4.2 Article

Circumferential Resection Margin Involvement in Stage III Rectal Cancer Patients Treated with Curative Resection Followed by Chemoradiotherapy: A Surrogate Marker for Local Recurrence?

Journal

YONSEI MEDICAL JOURNAL
Volume 54, Issue 1, Pages 131-138

Publisher

YONSEI UNIV COLL MEDICINE
DOI: 10.3349/ymj.2013.54.1.131

Keywords

Rectal neoplasm; circumferential resection margin; local recurrence; systemic metastasis; prognosis

Funding

  1. Korea Health 21 R&D Project, Ministry of Health and Welfare, Republic of Korea [0405-BC01-0604-0002]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Purpose: Circumferential resection margin (CRM) involvement is a well-known predictor for poor prognosis in rectal cancer. However, the significance is controversial in some studies. Accordingly, this study attempted to examine the prognostic impact of CRM involvement in stage III rectal cancer. Materials and Methods: Between January 1990 and December 2007, a total of 449 patients who underwent curative resection followed by complete adjuvant chemoradiotherapy for stage RI rectal cancer located within 12 cm from the anal verge were selected. Patients were divided into a CRM-positive group (n=79, 17.6%) and a CRM-negative group (n=370, 82.4%). Results: With a median follow-up of 56.6 months, recurrent disease was seen in 53.2 and 43.5% of the CRM-positive and CRM-negative group, respectively. CRM involvement was an independent prognostic factor for 5-year systemic recurrence-free survival (HR: 1.5, CI: 1.0-2.2, p=0.017). However, no significant difference was observed for local recurrence rate between the two groups (13.0 and 13.5%, respectively, p=0.677). Conclusion: In this study, local recurrence rate did not differ according to CRM involvement status in stage III rectal cancer patients, although CRM involvement was shown to be an independent poor prognostic factor. Accordingly, validation of the results of this study by further large prospective randomized trials is warranted.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.2
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available