Neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy for rectal cancer: how important is tumour regression?

Background: Pathological complete response following neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy (CRT) for locally advanced rectal cancer is associated with reduced local recurrence and improved long-term outcome. However, the prognostic value of a partial response, or of tumour regression in patients with metast...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: McCoy, M., Hemmings, C., Hillery, S., Penter, C., Bulsara, M., Zeps, Nikolajs, Platell, C.
Format: Journal Article
Published: 2015
Online Access:http://hdl.handle.net/20.500.11937/6041
_version_ 1848744963506962432
author McCoy, M.
Hemmings, C.
Hillery, S.
Penter, C.
Bulsara, M.
Zeps, Nikolajs
Platell, C.
author_facet McCoy, M.
Hemmings, C.
Hillery, S.
Penter, C.
Bulsara, M.
Zeps, Nikolajs
Platell, C.
author_sort McCoy, M.
building Curtin Institutional Repository
collection Online Access
description Background: Pathological complete response following neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy (CRT) for locally advanced rectal cancer is associated with reduced local recurrence and improved long-term outcome. However, the prognostic value of a partial response, or of tumour regression in patients with metastatic disease, is less clear. Methods: We present a single-centre cohort study of 205 patients with stage II–IV rectal cancer treated with surgery and neoadjuvant CRT between 2006 and 2013. Tumour regression was assessed using the Dworak system. Results: The probability of 3-year recurrence-free survival (RFS) was 95% for Dworak grade 4, 82% for grade 3, 64% for grade 2 and 53% for grade 1 (P = 0.0005). In univariate regression analysis, Dworak grade was associated with RFS (hazard ratio (HR) 0.51, P < 0.0001; trend analysis) and cancer-specific survival (HR 0.52, P = 0.002). In multivariate analysis, Dworak grade remained an independent predictor of RFS (HR 0.62, P = 0.012), along with clinical metastases stage, resection margin status, the presence or absence of extramural venous invasion and type of surgical procedure. Conclusions: Tumour regression grade after neoadjuvant CRT was an independent prognostic factor for RFS, highlighting the importance of the degree of local response to CRT.
first_indexed 2025-11-14T06:09:49Z
format Journal Article
id curtin-20.500.11937-6041
institution Curtin University Malaysia
institution_category Local University
last_indexed 2025-11-14T06:09:49Z
publishDate 2015
recordtype eprints
repository_type Digital Repository
spelling curtin-20.500.11937-60412018-01-03T08:24:16Z Neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy for rectal cancer: how important is tumour regression? McCoy, M. Hemmings, C. Hillery, S. Penter, C. Bulsara, M. Zeps, Nikolajs Platell, C. Background: Pathological complete response following neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy (CRT) for locally advanced rectal cancer is associated with reduced local recurrence and improved long-term outcome. However, the prognostic value of a partial response, or of tumour regression in patients with metastatic disease, is less clear. Methods: We present a single-centre cohort study of 205 patients with stage II–IV rectal cancer treated with surgery and neoadjuvant CRT between 2006 and 2013. Tumour regression was assessed using the Dworak system. Results: The probability of 3-year recurrence-free survival (RFS) was 95% for Dworak grade 4, 82% for grade 3, 64% for grade 2 and 53% for grade 1 (P = 0.0005). In univariate regression analysis, Dworak grade was associated with RFS (hazard ratio (HR) 0.51, P < 0.0001; trend analysis) and cancer-specific survival (HR 0.52, P = 0.002). In multivariate analysis, Dworak grade remained an independent predictor of RFS (HR 0.62, P = 0.012), along with clinical metastases stage, resection margin status, the presence or absence of extramural venous invasion and type of surgical procedure. Conclusions: Tumour regression grade after neoadjuvant CRT was an independent prognostic factor for RFS, highlighting the importance of the degree of local response to CRT. 2015 Journal Article http://hdl.handle.net/20.500.11937/6041 10.1111/ans.13394 restricted
spellingShingle McCoy, M.
Hemmings, C.
Hillery, S.
Penter, C.
Bulsara, M.
Zeps, Nikolajs
Platell, C.
Neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy for rectal cancer: how important is tumour regression?
title Neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy for rectal cancer: how important is tumour regression?
title_full Neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy for rectal cancer: how important is tumour regression?
title_fullStr Neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy for rectal cancer: how important is tumour regression?
title_full_unstemmed Neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy for rectal cancer: how important is tumour regression?
title_short Neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy for rectal cancer: how important is tumour regression?
title_sort neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy for rectal cancer: how important is tumour regression?
url http://hdl.handle.net/20.500.11937/6041