, Dybdahl H (2008) Increased lymph node harvest from colorectal cancer resections using GEWF solution: a randomised study. J Clin Pathol 61:1203-1208
32. Rödel C, Martus P, Papadoupolos T et al (2005) Prognostic significance of tumor regression after preoperative chemoradiotherapy for rectal cancer. J Clin Oncol 23:8688-8696
33. Dworak O, Keilholz L, Hoffmann A (1997) Pathological features of rectal cancer after preoperative radiochemotherapy. Int J Colorectal Dis 12:19-23
34. Ryan R, Gibbons D, Hyland JM et al (2005) Pathological response following long-course neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy for locally advanced rectal cancer. Histopathology 47:141-146
35. Maas M, Nelemans PJ, Valentini V et al (2010) Long-term outcome in patients with a pathological complete response after chemoradiation for rectal cancer: a pooled analysis of individual patient data. Lancet Oncol 11:835-844
36. Capirci C, Valentini V, Cionini L et al (2008) Prognostic value of pathologic complete response after neoadjuvant therapy in locally advanced rectal cancer: long-term analysis of 566 ypCR patients. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 72:99-107
37. Quirke P, Cuvelier C, Ensari A et al (2010) Evidence-based medicine: the time has come to set standards for staging. J Pathol 221:357-360
38. Quirke P, Williams GT, Ectors N, Ensari A, Piard F, Nagtegaal I (2007) The future of the TNM staging system in colorectal cancer: time for a debate? Lancet Oncol 8:651-657
39. Nagtegaal ID, Quirke P (2010) Revised staging: is it really better, or do we not know? J Clin Oncol 28:e397-e398
40. Nagtegaal ID, Tot T, Jayne DG et al (2011) Lymph nodes, tumor deposits, and TNM: are we getting better? J Clin Oncol 29:2487-2492
41. Nagtegaal ID, Quirke P, Schmoll HJ (2011) Has the new TNM classification for colorectal cancer improved care? Nat Rev Clin Oncol 9:119-123