Evaluation Of Pathological Response And Its Predictors In Carcinoma Rectum Following Neoadjuvant Chemoradiation.

Q3 Medicine The gulf journal of oncology Pub Date : 2021-09-01
Shoaib Nawaz, Sangeetha K Nayanar, Nabeel Yahiya
{"title":"Evaluation Of Pathological Response And Its Predictors In Carcinoma Rectum Following Neoadjuvant Chemoradiation.","authors":"Shoaib Nawaz,&nbsp;Sangeetha K Nayanar,&nbsp;Nabeel Yahiya","doi":"","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Neoadjuvant chemoradiation followed by surgery is the standard of care in locally advanced rectal tumors. Better pathologic response after chemoradiation is associated with better outcomes. Pathologic response may depend on various, patient and tumor related factors. The aim of our study was to assess the pathological response using a modified Ryan scoring system and to study various factors which influence the response.</p><p><strong>Materials and methods: </strong>This is a retrospective study carried out at a tertiary cancer centre in India. Patient details and histopathology reports of rectal cancer patients who took neoadjuvant chemoradiation from January 2016 to December 2018 were analyzed. Demographic details, pathological response assessed by modified Ryans tumor regression grade (TRG) score and various factors which influence the pathological response were studied. Those with TRG score 0 (complete response) and1(near complete response) were grouped together as good responders and those with score 3 (partial response) and 4 (poor or no response) as poor responders. Univariate and multivariate analyses were performed using logistic regression to determine factors which influence pathologic response.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>There were a total of 83 patients. Males and females were equally distributed. 43.4%(n=36) of patients had lower rectal tumors,32.5%(n=27) had midrectal tumors and 24.1%(n=20) had upper rectal tumors. 46% of patients were good responders which includes complete responders ,17% (n=14) and those with a near complete response,29% (n=24). 54% of patients were poor responders,which includes those with incomplete response,36% (n=34) and with no or poor response,18% (n=15). Among the upper rectal tumors, only 20% had good response and among the mid and lower rectal tumors 54% had good response.(p value 0.02).63% of males were good responders in comparison to 37% among females (p value 0.05).</p><p><strong>Discussion: </strong>Response to neoadjuvant chemoradiation with capecitabine in locally advanced rectal tumors in our institute is similar to the literature data with a complete response in 16.9%, near complete response in 28.9% partial response in 36.1% and no response in 18.1% of patients, according to modified Ryan score. It was found that upper rectal tumors had a poorer response when compared to mid and lower tumors and females had a poorer response compared to males.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Even though neoadjuvant chemoradiation remains the standard of care in locally advanced rectal carcinomas, its benefit in upper rectal tumors needs to be validated in larger studies.</p>","PeriodicalId":53633,"journal":{"name":"The gulf journal of oncology","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2021-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"The gulf journal of oncology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"Medicine","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Neoadjuvant chemoradiation followed by surgery is the standard of care in locally advanced rectal tumors. Better pathologic response after chemoradiation is associated with better outcomes. Pathologic response may depend on various, patient and tumor related factors. The aim of our study was to assess the pathological response using a modified Ryan scoring system and to study various factors which influence the response.

Materials and methods: This is a retrospective study carried out at a tertiary cancer centre in India. Patient details and histopathology reports of rectal cancer patients who took neoadjuvant chemoradiation from January 2016 to December 2018 were analyzed. Demographic details, pathological response assessed by modified Ryans tumor regression grade (TRG) score and various factors which influence the pathological response were studied. Those with TRG score 0 (complete response) and1(near complete response) were grouped together as good responders and those with score 3 (partial response) and 4 (poor or no response) as poor responders. Univariate and multivariate analyses were performed using logistic regression to determine factors which influence pathologic response.

Results: There were a total of 83 patients. Males and females were equally distributed. 43.4%(n=36) of patients had lower rectal tumors,32.5%(n=27) had midrectal tumors and 24.1%(n=20) had upper rectal tumors. 46% of patients were good responders which includes complete responders ,17% (n=14) and those with a near complete response,29% (n=24). 54% of patients were poor responders,which includes those with incomplete response,36% (n=34) and with no or poor response,18% (n=15). Among the upper rectal tumors, only 20% had good response and among the mid and lower rectal tumors 54% had good response.(p value 0.02).63% of males were good responders in comparison to 37% among females (p value 0.05).

Discussion: Response to neoadjuvant chemoradiation with capecitabine in locally advanced rectal tumors in our institute is similar to the literature data with a complete response in 16.9%, near complete response in 28.9% partial response in 36.1% and no response in 18.1% of patients, according to modified Ryan score. It was found that upper rectal tumors had a poorer response when compared to mid and lower tumors and females had a poorer response compared to males.

Conclusion: Even though neoadjuvant chemoradiation remains the standard of care in locally advanced rectal carcinomas, its benefit in upper rectal tumors needs to be validated in larger studies.

分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
直肠癌新辅助放化疗后病理反应的评价及其预测因素。
背景:手术后的新辅助放化疗是局部晚期直肠肿瘤的标准治疗方法。放化疗后较好的病理反应与较好的预后相关。病理反应可能取决于各种患者和肿瘤相关因素。本研究的目的是使用改进的Ryan评分系统来评估病理反应,并研究影响反应的各种因素。材料和方法:这是一项在印度三级癌症中心进行的回顾性研究。分析2016年1月至2018年12月接受新辅助放化疗的直肠癌患者的患者资料和组织病理学报告。研究患者的人口学资料、改良ryan肿瘤消退分级(TRG)评价的病理反应及影响病理反应的各种因素。TRG评分为0分(完全缓解)和1分(接近完全缓解)的患者归为良好反应者,评分为3分(部分缓解)和4分(不良或无反应)的患者归为不良反应者。采用logistic回归进行单因素和多因素分析,以确定影响病理反应的因素。结果:共83例患者。男性和女性平均分布。下直肠肿瘤占43.4%(n=36),中直肠肿瘤占32.5%(n=27),上直肠肿瘤占24.1%(n=20)。46%的患者是良好应答者,其中包括完全应答者,17% (n=14)和接近完全应答者,29% (n=24)。54%的患者为不良反应,其中不完全反应占36% (n=34),无反应或不良反应占18% (n=15)。在直肠上部肿瘤中,只有20%的肿瘤有良好的反应,而在直肠中下部肿瘤中,有54%的肿瘤有良好的反应。(p值0.02)。63%的男性反应良好,而女性反应良好的比例为37% (p值0.05)。讨论:根据改进的Ryan评分,我院局部进展期直肠肿瘤卡培他滨新辅助放化疗的反应与文献数据相似,16.9%的患者完全缓解,28.9%的患者接近完全缓解,36.1%的患者部分缓解,18.1%的患者无反应。研究发现,上直肠肿瘤与中、下直肠肿瘤相比反应较差,女性与男性相比反应较差。结论:尽管新辅助放化疗仍然是局部晚期直肠癌的标准治疗方法,但其在上直肠肿瘤中的益处需要在更大规模的研究中得到验证。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
The gulf journal of oncology
The gulf journal of oncology Medicine-Medicine (all)
CiteScore
0.90
自引率
0.00%
发文量
37
期刊最新文献
Assessing Mismatch Repair Expression by Immunohistochemistry in Colorectal Adenocarcinoma -Insight from a Tertiary Care Centre. Assessment of Radiation Induced Pneumonitis and Pericarditis in Patients Undergoing Breast Conservative Treatment Using Hypofractionated Simultaneous Integrated Boost Technique. Comparison of Acute Toxicities, Overall Treatment Time and Quality of Life in Head and Neck Cancer Patients Treated with IMRT and Helical Tomotherapy. Cost of Healthcare Services in Geriatric Neuro-oncology: A descriptive Analysis. Establishing and Monitoring an Effective Management of Benign Nontoxic Multinodular Goitre in Kuwait "Utilizing Two Different Dose Levels of Recombinant Human TSH in Combination with Radioactive Iodine".
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1