No abstract

No abstract

No abstract

Pre-operative staging is an essential aspect of modern rectal cancer management and radiological assessment is central to this process. An ideal radiological assessment should provide sufficient information to reliably guide pre-operative decision-making. Technical advances allow high-resolution imaging to not only provide prognostic information but to define the anatomy, helping the surgeon to anticipate potential pitfalls during the operation. The main imaging modality for local staging of rectal cancer is Magnetic Resonance Imaging (MRI), as it defines the tumour and relevant anatomy providing the most detail on the important prognostic factors that influence treatment choice. In addition, there is an emerging role for MRI in the assessment of the response to neoadjuvant therapy. This article is an evidence-based review of rectal cancer staging focusing on post-treatment assessment of response using MRI. The discussion extends into the implications for reliably assessing response and how this may influence future rectal cancer management.

The efficacy of response to preoperative chemoradiotherapy (CRT) in recurrent versus primary rectal cancer has not been investigated. We compared radiological downsizing between primary and recurrent rectal cancers following CRT and determined the optimal size reduction threshold for response validated by survival outcomes. The proportional change in tumor length for primary and recurrent rectal cancers following CRT was compared using the independent sample t-test. Overall survival (OS) was calculated using the Kaplan–Meier product limit method and differences between survival for tumor size reduction thresholds of 30% (response evaluation criteria in solid tumors [RECIST]), 40%, and 50% after CRT in primary and recurrent rectal cancer groups. A total of 385 patients undergoing CRT were analyzed, 99 with recurrent rectal cancer and 286 with primary rectal cancer. The mean proportional reduction in maximum craniocaudal length was significantly higher for primary rectal tumors (33%) compared with recurrent rectal cancer (11%) (P < 0.01). There was no difference in OS for either primary or recurrent rectal cancer when ≤30% or ≤40% definitions were used. However, for both primary and recurrent tumors, significant differences in median 3-year OS were observed when a RECIST cut-off of 50% was used. OS was 99% versus 77% in primary and 100% versus 42% in recurrent rectal cancer (P = 0.002 and P = 0.03, respectively). Only patients that demonstrated >50% size reduction showed a survival benefit. Recurrent rectal cancer appears radioresistant compared with primary tumors for tumor size after CRT. Further investigation into improving/intensifying chemotherapy and radiotherapy for locally recurrent rectal cancer is justified.