17
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: not found

      Lymph Node Negative Colorectal Cancers with Isolated Tumor Deposits Should Be Classified and Treated As Stage III

      research-article
      , MD 1 , , , MD 1 , , MD, PhD 2 , , MD, PhD 3 , , MD, PhD 4 , , MD, PhD 1 , , MD, PhD 5
      Annals of Surgical Oncology
      Springer-Verlag

      Read this article at

      ScienceOpenPublisherPMC
      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Background

          The prognostic role of pericolic or perirectal isolated tumor deposits (ITDs) in node-negative colorectal cancer (CRC) patients is unclear. Rules to define ITDs as regional lymph node metastases changed in subsequent editions of the TNM staging without substantial evidence. Aim of this study was to investigate the correlation between ITDs and disease recurrence in stage II and III CRC patients.

          Materials and Methods

          The medical files of 870 CRC patients were reviewed. Number, size, shape, and location pattern of all ITDs in node-negative patients were examined in relation to involvement of vascular structures and nerves. The correlation between ITDs and the development of recurrent disease was investigated.

          Results

          Disease recurrence was observed in 50.0% of stage II patients with ITDs (13 of 26), compared with 24.4% of stage II patients without ITDs (66 of 270) ( P < .01). Disease-free survival of ITD-positive stage II patients was comparable with that of stage III patients. Also within stage III, more recurrences were observed in ITD-positive patients compared with ITD-negative patients (65.1 vs. 39.1%, respectively). No correlation was found between size of ITDs and disease recurrence. More recurrences were seen in patients with irregularly shaped ITDs compared with patients with 1 or more smooth ITDs present.

          Conclusions

          Because of the high risk of disease recurrence, all node-negative stage II patients with ITDs, regardless of size and shape, should be classified as stage III, for whom adjuvant chemotherapy should be considered.

          Related collections

          Most cited references14

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          Final version of the American Joint Committee on Cancer staging system for cutaneous melanoma.

          To revise the staging system for cutaneous melanoma under the auspices of the American Joint Committee on Cancer (AJCC). The prognostic factors analysis described in the companion publication (this issue), as well as evidence from the published literature, was used to assemble the tumor-node-metastasis criteria and stage grouping for the melanoma staging system. Major changes include (1) melanoma thickness and ulceration but not level of invasion to be used in the T category (except for T1 melanomas); (2) the number of metastatic lymph nodes rather than their gross dimensions and the delineation of clinically occult (ie, microscopic) versus clinically apparent (ie, macroscopic) nodal metastases to be used in the N category; (3) the site of distant metastases and the presence of elevated serum lactic dehydrogenase to be used in the M category; (4) an upstaging of all patients with stage I, II, and III disease when a primary melanoma is ulcerated; (5) a merging of satellite metastases around a primary melanoma and in-transit metastases into a single staging entity that is grouped into stage III disease; and (6) a new convention for defining clinical and pathologic staging so as to take into account the staging information gained from intraoperative lymphatic mapping and sentinel node biopsy. This revision will become official with publication of the sixth edition of the AJCC Cancer Staging Manual in the year 2002.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            Colorectal tumour deposits in the mesorectum and pericolon; a critical review.

            Although tumour deposits (TD) in the pericolic and mesorectal fat have been recognized since 1935, incorporation in the Tumour Node Metastasis (TNM)/American Joint Committee on Cancer (AJCC) system took place in 1997. The 3-mm rule classified TD as lymph node metastases. This rule was changed in 2002, when the contour of the deposit became the diagnostic feature. This review has evaluated the 3714 patients described in the literature. The incidence of TD varies from 5 to 45%. Their origin has been shown to be heterogeneous; however, their presence indicates a poorer survival. The hazard ratio for death due to disease is 1.96. Various studies have tried to determine the importance of types of TD, based on contour, size and origin, but all fail to provide an evidence base to substantiate its use in the TNM system. To classify TD as positive lymph nodes after neoadjuvant therapy is a misconception, since the presence of tumour microfoci after therapy can be a sign of good response to treatment and indicative of a good prognosis. In conclusion, we did not find adequate evidence for the inclusion of TD in TNM/AJCC staging systems. Moreover, the current directives are confusing, and the definitions should not be used after neoadjuvant therapy.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Pericolonic tumor deposits in patients with T3N+MO colon adenocarcinomas: markers of reduced disease free survival and intra-abdominal metastases and their implications for TNM classification.

              A pericolonic tumor deposit (PTD) is a grossly palpated adenocarcinomas within pericolonic adipose tissue not within a lymph node. The source and prognostic significance of PTDs has not been well defined. The authors studied 418 T3N+M0 colon adenocarcinomas to determine the frequency and significance of PTDs. They also step-sectioned 30 PTDs to determine their origin and assist in their optimum TNM classification. Seventy-one (18%) of 400 consecutively examined cases had PTDs. The actuarial 1-, 2-, and 5-year disease free survival rates were significantly lower among patients with a PTD. PTDs, regardless of size, significantly impacted disease free survival. Increasing numbers of PTDs was associated with shorter disease free survival. Adenocarcinoma grade, a PTD, increasing numbers of PTDs, and number of lymph node metastases were independently associated with shorter disease free survival. The likelihood of extrahepatic abdominal failure was proportionally greater with increasing numbers of PTDs. Adenocarcinoma was observed in perineural, peri-large vessel, or intravascular locations in step-sectioned PTDs. A PTD is a perineural, perivascular, or intravascular tumor extension beyond the muscularis propria. They are distinct from lymph node metastases and should not be considered their prognostic equivalent. The disease free survival impact of even small PTDs was significant, suggesting that PTDs of all sizes should be considered a single entity. TNM classification of PTDs as lymph node metastases or discontinuous tumor extension is probably not accurate. The number and greatest dimension of PTDs should be reported separately from lymph node metastases.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Contributors
                ericbelt@hotmail.com
                Journal
                Ann Surg Oncol
                Annals of Surgical Oncology
                Springer-Verlag (New York )
                1068-9265
                1534-4681
                13 July 2010
                13 July 2010
                December 2010
                : 17
                : 12
                : 3203-3211
                Affiliations
                [1 ]Department of Surgery, VU Medical Centre, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
                [2 ]Department of Pathology, Kennemer Gasthuis, Haarlem, The Netherlands
                [3 ]Department of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, VU Medical Centre, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
                [4 ]Department of Pathology, VU Medical Center, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
                [5 ]Department of Surgery, Kennemer Gasthuis, Haarlem, The Netherlands
                Article
                1152
                10.1245/s10434-010-1152-7
                2995864
                20625841
                68a67783-f370-4860-9c27-e7fd2538b08b
                © The Author(s) 2010
                History
                : 18 February 2010
                Categories
                Colorectal Cancer
                Custom metadata
                © Society of Surgical Oncology 2010

                Oncology & Radiotherapy
                Oncology & Radiotherapy

                Comments

                Comment on this article