Effects of clinical information on the treatment decisions for good responders to neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy among rectal cancer patients.

IF 3 Q2 GASTROENTEROLOGY & HEPATOLOGY
Eon Bin Kim, In Ja Park, Hwa Jung Kim, Jong Keon Jang, Seong Ho Park, Young Il Kim, Min Hyun Kim, Jong Lyul Lee, Chan Wook Kim, Yong Sik Yoon, Seok-Byung Lim, Chang Sik Yu
{"title":"Effects of clinical information on the treatment decisions for good responders to neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy among rectal cancer patients.","authors":"Eon Bin Kim, In Ja Park, Hwa Jung Kim, Jong Keon Jang, Seong Ho Park, Young Il Kim, Min Hyun Kim, Jong Lyul Lee, Chan Wook Kim, Yong Sik Yoon, Seok-Byung Lim, Chang Sik Yu","doi":"10.3393/ac.2024.00276.0039","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>The decision for treatment after neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy (nCRT) in rectal cancer is intricately linked to tumor response and clinical parameters. This study was designed to elucidate determinants influencing treatment decisions for good responders to nCRT, while concurrently evaluating the ramifications of modifications in magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) tumor response evaluation protocols.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A survey was constructed with 5 cases of good responder after nCRT based on the magnetic resonance-based tumor regression grade (mrTRG) criteria. A total of 35 colorectal surgeons in Korea participated in the survey via email, and they were introduced to 2 discrete MRI-based tumor response evaluation methodologies: the conventional mrTRG and an emergent complete response (CR)/non-CR classification system. Surgeons were directed to select between total mesorectal excision, local excision, or a watch and wait strategy.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Treatment decisions varied significantly (P<0.01), as gradually more clinical information was provided with mrTRG. The paradigm shift from mrTRG to CR/non-CR evaluation criterion instigated the highest alteration in decision (P<0.01). Even comparing with other sets of information, decision change with different tumor response assessment (i.e., mrTRG vs. CR/non-CR) was statistically significant (P<0.01). Three particular cases consistently displayed a declining predilection for total mesorectal excision, favoring a more pronounced inclination towards watch and wait strategy or local excision. Nonetheless, the magnitude of these decisional shifts oscillated depending on the specific endoscopic imagery present.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Our current findings underscore the significant role of tumor response assessment methods in shaping treatment decisions for rectal cancer patients who respond well to nCRT. This highlights the need for clear and accurate tools to interpret MRI results.</p>","PeriodicalId":8267,"journal":{"name":"Annals of Coloproctology","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-07-10","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Annals of Coloproctology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3393/ac.2024.00276.0039","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"GASTROENTEROLOGY & HEPATOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Purpose: The decision for treatment after neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy (nCRT) in rectal cancer is intricately linked to tumor response and clinical parameters. This study was designed to elucidate determinants influencing treatment decisions for good responders to nCRT, while concurrently evaluating the ramifications of modifications in magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) tumor response evaluation protocols.

Methods: A survey was constructed with 5 cases of good responder after nCRT based on the magnetic resonance-based tumor regression grade (mrTRG) criteria. A total of 35 colorectal surgeons in Korea participated in the survey via email, and they were introduced to 2 discrete MRI-based tumor response evaluation methodologies: the conventional mrTRG and an emergent complete response (CR)/non-CR classification system. Surgeons were directed to select between total mesorectal excision, local excision, or a watch and wait strategy.

Results: Treatment decisions varied significantly (P<0.01), as gradually more clinical information was provided with mrTRG. The paradigm shift from mrTRG to CR/non-CR evaluation criterion instigated the highest alteration in decision (P<0.01). Even comparing with other sets of information, decision change with different tumor response assessment (i.e., mrTRG vs. CR/non-CR) was statistically significant (P<0.01). Three particular cases consistently displayed a declining predilection for total mesorectal excision, favoring a more pronounced inclination towards watch and wait strategy or local excision. Nonetheless, the magnitude of these decisional shifts oscillated depending on the specific endoscopic imagery present.

Conclusion: Our current findings underscore the significant role of tumor response assessment methods in shaping treatment decisions for rectal cancer patients who respond well to nCRT. This highlights the need for clear and accurate tools to interpret MRI results.

临床信息对直肠癌新辅助放化疗反应良好患者治疗决策的影响。
目的:直肠癌新辅助放化疗(nCRT)后的治疗决定与肿瘤反应和临床参数复杂相关。本研究旨在阐明影响nCRT良好应答者治疗决策的决定因素,同时评估磁共振成像(MRI)肿瘤应答评估方案修改的后果。方法:根据磁共振肿瘤消退分级(mrTRG)标准,对5例nCRT术后反应良好的患者进行调查。韩国共有35名结直肠外科医生通过电子邮件参与了这项调查,并向他们介绍了两种离散的基于mri的肿瘤反应评估方法:传统的mrTRG和紧急完全缓解(CR)/非CR分类系统。指导外科医生在全肠系膜切除、局部切除或观察等待策略之间进行选择。结论:我们目前的研究结果强调了肿瘤反应评估方法在形成对nCRT反应良好的直肠癌患者的治疗决策中的重要作用。这突出了对清晰准确的工具来解释MRI结果的需求。
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 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
3.30
自引率
3.20%
发文量
73
×
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
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
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 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信