Cargando…

Defining response to radiotherapy in rectal cancer using magnetic resonance imaging and histopathological scales

AIM: To define good and poor regression using pathology and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) regression scales after neo-adjuvant chemotherapy for rectal cancer. METHODS: A systematic review was performed on all studies up to December 2015, without language restriction, that were identified from MED...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Siddiqui, Muhammed R S, Bhoday, Jemma, Battersby, Nicholas J, Chand, Manish, West, Nicholas P, Abulafi, Al-Mutaz, Tekkis, Paris P, Brown, Gina
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Baishideng Publishing Group Inc 2016
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5055872/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27729748
http://dx.doi.org/10.3748/wjg.v22.i37.8414
_version_ 1782458812930719744
author Siddiqui, Muhammed R S
Bhoday, Jemma
Battersby, Nicholas J
Chand, Manish
West, Nicholas P
Abulafi, Al-Mutaz
Tekkis, Paris P
Brown, Gina
author_facet Siddiqui, Muhammed R S
Bhoday, Jemma
Battersby, Nicholas J
Chand, Manish
West, Nicholas P
Abulafi, Al-Mutaz
Tekkis, Paris P
Brown, Gina
author_sort Siddiqui, Muhammed R S
collection PubMed
description AIM: To define good and poor regression using pathology and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) regression scales after neo-adjuvant chemotherapy for rectal cancer. METHODS: A systematic review was performed on all studies up to December 2015, without language restriction, that were identified from MEDLINE, Cochrane Controlled Trials Register (1960-2015), and EMBASE (1991-2015). Searches were performed of article bibliographies and conference abstracts. MeSH and text words used included “tumour regression”, “mrTRG”, “poor response” and “colorectal cancers”. Clinical studies using either MRI or histopathological tumour regression grade (TRG) scales to define good and poor responders were included in relation to outcomes [local recurrence (LR), distant recurrence (DR), disease-free survival (DFS), and overall survival (OS)]. There was no age restriction or stage of cancer restriction for patient inclusion. Data were extracted by two authors working independently and using pre-defined outcome measures. RESULTS: Quantitative data (prevalence) were extracted and analysed according to meta-analytical techniques using comprehensive meta-analysis. Qualitative data (LR, DR, DFS and OS) were presented as ranges. The overall proportion of poor responders after neo-adjuvant chemo-radiotherapy (CRT) was 37.7% (95%CI: 30.1-45.8). There were 19 different reported histopathological scales and one MRI regression scale (mrTRG). Clinical studies used nine and six histopathological scales for poor and good responders, respectively. All studies using MRI to define good and poor response used one scale. The most common histopathological definition for good response was the Mandard grades 1 and 2 or Dworak grades 3 and 4; Mandard 3, 4 and 5 and Dworak 0, 1 and 2 were used for poor response. For histopathological grades, the 5-year outcomes for poor responders were LR 3.4%-4.3%, DR 14.3%-20.3%, DFS 61.7%-68.1% and OS 60.7-69.1. Good pathological response 5-year outcomes were LR 0%-1.8%, DR 0%-11.6%, DFS 78.4%-86.7%, and OS 77.4%-88.2%. A poor response on MRI (mrTRG 4,5) resulted in 5-year LR 4%-29%, DR 9%, DFS 31%-59% and OS 27%-68%. The 5-year outcomes with a good response on MRI (mrTRG 1,2 and 3) were LR 1%-14%, DR 3%, DFS 64%-83% and OS 72%-90%. CONCLUSION: For histopathology regression assessment, Mandard 1, 2/Dworak 3, 4 should be used for good response and Mandard 3, 4, 5/Dworak 0, 1, 2 for poor response. MRI indicates good and poor response by mrTRG1-3 and mrTRG4-5, respectively.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-5055872
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2016
publisher Baishideng Publishing Group Inc
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-50558722016-10-11 Defining response to radiotherapy in rectal cancer using magnetic resonance imaging and histopathological scales Siddiqui, Muhammed R S Bhoday, Jemma Battersby, Nicholas J Chand, Manish West, Nicholas P Abulafi, Al-Mutaz Tekkis, Paris P Brown, Gina World J Gastroenterol Systematic Reviews AIM: To define good and poor regression using pathology and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) regression scales after neo-adjuvant chemotherapy for rectal cancer. METHODS: A systematic review was performed on all studies up to December 2015, without language restriction, that were identified from MEDLINE, Cochrane Controlled Trials Register (1960-2015), and EMBASE (1991-2015). Searches were performed of article bibliographies and conference abstracts. MeSH and text words used included “tumour regression”, “mrTRG”, “poor response” and “colorectal cancers”. Clinical studies using either MRI or histopathological tumour regression grade (TRG) scales to define good and poor responders were included in relation to outcomes [local recurrence (LR), distant recurrence (DR), disease-free survival (DFS), and overall survival (OS)]. There was no age restriction or stage of cancer restriction for patient inclusion. Data were extracted by two authors working independently and using pre-defined outcome measures. RESULTS: Quantitative data (prevalence) were extracted and analysed according to meta-analytical techniques using comprehensive meta-analysis. Qualitative data (LR, DR, DFS and OS) were presented as ranges. The overall proportion of poor responders after neo-adjuvant chemo-radiotherapy (CRT) was 37.7% (95%CI: 30.1-45.8). There were 19 different reported histopathological scales and one MRI regression scale (mrTRG). Clinical studies used nine and six histopathological scales for poor and good responders, respectively. All studies using MRI to define good and poor response used one scale. The most common histopathological definition for good response was the Mandard grades 1 and 2 or Dworak grades 3 and 4; Mandard 3, 4 and 5 and Dworak 0, 1 and 2 were used for poor response. For histopathological grades, the 5-year outcomes for poor responders were LR 3.4%-4.3%, DR 14.3%-20.3%, DFS 61.7%-68.1% and OS 60.7-69.1. Good pathological response 5-year outcomes were LR 0%-1.8%, DR 0%-11.6%, DFS 78.4%-86.7%, and OS 77.4%-88.2%. A poor response on MRI (mrTRG 4,5) resulted in 5-year LR 4%-29%, DR 9%, DFS 31%-59% and OS 27%-68%. The 5-year outcomes with a good response on MRI (mrTRG 1,2 and 3) were LR 1%-14%, DR 3%, DFS 64%-83% and OS 72%-90%. CONCLUSION: For histopathology regression assessment, Mandard 1, 2/Dworak 3, 4 should be used for good response and Mandard 3, 4, 5/Dworak 0, 1, 2 for poor response. MRI indicates good and poor response by mrTRG1-3 and mrTRG4-5, respectively. Baishideng Publishing Group Inc 2016-10-07 2016-10-07 /pmc/articles/PMC5055872/ /pubmed/27729748 http://dx.doi.org/10.3748/wjg.v22.i37.8414 Text en ©The Author(s) 2016. Published by Baishideng Publishing Group Inc. All rights reserved. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/ This article is an open-access article which was selected by an in-house editor and fully peer-reviewed by external reviewers. It is distributed in accordance with the Creative Commons Attribution Non Commercial (CC BY-NC 4.0) license, which permits others to distribute, remix, adapt, build upon this work non-commercially, and license their derivative works on different terms, provided the original work is properly cited and the use is non-commercial.
spellingShingle Systematic Reviews
Siddiqui, Muhammed R S
Bhoday, Jemma
Battersby, Nicholas J
Chand, Manish
West, Nicholas P
Abulafi, Al-Mutaz
Tekkis, Paris P
Brown, Gina
Defining response to radiotherapy in rectal cancer using magnetic resonance imaging and histopathological scales
title Defining response to radiotherapy in rectal cancer using magnetic resonance imaging and histopathological scales
title_full Defining response to radiotherapy in rectal cancer using magnetic resonance imaging and histopathological scales
title_fullStr Defining response to radiotherapy in rectal cancer using magnetic resonance imaging and histopathological scales
title_full_unstemmed Defining response to radiotherapy in rectal cancer using magnetic resonance imaging and histopathological scales
title_short Defining response to radiotherapy in rectal cancer using magnetic resonance imaging and histopathological scales
title_sort defining response to radiotherapy in rectal cancer using magnetic resonance imaging and histopathological scales
topic Systematic Reviews
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5055872/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27729748
http://dx.doi.org/10.3748/wjg.v22.i37.8414
work_keys_str_mv AT siddiquimuhammedrs definingresponsetoradiotherapyinrectalcancerusingmagneticresonanceimagingandhistopathologicalscales
AT bhodayjemma definingresponsetoradiotherapyinrectalcancerusingmagneticresonanceimagingandhistopathologicalscales
AT battersbynicholasj definingresponsetoradiotherapyinrectalcancerusingmagneticresonanceimagingandhistopathologicalscales
AT chandmanish definingresponsetoradiotherapyinrectalcancerusingmagneticresonanceimagingandhistopathologicalscales
AT westnicholasp definingresponsetoradiotherapyinrectalcancerusingmagneticresonanceimagingandhistopathologicalscales
AT abulafialmutaz definingresponsetoradiotherapyinrectalcancerusingmagneticresonanceimagingandhistopathologicalscales
AT tekkisparisp definingresponsetoradiotherapyinrectalcancerusingmagneticresonanceimagingandhistopathologicalscales
AT browngina definingresponsetoradiotherapyinrectalcancerusingmagneticresonanceimagingandhistopathologicalscales