Annals of Surgical Oncology

, Volume 14, Issue 2, pp 455–461 | Cite as

The Potential of Restaging in the Prediction of Pathologic Response After Preoperative Chemoradiotherapy for Rectal Cancer

  • Isacco Maretto
  • Fabio Pomerri
  • Salvatore Pucciarelli
  • Claudia Mescoli
  • Enrico Belluco
  • Simona Burzi
  • Massimo Rugge
  • Pier Carlo Muzzio
  • Donato Nitti



We performed this study to prospectively evaluate the postchemoradiotherapy performance of transrectal ultrasonography (TRUS), pelvic computed tomography (CT) scan and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), and endoscopic biopsies for predicting the pathologic complete response of rectal cancer patients.


Four weeks after completion of preoperative chemoradiotherapy, 46 consecutive patients with mid to low rectal cancer were prospectively evaluated by proctoscopy, TRUS, and pelvic CT scan and MRI. On the basis of T and N status, patients were classified as T0 or T1–4 and N-negative or N-positive. For each staging modality used, sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, negative predictive value, and accuracy were calculated. Findings were compared with the pathologic tumor-node-metastasis stage.


On histopathologic analysis, 12 patients had pT0 and 34 had pT1–4 lesions; out of 45 assessable patients, 9 were N-positive. The sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, negative predictive value, and accuracy in predicting T status (T0 vs. T ≥1) were 77%, 33%, 74%, 36%, and 64%, respectively, for TRUS; 100%, 0%, 74%, not assessable, and 74% for CT; and 100%, 0%, 77%, not assessable, and 77% for MRI. The corresponding figures in predicting N status (N-negative vs. N-positive) were, respectively, 37%, 67%, 21%, 81%, and 61% for TRUS; 78%, 58%, 32%, 91%, and 62% for CT; and 33%, 74%, 25%, 81%, and 65% for MRI.


Current rectal cancer staging modalities after chemoradiotherapy allow good prediction of node-negative cases, although none of them is able to predict the pathologic complete response on the rectal wall.


Rectal cancer Staging CT scan MRI TRUS 


  1. 1.
    Kapiteijn E, Marijnen CA, Nagtegaal ID, et al. Dutch Colorectal Cancer Group. Preoperative radiotherapy combined with total mesorectal excision for resectable rectal cancer. N Engl J Med 2001;345:638–46PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Sauer R, Becker H, Hohenberger W, et al. Preoperative versus postoperative chemoradiotherapy for rectal cancer. N Engl J Med 2004; 351:1731–40PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Kim NK, Kim MJ, Yun SH, Sohn SK, Min JS. Comparative study of transrectal ultrasonography, pelvic computerized tomography, and magnetic resonance imaging in preoperative staging of rectal cancer. Dis Colon Rectum 1999; 42:770–5PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Herbst F. Pelvic radiological imaging: a surgeon’s perspective. Eur J Radiol 2003; 47:135–41PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Bipat S, Glas AS, Slors FJM, Zwinderman AH, Bossuyt PMM, Stoker J. Rectal cancer: local staging and assessment of lymph node involvement with endoluminal US, CT, and MR imaging—a meta-analysis. Radiology 2004; 232:773–83PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Kahn H, Alexander A, Rakinic J, Rakinic J, Nagle D, Fry R. Preoperative staging of irradiated rectal cancers using digital rectal examination, computed tomography, endorectal ultrasound, and magnetic resonance imaging does not accurately predict T0, N0 pathology. Dis Colon Rectum 1997; 40:140–4PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Rau B, Hunerbein M, Barth C, et al. Accuracy of endorectal ultrasound after preoperative radiochemotherapy in locally advanced rectal cancer. Surg Endosc 1999; 13:980–4PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Denecke T, Rau B, Hoffmann KT, et al. Comparison of CT, MRI and FDG-PET in response prediction of patients with locally advanced rectal cancer after multimodal preoperative therapy: is there a benefit in using functional imaging? Eur Radiol 2005; 15:1658–66PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Stipa F, Chessin DB, Shia J, et al. A pathologic complete response of rectal cancer to preoperative combined-modality therapy results in improved oncological outcome compared with those who achieved no downstaging on the basis of preoperative endorectal ultrasonography. Ann Surg Oncol 2006; 13:1047–53PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Theodoropoulos G, Wise WE, Padmanabhan A, et al. T-level downstaging and complete pathologic response after preoperative chemoradiation for advanced rectal cancer result in decreased recurrence and improved disease-free survival. Dis Colon Rectum 2002; 45:895–903PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Chan AKP, Wong A, Jenken D, Heine J, Buie D, Johnson D. Posttreatment TNM staging is a prognostic indicator of survival and recurrence in tethered or fixed rectal carcinoma after preoperative chemotherapy and radiotherapy. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2005; 61:665–77PubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Bedrosian I, Rodriguez-Bigas MA, Feig B, et al. Predicting the node-negative mesorectum after preoperative chemoradiation for locally advanced rectal carcinoma. J Gastrointest Surg 2004; 8:56–62PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Stipa F, Zernecke A, Moore HG, et al. Residual mesorectal lymph node involvement following neoadjuvant combined-modality therapy: rationale for radical resection? Ann Surg Oncol 2004; 11:187–91PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Read TE, Andujar JE, Caushaj PF, et al. Neoadjuvant therapy for rectal cancer: histologic response of the primary tumor predicts nodal status. Dis Colon Rectum 2004; 47:825–31PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Pucciarelli S, Capirci C, Emanuele U, et al. Relationship between pathologic T-stage and nodal metastasis after preoperative chemoradiotherapy for locally advanced rectal cancer. Ann Surg Oncol 2005; 12:111–6PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Habr-Gama A, Perez RO, Nadalin W, et al. Operative versus nonoperative treatment for stage 0 distal rectal cancer following chemoradiation therapy: long-term results. Ann Surg 2004; 240:711–7PubMedGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Kim CJ, Yeatman TJ, Coppola D, et al. Local excision of T2 and T3 rectal cancers after downstaging chemoradiation. Ann Surg 2001; 234:352–8PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Schell SR, Zlotecki RA, Mendenhall WM, Marsh RW, Vauthey JN, Copeland EM III. Transanal excision of locally advanced rectal cancers downstaged using neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy. J Am Coll Surg 2002; 194:584–90PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Bonnen M, Crane C, Vauthey JN, et al. Long-term results using local excision after preoperative chemoradiation among selected T3 rectal cancer patients. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2004; 60:1098–105PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Pucciarelli S, Friso ML, Toppan P, et al. Preoperative combined radiotherapy and chemotherapy for middle and lower rectal cancer: preliminary results. Ann Surg Oncol 2000; 7:38–44PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Pucciarelli S, Toppan P, Friso ML, et al. Complete pathologic response following preoperative chemoradiation therapy for middle to lower rectal cancer is not a prognostic factor for a better outcome. Dis Colon Rectum 2004; 47:1798–807PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Enker WE, Thaler TH, Cranon LM, Polyak T. Total mesorectal excision in the operative treatment of carcinoma of the rectum. J Am Coll Surg 1995; 181:335–46PubMedGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Greene FL, Page DL, Fleming ID, et al. American Joint Committee on Cancer (AJCC). AJCC Cancer Staging Manual. 6th ed. New York: Springer-Verlag, 2002:121–3Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Blomqvist L, Holm T, Nyren S, Svanström R, Ulvskog Y, Iselius L. MR imaging and computed tomography in patients with rectal tumours clinically judged as locally advanced. Clin Radiol 2002; 57:211–8PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Chiesura-Corona M, Muzzio PC, Giust G, Zuliani M, Pucciarelli S, Toppan P. Rectal cancer: CT local staging with histopathologic correlation. Abdom Imaging 2001; 26:134–8PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Harewood GC, Wiersema MJ, Nelson H, et al. A prospective, blinded assessment of the impact of preoperative staging on the management of rectal cancer. Gastroenterology 2002; 123:24–32PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Quirke P, Durdey P, Dixon MF, Williams NS. Local recurrence of rectal adenocarcinoma due to inadequate surgical resection. Histopathological study of lateral tumour spread and surgical excision. Lancet 1986;2:996–9PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Vanagunas A, Lin DE, Stryker SJ. Accuracy of endoscopic ultrasound for restaging rectal cancer following neoadjuvant chemoradiation therapy. Am J Gastroenterol 2004; 99:109–12PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Barbaro B, Schulsinger A, Valentini V, Marano P, Rotman M. The accuracy of transrectal ultrasound in predicting pathological stage of low-lying rectal cancer after preoperative chemoradiation therapy. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 1999;43:1043–7PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Chen CC, Lee RC, Lin JK, Wang LW, Yang SH. How accurate is magnetic resonance in restaging rectal cancer in patients receiving preoperative combined chemoradiotherapy? Dis Colon Rectum 2005; 48:722–8PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Hoffmann KT, Rau B, Wust P, et al. Restaging of locally advanced carcinoma of the rectum with MR imaging after preoperative radiochemotherapy plus regional hyperthermia. Strahlenther Onkol 2002; 178:386–92PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Liersch T, Langer C, Jakob C, et al. Preoperative diagnostic procedures in locally advanced rectal carcinoma (> or = T3 or N+). What does endoluminal ultrasound achieve at staging and restaging (after neoadjuvant radiochemotherapy) in contrast to computed tomography? Chirurg 2003; 74:224–34PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Kim MJ, Lim JS, Oh YT, et al. Preoperative MRI of rectal cancer with and without rectal water filling: an intraindividual comparison. Am J Roentgenol 2004; 182:1469–76Google Scholar
  34. 34.
    Blomqvist L, Machado M, Rubio C, et al. Rectal tumor staging: MR imaging using pelvic phased-array and endorectal coils vs endoscopic ultrasonography. Eur Radiol 2000; 10:653–60PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Brown G, Radcliffe AG, Newcombe RG, Dallimore NS, Bourne MW, Williams GT. Preoperative assessment of prognostic factors in rectal cancer using high-resolution magnetic resonance imaging. Br J Surg 2003; 90:355–64PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Koh DM, Brown G, Temple L, et al. Rectal cancer: mesorectal lymph nodes at MR imaging with USPIO versus histopathologic findings—initial observations. Radiology 2004; 231:91–9PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    Knaebel HP, Koch M, Feise T, Benner A, Kienle P. Diagnostic of rectal cancer: endorectal ultrasound. Recent Results Cancer Res 2005; 165:46–57PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. 38.
    Brown G, Richards CJ, Bourne MW, et al. Morphologic predictors of lymph node status in rectal cancer with use of high-spatial-resolution MR imaging with histopathologic comparison. Radiology 2003; 227:371–7PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. 39.
    Catalano MF, Sivak MV Jr, Rice T, Gragg LA, Van Dam J. Endosonographic features predictive of lymph node metastasis. Gastrointest Endosc 1994; 40:442–6PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. 40.
    Kotanagy H, Fukuoka T, Shibata Y, et al. The size of regional lymph nodes does not correlate with the presence or absence of metastases in lymph nodes in rectal cancer. J Surg Oncol 1993; 54:252–4CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. 41.
    Ratto C, Ricci R, Rossi C, Morelli U, Vecchio FM, Doglietto GB. Mesorectal microfoci adversely affect the prognosis of patients with rectal cancer. Dis Colon Rectum 2002; 45:733–42PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Society of Surgical Oncology 2006

Authors and Affiliations

  • Isacco Maretto
    • 1
  • Fabio Pomerri
    • 2
  • Salvatore Pucciarelli
    • 1
  • Claudia Mescoli
    • 3
  • Enrico Belluco
    • 1
  • Simona Burzi
    • 2
  • Massimo Rugge
    • 3
  • Pier Carlo Muzzio
    • 2
  • Donato Nitti
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Oncological and Surgical SciencesClinica Chirurgica II, University of PaduaPaduaItaly
  2. 2.Department of Diagnostic Sciences and Special TherapiesRadiology Unit, Istituto Oncologico Veneto, Istituto di Ricovero e Cura a Carattere Scientifico (IRCCS), University of PaduaPaduaItaly
  3. 3.Department of Diagnostic Sciences and Special TherapiesPathology Unit, Istituto Oncologico Veneto, Istituto di Ricovero e Cura a Carattere Scientifico (IRCCS), University of PaduaPaduaItaly

Personalised recommendations