Rates of Circumferential Resection Margin Involvement Vary Between Surgeons and Predict Outcomes in Rectal Cancer Surgery

Birbeck, K; Macklin, Christopher P.; Tiffin, Nicholas J.; Parsons, Wendy J; Dixon, M. F.; Mapstone, Nicholas P.; Abbott, C R; Scott, Nigel; Finan, P. J.; Johnston, D.; Quirke, Philip

doi:10.1097/00000658-200204000-00001

Cited by 627 publications

(468 citation statements)

References 15 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

421

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…This is consistent with most studies on the prognostic prediction of CRM 6, 7, 8, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 92%

“…Many studies considered CRM as positive when it was ≤1 mm (R1) and associated with obviously poor prognosis as compared to CRM >1 mm (R0), which was in accordance with the ESMO guidelines 6, 8, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17. The criterion to define a positive CRM remains unclear.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 77%

“…While several studies showed that CRM should not be used as a prognostic factor in rectal cancer,4, 5 other studies demonstrated the importance of CRM as an independent prognostic factor of local recurrence and long‐term survival,6, 7, 8, 9 including the first report by Quirke et al10 suggesting that CRM might be a strong predictor of long‐term oncologic outcomes. According to the European Society for Medical Oncology (ESMO) Clinical Practice Guidelines for rectal cancer, CRM is defined as involved if it is ≤1 mm from the tumor‐free margin, leading to an increased risk of local recurrence, distant metastases, and poorer survival 11…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Circumferential resection margin as a prognostic factor after rectal cancer surgery: A large population‐based retrospective study

et al. 2018

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

AimThis study aimed to investigate circumferential resection margin (CRM) as a prognostic factor for long‐term oncologic survival after rectal cancer surgery.MethodsPatients diagnosed with malignant rectal cancer between 1 January 2010 and 31 December 2014, from the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) program were identified for this study. The patients were divided into five CRM groups to compare the baseline characteristics and assess cancer‐specific survival (CSS): 0‐1 mm, 1.1‐2.0 mm, 2.1‐5.0 mm, 5.1‐10.0 mm, and >10 mm. The main endpoint was CSS.ResultsCircumferential resection margin ≤1 mm was independently associated with 99% increased risk of cancer‐specific mortality in rectal cancer [hazard ratio (HR) = 1.990, 95% confidence interval (CI) = 1.613‐2.454, P < 0.001, using CRM (1.1‐2.0 mm) as a reference]. CRM (5.1‐10.0 mm) was independently associated with 29.2% decreased risk of cancer‐specific mortality [HR = 0.708, 95% CI = 0.525‐0.954, P = 0.152, using group (2.1‐5.0 mm) as reference]. CRM ≤2 mm or ≤0.4 mm was not obviously associated with CSS.Conclusionscircumferential resection margin is an independent prognostic factor in rectal cancer. Surgeons should try to maximize the CRM. Rectal cancer patients with CRM ≤1 mm should receive more postoperative attention depending on individual situation. Also, CRM should be accurately measured in millimeters in a preoperative magnetic resonance imaging or pathological report, rather than simply described as “involved” or “clear.”

show abstract

“…This is consistent with most studies on the prognostic prediction of CRM 6, 7, 8, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 92%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 77%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Circumferential resection margin as a prognostic factor after rectal cancer surgery: A large population‐based retrospective study

et al. 2018

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Circumferential resection margin status predicts for local recurrence and overall survival (Birbeck et al, 2002;Wibe et al, 2002). However, CRM status is rarely reported.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Preoperative radiotherapy combined with 5 days per week capecitabine chemotherapy in locally advanced rectal cancer

et al. 2007

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

There is increasing evidence supporting the use of preoperative chemoradiotherapy in patients with locally advanced rectal cancer in an attempt to facilitate complete surgical resection with clear margins. We describe our experience of using a 5-day per week regime of preoperative capecitabine chemoradiotherapy. Between November 2004 and September 2006, 70 patients with MRI-defined locally advanced rectal cancer were selected for treatment. Capecitabine was given at a dose of 900 mg m À2 for 5 days per week combined with 45 Gy of radiotherapy in 25 doses. This regime was well tolerated with 89% of our patients receiving the full dose of chemotherapy and 96% receiving the full dose of radiotherapy. Ninety-three per cent proceeded to macroscopically complete surgical resection. The pathological complete response rate was 9.2% with a node-negative rate of 66%. A negative circumferential margin was achieved by 79% of the patients who underwent resection. Compared to studies using a 7-day per week capecitabine schedule, our results show increased compliance and less dose reductions with comparable pathological outcome. There is clear evidence from two systematic reviews that adjuvant radiotherapy reduces the risk of local recurrence in patients with resectable rectal cancer (Camma et al, 2000; Colorectal Cancer Collaborative, 2001). The greatest benefit is seen when preoperative radiotherapy is used with a biologically equivalent dose of 430 Gy. Further clinical trials were required to assess the benefit of adding concurrent chemotherapy to preoperative radiotherapy.The recent publication of two phase III trials confirms that preoperative concurrent chemoradiation (CRT) is superior to long-course radiotherapy alone in patients with T3/4 or nodepositive resectable rectal cancer. The EORTC 22921 (Bosset et al, 2005) and FFCD 9203 (Gerard et al, 2006) trials compared intravenous 5-fluorouracil (5FU) and leucovorin (LV) given during the first and fifth weeks of radiotherapy with radiotherapy alone (dose of RT was 45 Gy in 25 fractions in both arms of the studies). Both trials demonstrated a reduction in the rates of local recurrence at 5 years from 17% with radiotherapy alone to 8 -9% with preoperative CRT, but neither trial showed any difference in overall survival. A further recent phase III trial has demonstrated that preoperative 5FU CRT is superior to post-operative CRT with a significant reduction in local recurrence from 12 to 6% as well as a significant reduction in both acute and long-term toxicity (Sauer et al, 2004). This evidence will clearly result in an increasing use of fluoropyrimidine-based CRT.Intravenous 5FU-based chemoradiation presents many logistical challenges. Continuous infusion of 5FU requires the insertion of a central venous line with its attendant risks of thrombosis and infection as well as the inconvenience of a portable infusion pump. The use of the bolus 5FU/LV regimen used in the EORTC and FFCD trials requires 10 daily visits to the chemotherapy day unit, with associated waiting time, t...

show abstract

“…The goal of surgery in this setting is complete excision of the tumour, with a clear circumferential margin (R0). If this is achieved, the risk of local recurrence is minimised [43]. Whilst TME/ELAPE surgery is now an accepted standard of care in rectal cancer surgery, how this is performed has evolved with advances in laparoscopic and robotic equipment and expertise.…”

Section: Surgery For Rectal Cancermentioning

confidence: 99%

Paradigm Shift in the Management of Rectal Cancer

Rawat

Evans

2014

Indian J Surg

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Surgery for rectal cancer in the pre-Total Mesorectal Excision (TME) era was associated with high local recurrence rates. The widespread adoption of the TME technique together with the addition of neoadjuvant oncological therapies have reduced local failure rates and improved survival for patients with rectal cancer. Advances in our knowledge, better understanding of tumour biology and refinement in minimal access techniques and equipment have significantly changed the management of rectal cancer. This paper reviews these changes and proposes a paradigm shift in how rectal cancer management is conceptualised and treated, such that the treatment of rectal cancer is separated into early tumours (potentially suitable for local excison), TME tumours (optimally managed by TME) and beyond TME tumours (optimally managed by multivisceral resection outside the TME plane).

show abstract

Rates of Circumferential Resection Margin Involvement Vary Between Surgeons and Predict Outcomes in Rectal Cancer Surgery

Cited by 627 publications

References 15 publications

Circumferential resection margin as a prognostic factor after rectal cancer surgery: A large population‐based retrospective study

Circumferential resection margin as a prognostic factor after rectal cancer surgery: A large population‐based retrospective study

Preoperative radiotherapy combined with 5 days per week capecitabine chemotherapy in locally advanced rectal cancer

Paradigm Shift in the Management of Rectal Cancer

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About