Accurate Pretreatment Staging Research Articles

Current Management of Locally Recurrent Rectal Cancer.

Locally recurrent rectal cancer (LRRC), which occurs in 6-12% of patients previously treated with surgery, with or without pre-operative chemoradiation therapy, represents a complex and heterogeneous disease profoundly affecting the patient's quality of life (QoL) and long-term survival. Its management usually requires a multidisciplinary approach, to evaluate the several aspects of a LRRC, such as resectability or the best approach to reduce symptoms. Surgical treatment is more complex and usually needs high-volume centers to obtain a higher rate of radical (R0) resections and to reduce the rate of postoperative complications. Multiple factors related to the patient, to the primary tumor, and to the surgery for the primary tumor contribute to the development of local recurrence. Accurate pre-treatment staging of the recurrence is essential, and several classification systems are currently used for this purpose. Achieving an R0 resection through radical surgery remains the most critical factor for a favorable oncologic outcome, although both chemotherapy and radiotherapy play a significant role in facilitating this goal. If a R0 resection of a LRRC is not feasible, palliative treatment is mandatory to reduce the LRRC-related symptoms, especially pain, minimizing the effect of the recurrence on the QoL of the patients. The aim of this manuscript is to provide a comprehensive narrative review of the literature regarding the management of LRRC.

Role of MRI in Staging of Penile Cancer

Penile cancer is one of the male-specific cancers. Accurate pretreatment staging is crucial due to a plethora of treatment options currently available. The 8th edition American Joint Committee on Cancer-Tumor Node and Metastasis (AJCC-TNM) revised the staging for penile cancers, with invasion of corpora cavernosa upstaged from T2 to T3 and invasion of urethra downstaged from T3 to being not separately relevant. With this revision, MRI is more relevant in local staging because MRI is accurate in identifying invasion of corpora cavernosa, while the accuracy is lower for detection of urethral involvement. The recent European Urology Association (EAU) guidelines recommend MRI to exclude invasion of the corpora cavernosa, especially if penis preservation is planned. Identification of satellite lesions and measurement of residual-penile-length help in surgical planning. When nonsurgical treatment modalities of the primary tumor are being considered, accurate local staging helps in decision-making regarding upfront inguinal lymph node dissection as against surveillance. MRI helps in detection and extent of inguinal and pelvic lymphadenopathy and is superior to clinical palpation, which continues to be the current approach recommended by National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN) treatment guidelines. MRI helps the detection of "bulky" lymph nodes that warrant neoadjuvant chemotherapy and potentially identify extranodal extension. However, tumor involvement in small lymph nodes and differentiation of reactive vs. malignant lymphadenopathy in large lymph nodes continue to be challenging and the utilization of alternative contrast agents (superparamagnetic iron oxide), positron emission tomography (PET)-MRI along with texture analysis is promising. In locally recurrent tumors, MRI is invaluable in identification of deep invasion, which forms the basis of treatment. Multiparametric MRI, especially diffusion-weighted-imaging, may allow for quantitative noninvasive assessment of tumor grade and histologic subtyping to avoid biopsy undersampling. Further research is required for incorporation of MRI with deep learning and artificial intelligence algorithms for effective staging in penile cancer. Level of Evidence: 5 Technical Efficacy: Stage 3 J. Magn. Reson. Imaging 2020;51:1612-1629.

Indeterminate pulmonary nodules among patients with new diagnosis of colorectal cancer: Prevalence and significance assessment

Background: In Saudi Arabia, colorectal cancer (CRC) accounts for 11.5% of cancer incidence, where nearly one-third is metastatic. Global guidelines recommend accurate pretreatment staging to determine resectability and stage-directed treatment. Computed tomography (CT) scan is among the widely used imaging for staging. However, at times, the characterization of abnormalities detected by CT scan is perplexing. Indeterminate pulmonary nodules (IPNs) are nodules that are neither benign nor malignant, which are incidentally detected on baseline staging chest CT. We aimed to estimate the prevalence of IPN that were identified among CRC patients. Materials and Methods: We conducted a retrospective record review of all newly diagnosed CRC patients between June 2013 and June 2018 from an academic hospital in Jeddah, Kingdom of Saudi Arabia (KSA). Demographics and certain prespecified variables were collected. The presence of IPN on staging chest CT as per consultant radiologist report was documented, and the ability of other modalities to identify the nature of IPN was compared. Data were analyzed using SPSS and a P value < 0.05 was considered significant. Results: Of 283 CRC patients, 208 (73.5%) underwent chest CT, and the mean age was 57.4 years (±SD 13.1). The prevalence of IPN among CRC patients is 17.7%. Thirty IPN patients had a follow-up chest CT for IPN, which identified IPN nature in 18(60%) of them. The likelihood of IPN to be CRC-related metastasis was significantly associated with the presence of synchronous liver metastasis (P = 0.0005), younger age (P = 0.022), and colon cancer (P = 0.011). Conclusion: The prevalence of IPN was 17.7%, which is different in comparison to other studies from different countries. There is a vital need for unified guidelines describing IPN to accurately stage CRC patients, decrease unnecessary follow-ups, and acquire the exact prevalence of IPN.

Phase II study of induction chemotherapy followed by chemoradiotherapy in patients with borderline resectable and unresectable locally advanced pancreatic cancer

There is not a clear consensus regarding the optimal treatment of locally advanced pancreatic disease. There is a potential role for neoadjuvant therapy to treat micrometastatic disease with chemotherapy, as well as for the treatment of local disease with radiotherapy. We evaluated the safety and efficacy of induction chemotherapy with oxaliplatin and gemcitabine followed by a high weekly dose of gemcitabine concurrent to radiation therapy in patients with borderline resectable and unresectable locally advanced pancreatic cancer. In our study, 41 patients with pancreatic cancer were evaluated. In all cases an accurate pre-treatment staging was performed. Patients with evidence of metastatic disease were excluded, and thus a total of 34 patients were consequently enrolled. Of these, twenty-seven patients (80%) had locally advanced unresectable tumours, seven patients (20%) had borderline resectable disease. This protocol treatment represents a well-tolerated promising approach. Fifteen patients (55.5%) underwent surgical radical resection. With a median follow-up of 20 months, the median PFS and OS were 20 months and 19.2 months, respectively. The median OS for borderline resectable patients was 21.5 months compared with 14 months for unresectable patients (p = 0.3). Continued optimization in multimodality therapy and an accurate patient selection remain crucial points for the appropriate treatment of these patients.

Utility of early dynamic and delayed post-diuretic 18F-FDG PET/CT SUVmax in predicting tumour grade and T-stage of urinary bladder carcinoma: results from a prospective single centre study.

Accurate pre-treatment grading and staging of bladder cancer are vital for better therapeutic decision and prognosis. The aim of the present study was to evaluate the correlation between maximum standardized uptake value (SUVmax) calculated during early dynamic and post-diuretic fluorine-18 fludeoxyglucose (18F-FDG) positron emission tomography (PET)/CT studies with grade and pT-stage of bladder cancer. 39 patients with suspected/proven bladder carcinoma underwent 10-min early dynamic pelvic imaging and delayed post-diuretic whole-body FDG PET/CT imaging. SUVmax of the lesions derived from both studies was compared with grade and pT-stage. Relationship of SUVmax with grade and pT-stage was analyzed using independent sample t-test and analysis of variance. SUVmax of the early dynamic imaging showing tumour perfusion was independent from the SUVmax of delayed imaging. High-grade tumours showed higher SUVmax than low-grade tumours in the early dynamic imaging (5.4 ± 1.4 vs 4.7 ± 1.6; p-value 0.144) with statistically significant higher value in Stage pT1 tumours (6.8 ± 0.8 vs 5.5 ± 1.2; p-value 0.04). Non-invasive pTa tumours had significantly less SUVmax than higher stage tumours during early dynamic imaging [F(4,29) = 6.860, p 0.001]. Early dynamic imaging may have a role in predicting the grade and aggressiveness of the bladder tumours and thus can help in treatment planning and prognostication. Advances in knowledge: Dynamic PET/CT is a limitedly explored imaging technique. This prospective pilot study demonstrates the utility of this modality as a potential adjunct to standard FDG PET/CT imaging in predicting the grade and aggressiveness of the bladder tumours and thus can impact the patient management.

A Comparison of Various Modalities in Staging Rectal Cancer: DRE, EUS, and MRI

Introduction: Accurate pre-treatment staging of rectal cancer is critical to determine the need for neoadjuvant chemoradiation therapy (CRT), which is offered for patients staged as T3 or TxN1 disease or worse. Along with digital rectal examination (DRE), both EUS and MRI are commonly used in clinical practice to evaluate tumor depth (T stage) and locoregional lymph node involvement. This retrospective review aims to evaluate the utility and clinical impact of EUS and MRI as adjuncts to DRE for the staging and management of newly diagnosed rectal cancer. Methods: Rectal cancer cases from January 2014 through June 2016 where MRI was performed as part of staging and/or where T-stage assessment by surgical DRE was documented prior to endoscopy were reviewed. All EUS procedures were performed by two experienced ultrasonographers. DRE was performed by one of two colorectal surgeons. Kappa statistics was used to measure agreement between different staging methods. This was done for both T-stage and treatment stage, defined as ≤T2, N0 versus ≥T3 or TxN1 as this dichotomy often dictates treatment with CRT. Results: T-stage by DRE was documented prior to EUS in 58 cases. T-stage agreement between DRE and EUS was moderate (K=0.46), with substantial agreement in treatment stage between the two (K=0.64). EUS differed with DRE on treatment stage in 3 cases (5%): 1 was upstaged from T2 to T3 and 2 were down staged from T3 to T2. T-stage by DRE was documented prior to MRI in 45 cases. Agreement between DRE and MRI in both T-stage and treatment stage was modest (K=0.09 and K=0.23 respectively). T-stage by EUS and MRI was documented in 67 cases. There was fair agreement for T-staging between EUS and MRI (K=0.29) with greater agreement in treatment stage between the two (K=0.51). EUS and MRI differed on treatment stage in 5 cases (7%): in 3 cases MRI provided a higher stage while in 2 cases EUS provided a higher stage. T-stage and treatment stage agreement across all three staging modalities was modest (0.24) and moderate (K=0.46) respectively (Table 1). Conclusion: DRE performed by an experienced colorectal surgeon correlates well with EUS in determining the stage of rectal cancer and the need for neoadjuvant therapy. The more modest correlation between DRE and MRI may be due to the smaller sample size. EUS and MRI generally agree on the treatment stage of rectal tumors. The use of both modalities rarely alters clinical decisions in the treatment of newly diagnosed rectal cancer and is likely redundant.Figure 1

Esophageal Cancer: Role of Imaging in Primary Staging and Response Assessment Post Neoadjuvant Therapy

Advances in the early detection and treatment of esophageal cancer have meant improved survival rates for patients with esophageal cancer. Accurate pretreatment and post-neoadjuvant treatment staging of esophageal cancer is essential for assessing operability and determining the optimum treatment plan. This article reviews the multimodality imaging approach in the diagnosis, staging, and assessment of treatment response in esophageal cancer.

Circulating Tumor Cells as a Biomarker for Preoperative Prognostic Staging in Patients With Esophageal Cancer

We evaluated the prognostic significance of circulating tumor cells (CTCs) in patients with esophageal cancer (EC). Despite the availability of several preoperative diagnostic techniques, accurate pretreatment staging of EC remains challenging. In this single-center, prospective study, peripheral blood samples for CTC analyses were obtained preoperatively from 100 patients who were judged to have resectable EC. CTC detection was performed using the CellSearch System. Data were correlated with clinicopathological parameters and patient outcomes. CTCs were detected in 18% (18/100) of all eligible patients. Patients with CTCs showed significantly shorter relapse-free (P < 0.001) and overall survival (P < 0.001) than CTC-negative patients. Even in patients with lymph node invasion and without distant metastases (pN+, M0, N = 45), CTC detection indicated significantly worse relapse-free (P < 0.001) and overall survival (P = 0.007). Multivariate analyses of eligible patients identified CTCs as a strong, independent, prognostic indicator of tumor recurrence (hazard ratio, 5.063; 95% confidence interval, 2.233-11.480; P < 0.001) and overall survival (hazard ratio, 3.128; 95% confidence interval, 1.492-6.559; P = 0.003). This is the first study to report that CTCs detected by an automated immunomagnetic detection system are independent, prognostic indicators of patients' outcome in EC. Thus, implementation of CTCs may improve accuracy of preoperative staging in EC.

Role of Radiotherapy and Newer Techniques in the Treatment of GI Cancers.

The role of radiotherapy in multidisciplinary treatment of GI malignancies is well established. Recent advances in imaging as well as radiotherapy planning and delivery techniques have made it possible to target tumors more accurately while sparing normal tissues. Intensity-modulated radiotherapy is an advanced method of delivering radiation using cutting-edge technology to manipulate beams of radiation. The role of intensity-modulated radiotherapy is growing for many GI malignancies, such as cancers of the stomach, pancreas, esophagus, liver, and anus. Stereotactic body radiotherapy is an emerging treatment option for some GI tumors such as locally advanced pancreatic cancer and primary or metastatic tumors of the liver. Stereotactic body radiotherapy requires a high degree of confidence in tumor location and subcentimeter accuracy of the delivered dose. New image-guided techniques have been developed to overcome setup uncertainties at the time of treatment, including real-time imaging on the linear accelerator. Modern imaging techniques have also allowed for more accurate pretreatment staging and delineation of the primary tumor and involved sites. In particular, magnetic resonance imaging and positron emission tomography scans can be particularly useful in radiotherapy planning and assessing treatment response. Molecular biomarkers are being investigated as predictors of response to radiotherapy with the intent of ultimately moving toward using genomic and proteomic determinants of therapeutic strategies. The role of all of these new approaches in the radiotherapeutic management of GI cancers and the evolving role of radiotherapy in these tumor sites will be highlighted in this review.

The Accuracy of Computed Tomography in the Pretreatment T and N Staging of Colorectal Cancer

Colorectal cancer is one of the most frequent cancers around the world. Multimodality therapies are used for colorectal cancer including surgery, chemotherapy, radiotherapy and targeted therapy. Correct treatment plan depends greatly on the accurate pretreatment staging. Computed tomography (CT) is a widely used detection and staging modality for colorectal cancer patients in clinical practice. The role of CT in assessing the patients with colorectal cancer has been well established, but the accuracy of evaluating and staging colorectal cancer by CT varies in different reports. With the development of CT techniques, some reformations such as multi-detector CT, CT with water enema or air insufflations, multiple planner reconstruction help to give us higher resolution images in shorter time. CT is playing an increasingly important role in pretreatment staging of colorectal cancer, though magnetic resonance imaging and endorectal ultrasound may provide more precise images and evaluation of local T and N staging of rectal cancer. Finally, positron emission tomography (PET) or PET/CT have not shown significant improvement over CT after completion of standard pretreatment evaluation.

Imaging of non-Hodgkin lymphomas: diagnosis and response-adapted strategies.

Optimal lymphoma management requires accurate pretreatment staging and reliable assessment of response, both during and after therapy. Positron emission tomography with computerized tomography (PET/CT) combines functional and anatomical imaging and provides the most sensitive and accurate methods for lymphoma imaging. New guidelines for lymphoma imaging and recently revised criteria for lymphoma staging and response assessment recommend PET/CT staging, treatment monitoring, and response evaluation in all FDG-avid lymphomas, while CT remains the method of choice for non-FDG-avid histologies. Since interim PET imaging has high prognostic value in lymphoma, a number of trials investigate PET-based, response-adapted therapy for non-Hodgkin lymphomas (NHL). PET response is the main determinant of response according to the new response criteria, but PET/CT has little or no role in routine surveillance imaging, the value which is itself questionable. This review presents from a clinical point of view the evidence for the use of imaging and primarily PET/CT in NHL before, during, and after therapy. The reader is given an overview of the current PET-based interventional NHL trials and an insight into possible future developments in the field, including new PET tracers.

Role of magnetic resonance imaging in the diagnosis of cervical lymph node metastasis with unknown primary

Visual inspection and bimanual palpation are the cornerstones of diagnosis of diseases of the oral cavity. Clinical examination, however, could underestimate the deep spread of tumors and thereby the submucosal extent and limiting accurate pretreatment staging of disease. Imaging provides additional staging information such as precise location and local extent of the tumor which help in the selection of most effective treatment option and extent of surgical excision. Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) offers an excellent aid for the evaluation of tumors of the oral cavity due to direct visualization of soft tissue in multiple planes. An interesting case of a 35-year-old male patient with extensive lymph nodal mass involving left side of the neck with limited mouth opening is reported. MRI was very helpful in locating the site of primary neoplastic mass along with providing the exact extent of the tumor and its effect on adjacent vital structures.

New TNM staging system for esophageal cancer: what chest radiologists need to know.

Esophageal cancer is a leading cause of cancer-related deaths worldwide, and the 5-year relative survival rate remains less than 20% in the United States. The treatment of esophageal cancer should be stage specific for better clinical outcomes. Recent treatment paradigms tend to involve a multimodality approach to management, which includes surgical resection and preoperative or definitive chemoradiation therapy. Accurate pretreatment staging of esophageal cancer is integral for assessing operability and determining a suitable treatment plan. The American Joint Committee on Cancer (AJCC) and the Union for International Cancer Control (UICC) have published the seventh edition of the staging manual for cancer in the esophagus and esophagogastric junction. Unlike the sixth edition, the revised staging manual is data driven and harmonized with the staging of stomach cancer. Improvements include new definitions for the anatomic classifications Tis, T4, regional lymph node, N, and M and the addition of nonanatomic cancer characteristics (histopathologic cell type, histologic grade, and cancer location). Given the recent increase in the incidence of adenocarcinoma of the distal esophagus, esophagogastric junction, and gastric cardia, the staging of tumors in the esophagogastric junction has been addressed. Radiologists must understand the details of the seventh edition of the AJCC-UICC staging system for esophageal cancer and use appropriate imaging modalities, such as computed tomography (CT), endoscopic ultrasonography, and positron emission tomography/CT, for initial staging.

Induction Therapy Does Not Improve Survival for Clinical Stage T2N0 Esophageal Cancer

This study compared survival after initial treatment with esophagectomy as primary therapy to induction therapy followed by esophagectomy for patients with clinical T2N0 (cT2N0) esophageal cancer in the National Cancer Database (NCDB). Predictors of therapy selection for patients with cT2N0 esophageal cancer in the NCDB from 1998 to 2011 were identified with multivariable logistic regression. Survival was evaluated using Kaplan-Meier and Cox proportional hazards methods. Surgery was used in 42.9% (2057 of 4799) of cT2N0 patients. Of 1599 esophagectomy patients for whom treatment timing was recorded, induction therapy was used in 44.1% (688). Pretreatment staging was proven accurate in only 26.7% of patients (210 of 786) who underwent initial surgery without induction treatment and had complete pathologic data available: 41.6% (n = 327) were upstaged and 31.7% (n = 249) were downstaged. Adjuvant therapy (chemotherapy or radiation therapy) was given to 50.2% of patients treated initially with surgery who were found after resection to have nodal disease. There was no significant difference in long-term survival between strategies of primary surgery and induction therapy followed by surgery (median 41.1 versus 41.9 months, p = 0.51). In multivariable analysis, induction therapy was not independently associated with risk of death (hazard ratio [HR], 1.16, p = 0.32). Current clinical staging for early-stage esophageal cancer is highly inaccurate, with only a quarter of surgically resected cT2N0 patients found to have had accurate pretreatment staging. Induction therapy for patients with cT2N0 esophageal cancer in the NCDB is not associated with improved survival.

Esophageal cancer: staging system and guidelines for staging and treatment.

Survival of esophageal cancer is improving but remains poor. Esophageal cancer stage is based on depth of tumor invasion, involvement of regional lymph nodes, and the presence or absence of metastatic disease. Appropriate work-up is critical to identify accurate pre-treatment staging so that both under-treatment and unnecessary treatment is avoided. Treatment strategy should follow guideline recommendations, and generally should be developed after multidisciplinary evaluation.

Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy for Localized Pancreatic Cancer: Too Little or Too Long?

For a ‘‘systemic’’ disease such as pancreatic cancer, neoadjuvant chemotherapy is a logical approach that thus far has been limited largely by a lack of effective systemic agents. For example, when considering treatment sequencing for patients with resectable disease, the concept of offering a treatment with an objective response rate of less than 10 % (as for gemcitabine alone) has been unacceptable to most clinicians. (Chemo)radiation has therefore been the backbone of most neoadjuvant approaches, with the goal of improving local/regional disease control (preventing local recurrence) and avoiding operation in those with progressive disease found on post-treatment, preoperative restaging. A few neoadjuvant studies to date have included relatively short courses of chemotherapy—without any obvious improvement in outcomes compared with chemoradiation alone. To further complicate treatment sequencing controversy, surgeons have cautioned that many patients (and referring physicians) want their tumors resected tomorrow and can find a surgeon who will accommodate them. Concerns about increased perioperative morbidity (following neoadjuvant therapy) still exist but have been allayed by several studies, including a recent NSQIP analysis. Importantly, an ‘‘effective’’ neoadjuvant chemotherapy regimen could theoretically improve longterm outcomes by successfully treating (possibly even eradicating) micrometastatic disease in the setting of an immune-competent host who is not attempting to recover from a large operation. The duration of neoadjuvant chemotherapy is a critical variable. If the right drug is selected for the right patient, treatment will need to be long enough to effectively treat micrometastatic disease. If the wrong drug(s) is selected (we only learn this in retrospect when restaging is performed), treatment should be short enough to avoid losing a window of resectability due to local disease progression. This is an important consideration in patients with resectable and borderline resectable disease (in contrast to those patients with locally advanced pancreatic cancer—thus the importance of accurate pretreatment staging). At present, there is little evidence to support any specific neoadjuvant treatment duration, although opinions exist that are based largely on personal experience, extrapolation from other solid tumor sites, and translational laboratory science. Rose and coauthors from Virginia Mason Medical Center are to be commended for demonstrating that patients are willing and able to undergo almost 6 months (on average) of neoadjuvant chemotherapy with good results, both shortterm and long-term . To what degree this was the result of the well-known experience and talent of this multidisciplinary group will be reflected in the ability of others to duplicate these results. Although patients were not treated on a clinical trial, they were maintained in a prospective registry, which is a practice that should be encouraged. The major strength of the study was the relatively large (n = 64) and homogeneously staged patient population, all radiographically ‘‘borderline resectable’’ by the SSO/AHPBA consensus criteria and with no evidence of metastatic disease by pretreatment staging that included laparoscopy with peritoneal washings—which did introduce an added selection bias as most such reports have not included laparoscopic staging. The outcomes in this study are not entirely due to increased ‘‘selection’’ provided by the extended duration of therapy. There clearly was a treatment effect demonstrated at the site of the primary tumor. Almost half of patients underwent resection of the primary, with R0 Society of Surgical Oncology 2014

Appraisal of Staging Endoscopic Ultrasonography in a Modern High‐Volume Esophageal Program

Accurate pretreatment staging is essential to decision making for patients with esophageal and junctional cancers, particularly when choosing endoscopic therapy or a multimodal approach. As the efficacy of endoscopic ultrasonography (EUS) has been reported as variable, we assessed it prospectively in a large cohort from a high-volume center. The EUS data from 2007 to 2011 were reviewed and analyzed. We conducted a comparative analysis with computed tomography-positron emission tomography (CT-PET) staging and pathology. Survival was analyzed by Kaplan-Meier testing on EUS-predicted T- and N-stage cohorts. Altogether, 222 patients underwent EUS. Among patients undergoing primary surgical resection, preoperative EUS diagnosed the T stage correctly in 71 % (55/77) of cases. Sensitivity and specificity for T1, T2, and T3 tumors were 94 and 89 %, 55 and 80 %, and 66 and 93 %, respectively. Mean maximum standard uptake volume on CT-PET correlated moderately with the EUS T stage (r = 0.42, p < 0.0001). EUS accuracy for nodal disease was 65 %. Survival was statistically better for the EUS T1 group than for those with T3 tumors (p = 0.01). Nodal metastases diagnosed on EUS predicted a significantly worse prognosis than EUS-negative nodes on both univariate and multivariate analyses (p < 0.0001 and p = 0.005 respectively). There was a significant relation between EUS T and N stages and overall survival. EUS demonstrated 71 % accuracy for the overall T stage. Staging accuracy of EUS for large lesions was less effective than for T1 tumors, underlining the need for a multimodal investigative approach to stage esophageal tumors accurately.

Expert pathology review and endoscopic mucosal resection alters the diagnosis of patients referred to undergo therapy for Barrett’s esophagus

Endoscopic therapy has emerged as an alternative to surgical esophagectomy for the management of Barrett's esophagus (BE)-associated neoplasia. Accurate pretreatment staging is essential to ensure an appropriate choice of therapy and optimal long-term outcomes. This study aimed to assess the frequency with which expert histopathologic review of biopsies combined with endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR) would alter the pretreatment diagnosis of BE-associated neoplasia. Patients referred to the Vanderbilt Barrett's Esophagus Endoscopic Treatment Program (V-BEET) were retrospectively identified. Demographic, histopathologic, and endoscopic data were extracted from the medical record. For this study, 29 subjects referred for endoscopic staging of BE fulfilled the entry criteria. The referral diagnosis was low-grade dysplasia (LGD) in 3 % (1/29), high-grade dysplasia (HGD) in 62 % (18/29), intramucosal adenocarcinoma (T1a) adenocarcinoma in 17 % (5/29), and invasive adenocarcinoma in 17 % (5/29) of the subjects. Expert histopathologic review of available referral biopsy specimens altered the diagnosis in 33 % (5/15) of the cases. Further diagnostic staging with EMR showed BE without dysplasia in 10 % (3/29), LGD in 14 % (4/29), HGD in 34 % (10/29), T1a adenocarcinoma in 28 % (8/29), and invasive adenocarcinoma in 14 % (4/29) of the patients. The combination of expert histopathologic review and EMR altered the initial diagnosis for 55 % (16/29) of the subjects, with 56 % (9/16) upstaged to more advanced disease and 44 % (7/16) downstaged to less advanced disease. The practice of combined expert histopathologic review and EMR alters the pretreatment diagnosis for the majority of patients with BE-associated neoplasia. Caution is advised for those embarking on endoscopic or surgical treatment for BE-associated neoplasia in the absence of these staging methods.

Current Staging Systems for Pancreatic Cancer

Accurate pretreatment staging of pancreatic cancer is a crucial initial step in the development of a stage-specific treatment plan, either on- or off-protocol for any patient with pancreatic cancer. Importantly, current American Joint Committee on Cancer staging utilizes the maximal information available; if surgery has been performed, then pathological information from the resected specimen will provide additional information for both T and N staging. If surgery has not been performed, then staging is based on information from available cross-sectional imaging studies. Although American Joint Committee on Cancer staging was modified in the sixth edition to reflect the survival difference between patients with operable/resectable versus nonoperable/unresectable disease, the precise definitions of resectability continue to evolve. It is essential for clinicians of different specialties to understand the definitions of resectability to facilitate optimal patient care and to allow for accurate interpretation of the literature. This review focuses on important aspects of the pretreatment assessment of patients with particular attention to definitions of resectability. Computed tomography has become the optimal imaging modality for pancreatic cancer staging, but other adjunct studies, including endoscopic ultrasound and laparoscopy, may provide additional staging information especially in circumstances where computed tomography technology is limited. In addition, the process of a standardized pathological review is summarized, with emphasis on assessment of the superior mesenteric artery margin and the definitions of R0, R1, and R2. Finally, the prognostic importance of key components of the pathological report such as lymph node status, lymph node ratio, and treatment effect is reviewed.

Optimizing the role of FDG PET–CT for potentially operable metastatic colorectal cancer

Recent treatment advances now allow a realistic chance of cure in selected patients with metastatic colorectal carcinoma (CRC). Accurate pre-treatment staging is crucial to ensure appropriate management by identification of patients with more advanced disease who will not benefit from surgery. (18)Fluorine 2-fluoro-2-deoxy-D-glucose positron emission tomography-computed tomography (PET-CT) has a firmly established role in staging, restaging, and recurrence detection of a range of tumors. This article will review the role of PET-CT in patients with CRC with a particular emphasis on optimizing the technique in patients with potentially operable metastatic disease.