Neoadjuvant Therapy for Rectal Cancer Affects Lymph Node Yield and Status Without Clear Implications on Outcome: The Case for Eliminating a Metric and Using Preoperative Staging to Guide Therapy

View More View Less
  • a From Division of Surgical Oncology, The Ohio State University Wexner Medical Center/Arthur G. James Cancer Hospital, Columbus, Ohio; Center for Biostatistics, The Ohio State University Wexner Medical Center, Columbus, Ohio; Robert H. Lurie Comprehensive Cancer Center of Northwestern University, Chicago, Illinois; Department of Hematology/Oncology, Fox Chase Cancer Center, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania; City of Hope Comprehensive Cancer Center, Duarte, California; University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Texas; Kalispell Regional Healthcare Specialists, Kalispell Regional Healthcare, Kalispell, Montana; Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, New York; Dana-Farber Cancer Institute, Boston, Massachusetts; and Depaartment of Medicine, Division of Hematology/Oncology, Mayo Clinic Cancer Center, Phoenix, Arizona.
Restricted access

Background: Nodal status has long been considered pivotal to oncologic care, staging, and management. This has resulted in the establishment of rudimentary metrics regarding adequate lymph node yield in colon and rectal cancers for accurate cancer staging. In the era of neoadjuvant treatment, the implications of lymph node yield and status on patient outcomes remains unclear. Patient and Methods: This study included 1,680 patients with locally advanced rectal cancer from the NCCN prospective oncology database stratified into 3 groups based on preoperative therapy received: no neoadjuvant therapy, neoadjuvant chemoradiation, and neoadjuvant chemotherapy. Clinicopathologic characteristics and survival were compared between the groups, with univariate and multivariate analyses undertaken. Results: The clinicopathologic characteristics demonstrated statistically significant differences and heterogeneity among the 3 groups. The neoadjuvant chemoradiation group demonstrated the statistically lowest median lymph node yield (n=15) compared with 17 and 18 for no-neoadjuvant and neoadjuvant chemotherapy, respectively (P<.0001). Neoadjuvant treatment did impact survival, with chemoradiation demonstrating increased median overall survival of 42.7 compared with 37.3 and 26.6 months for neoadjuvant chemotherapy and no-neoadjuvant therapy, respectively (P<.0001). Patients with a yield of fewer than 12 lymph nodes had improved median overall survival of 43.3 months compared with 36.6 months in patients with 12 or more lymph nodes (P=.009). Multivariate analysis demonstrated that neither node yield nor status were predictors for overall survival. Discussion: This analysis reiterates that nodal yield in rectal cancer is multifactorial, with neoadjuvant therapy being a significant factor. Node yield and status were not significant predictors of overall survival. A nodal metric may not be clinically relevant in the era of neoadjuvant therapy, and guidelines for perioperative therapy may need reconsideration.

Author Contributions: Bekaii-Saab and Abdel-Misih formulated the scientific question (concept) and the associated data points of interest to be obtained from the NCCN cancer database. Schrag reviewed the initial concept with approval for use of the NCCN cancer database for this scientific inquiry. LW was involved in the statistical concepts and analysis of the acquired data. The qualitative data analysis, interpretation, and drafting of the manuscript were undertaken by Abdel-Misih and Bekaii-Saab. All authors (Weiser, Benson, Cohen, Lai, Skibber, Wilkinson, Weiser, Schrag, Bekaii-Saab, and Abdel-Misih) contributed to the review and editing of the manuscript. All authors had final approval of the version to be published and are in agreement to be accountable for all aspects of the work in ensuring questions related to the accuracy and integrity of the work are appropriately investigated and resolved.

Correspondence: Sherif R. Z. Abdel-Misih, MD, 320 West 10th Avenue, M256 Starling-Loving Hall, Columbus, OH 43210. E-mail: sherif.abdel-misih@osumc.edu
  • 1.

    Le Voyer TE, Sigurdson ER, Hanlon AL. Colon cancer survival is associated with increasing number of lymph nodes analyzed: a secondary survey of intergroup trial INT-0089. J Clin Oncol 2003;21;29122919.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 2.

    Swanson RS, Compton CC, Stewart AK, Bland KI. The prognosis of T3N0 colon cancer is dependent on the number of lymph nodes examined. Ann Surg Oncol 2003;10:6571.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 3.

    Tepper JE, O'Connell MJ, Niedzwiecki D. Impact of number of nodes retrieved on outcome in patients with rectal cancer. J Clin Oncol 2001;19:157163.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 4.

    Cserni G, Vinh-Hung V, Burzykowski T. Is there a minimum number of lymph nodes that should be histologically assessed for a reliable nodal staging of T3N0M0 colorectal carcinomas? J Surg Oncol 2002;81:6369.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 5.

    Fielding LP, Arsenault PA, Chapuis PH. Clinicopathologic staging for colorectal cancer: an International Documentation System (IDS) and an International Comprehensive Anatomical Terminology (ICAT). J Gastroenterol Hepatol 1991;6:3544.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 6.

    Baxter NN, Virnig DJ, Rothenberger DA. Lymph node evaluation in colorectal cancer patients: a population-based study. J Natl Cancer Inst 2005;97:219225.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 7.

    Wright FC, Law CH, Last L. Lymph node retrieval and assessment in stage II colorectal cancer: a population based study. Ann Surg Oncol 2003;10:903909.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 8.

    Colon and Rectum. In: American Joint Committee on Cancer. AJCC Cancer Staging Manual. 6th ed. New York, NY: Springer; 2002:113124.

  • 9.

    Taflampas P, Christodoulakis M, Gourtsoyianni S. The effect of preoperative chemoradiotherapy on lymph node harvest after total mesorectal excision for rectal cancer. Dis Colon Rectum 2009;52:14701474.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 10.

    McDonald JR, Renehan AG, O'Dwyer ST, Haboubi NY. Lymph node harvest in colon and rectal cancer: current considerations. World J Gastorintest Surg 2012;4:919.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 11.

    Evans MD, Barton K, Rees A. The impact of surgeon and pathologist on lymph node retrieval in colorectal cancer and its impact on survival for patients with Dukes' stage B disease. Colorectal Dis 2008;10:157164.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 12.

    Bilimoria KY, Bentrem DJ, Stewart AK. Lymph node evaluation as a colon cancer quality measure: a national hospital report card. J Natl Cancer Inst 2008;100:13101317.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 13.

    Miller ED, Robb BW, Cummings OW, Johnstone PA. The effects of preoperative chemoradiotherapy on lymph node sampling in rectal cancer. Dis Colon Rectum 2012;55:10021007.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 14.

    Shen SS, Haupt BX, Ro JY. Number of lymph nodes examined and associated clinicopathologic factors in colorectal carcinoma. Arch Pathol Lab Med 2009;133:781786.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 15.

    Baxter NN, Morris AM, Rothenberger DA, Tepper JE. Impact of preoperative radiation for rectal cancer on subsequent lymph node evaluation: a population–based analysis. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2005;61:426431.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 16.

    Gorog D, Nagy P, Peter A, Perner F. Influence of obesity on lymph node recovery from rectal cancer specimens. Pathol Oncol Res 2003;9:180183.

  • 17.

    Nathan H, Shore AD, Anders RA. Variation in lymph node assessment after colon cancer resection: patient, surgeon, pathologist, or hospital? J Gastrointest Surg 2011;15:471479.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 18.

    Wong SL, Ji H, Hollenbeck BK. Lymph node examination rates and survival after resection for colon cancer. JAMA 2007;298:21492154.

  • 19.

    Sauer R, Becker H, Hohenberger W. Preoperative versus postoperative chemoradiotherapy for rectal cancer. N Engl J Med 2004;351:17311740.

  • 20.

    De la Fuente SG, Manson RJ, Ludwig KA, Mantyh CR. Neoadjuvant chemoradiation for rectal cancer reduces lymph node harvest in proctectomy specimens. J Gastrointest Surg 2009;13:269274.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 21.

    Marks JH, Valsdottir EB, Rather AA. Fewer than 12 lymph nodes can be expected in a surgical specimen after high-dose chemoradiation therapy for rectal cancer. Dis Colon Rectum 2010;53:10231029.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 22.

    Rullier A, Laurent C, Capdepont M. Lymph nodes after preoperative chemoradiotherapy for rectal carcinoma: number, status, and impact on survival. Am J Surg Pathol 2008;32:4550.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 23.

    Bosset JF, Calais G, Mineur L. Fluorouracil-based adjuvant chemotherapy after preoperative chemoradiotherapy in rectal cancer: long-term results of the EORTC 22921 randomised study. Lancet Oncol 2014;15:184190.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 24.

    Benson AB, Venook AP, Bekaii-Saab T. NCCN Clinical Practice Guidelines in Oncology: Rectal Cancer. Version 2.2016. Accessed March 28, 2016. To view the most recent version of these guidelines, visit NCCN.org.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
All Time Past Year Past 30 Days
Abstract Views 0 0 0
Full Text Views 233 189 10
PDF Downloads 53 38 2
EPUB Downloads 0 0 0