Top

Published in:

01-02-2014 | Review and Perspectives

EURECCA consensus conference highlights about colorectal cancer clinical management: the pathologists expert review

Authors: P. Quirke, N. P. West, I. D. Nagtegaal

Published in: Virchows Archiv | Issue 2/2014

Abstract

Care for patients with colon and rectal cancer has improved in the last 20 years; however, a considerable variation still exists in cancer management and outcome between European countries. Large variation is also apparent between national guidelines and patterns of cancer care in Europe. Therefore, EURECCA, which is the acronym of European Registration of Cancer Care, is aiming at defining core treatment strategies and developing a European audit structure in order to improve the quality of care for all patients with colon and rectal cancer. In December 2012, the first multidisciplinary consensus conference about cancer of the colon and rectum was held. The expert panel consisted of representatives of European scientific organizations involved in cancer care of patients with colon and rectal cancer and representatives of national colorectal registries.

van de Velde CJ, Aristei C, Boelens PG et al (2013) EURECCA colorectal: multidisciplinary mission statement on better care for patients with colon and rectal cancer in Europe. Eur J Cancer 49:2784–2790PubMedCrossRef

American Joint Committee for Cancer Staging and End-Results Reporting (1977) Manual for staging of cancer 1977. American Joint Committee, Chicago

UICC (Hermanek P, Sobin LH, eds.) TNM classification of malignant tumors. 4th edn. Berlin: Springer; 1987.

American Joint Committee on Cancer (AJCC) (Beahrs OH, Henson DE, Hutter RVP, Myers MH, eds.) Manual of staging of cancer. 3rd edn. Philadelphia: Lippincott; 1988.

ICC (Sobin LH, Wittekind Ch, eds) TNM classification of malignant tumours. 6th edn. 2002. New York: Wiley; 2002.

American Joint Committee on Cancer (AJCC) (Greene FL, Page DL, Fleming ID et al., eds) Cancer Staging Manual, 6th edn. New York: Springer; 2002.

Hermanek P, Gall FP, Altendorf A (1980) Prognostic grouping in colorectal carcinoma. J Cancer Res Clin Oncol 98:185–193PubMedCrossRef

Newland RC, Chapuis PH, Pheils MT, MacPherson JG (1981) The relationship of survival in staging and grading of colorectal carcinoma. Cancer 47:350–357CrossRef

Wittekind C, Compton C, Quirke P et al (2009) A uniform residual tumor (R) classification: integration of the R classification and the circumferential margin status. Cancer 115:3483–3488PubMedCrossRef

10.

Quirke P, Dudley P, Dixon MF, Williams NS (1986) Local recurrence of rectal adenocarcinoma due to inadequate surgical resection. Histopathologic study of lateral tumor spread and surgical excision. Lancet 328:996–999CrossRef

11.

Adam IJ, Mohamdee MO, Margin IG et al (1994) Role of circumferential margin involvement in the local recurrence of rectal cancer. Lancet 344:707–711PubMedCrossRef

12.

Nagtegaal ID, Quirke P (2008) What is the role for the circumferential margin in the modern treatment of rectal cancer? J Clin Oncol 26:303–312PubMedCrossRef

13.

Nagtegaal ID, Marijnen CA, Kranenbarg EK, van de Velde CJ, van Krieken JH (2002) Circumferential margin involvement is still an important predictor of local recurrence in rectal carcinoma: not one millimeter but two millimeters is the limit. Am J Surg Pathol 26:350–357PubMedCrossRef

14.

Wibe A, Rendedal PR, Svensson E et al (2002) Prognostic significance of the circumferential resection margin following total mesorectal excision for rectal cancer. Br J Surg 89:327–334PubMedCrossRef

15.

Birbeck KF, Macklin CP, Tiffin NJ et al (2002) Rates of circumferential resection margin involvement vary between surgeons and predict outcomes in rectal cancer surgery. Ann Surg 235:449–457PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRef

16.

Nagtegaal ID, van de Velde CJ, van der Worp E, Kapiteijn E, Quirke P, van Krieken JH (2002) Macroscopic evaluation of rectal cancer resection specimen: clinical significance of the pathologist in quality control. J Clin Oncol 20:1729–1734PubMedCrossRef

17.

Quirke P, Steele R, Monson J et al (2009) Effect of the plane of surgery achieved on local recurrence in patients with operable rectal cancer: a prospective study using data from the MRC CR07 and NCIC-CTG CO16 randomised clinical trial. Lance 373:821–828CrossRef

18.

Leite JS, Martins SC, Oliveira J, Cunha MF, Castro-Sousa F (2011) Clinical significance of macroscopic completeness of mesorectal resection in rectal cancer. Color Dis 13:381–386CrossRef

19.

García-Granero E, Faiz O, Muñoz E (2009) Macroscopic assessment of mesorectal excision in rectal cancer: a useful tool for improving quality control in a multidisciplinary team. Cancer 115:3400–3411PubMedCrossRef

20.

West NP, Finan PJ, Anderin C, Lindholm J, Holm T, Quirke P (2008) Evidence of the oncologic superiority of cylindrical abdominoperineal excision for low rectal cancer. J Clin Oncol 26:3517–3522PubMedCrossRef

21.

West NP, Anderin C, Smith KJ, Holm T, Quirke P (2010) Multicentre experience with extralevator abdominoperineal excision for low rectal cancer. Br J Surg 97:588–599PubMedCrossRef

22.

Bosch SL, Nagtegaal ID (2012) The importance of the pathologist’s role in assessment of the quality of the mesorectum. Curr Colorectal Cancer Rep 8:90–98PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRef

23.

Stelzner S, Koehler C, Stelzer J, Sims A, Witzigmann H (2011) Extended abdominoperineal excision vs. standard abdominoperineal excision in rectal cancer—a systematic overview. Int J Color Dis 26:1227–1240CrossRef

24.

Morris EJ, Maughan NJ, Forman D, Quirke P (2007) Identifying stage III colorectal cancer patients: the influence of the patient, surgeon, and pathologist. J Clin Oncol 25:2573–2579PubMedCrossRef

25.

Mekenkamp LJ, van Krieken JH, Marijnen CA, van de Velde CJ, Nagtegaal ID (2009) Lymph node retrieval in rectal cancer is dependent on many factors—the role of the tumor, the patient, the surgeon, the radiotherapist, and the pathologist. Am J Surg Pathol 33:1547–1553PubMedCrossRef

26.

Baxandall M, Lewis F, Casali G et al (2006) Disappearing lymph nodes, one explanation for the fall in number with increasing age. J Path 208(S1):29A

27.

Berg M, Guriby M, Nordgård O, et al. Influence of microsatellite instability, KRAS and BRAF mutations on lymph node harvest in stage I–III colon cancers. Mol Med 2013; published online 21st August.

28.

Rullier A, Laurent C, Capdepont M et al (2008) Lymph nodes after preoperative chemoradiotherapy for rectal carcinoma: number, status, and impact on survival. Am J Surg Pathol 32:45–50PubMedCrossRef

29.

Baxter NN, Morris AM, Rothenberger DA, Tepper JE (2005) Impact of preoperative radiation for rectal cancer on subsequent lymph node evaluation: a population-based analysis. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 61:426–431PubMedCrossRef

30.

Jepsen RK, Ingeholm P, Lund EL (2012) Upstaging of early colorectal cancers following improved lymph node yield after methylene blue injection. Histopathology 61:788–794PubMedCrossRef

31.

Iversen LH, Laurberg S, Hagemann-Madsen R, Dybdahl H (2008) Increased lymph node harvest from colorectal cancer resections using GEWF solution: a randomised study. J Clin Pathol 61:1203–1208PubMedCrossRef

32.

Rödel C, Martus P, Papadoupolos T et al (2005) Prognostic significance of tumor regression after preoperative chemoradiotherapy for rectal cancer. J Clin Oncol 23:8688–8696PubMedCrossRef

33.

Dworak O, Keilholz L, Hoffmann A (1997) Pathological features of rectal cancer after preoperative radiochemotherapy. Int J Colorectal Dis 12:19–23PubMedCrossRef

34.

Ryan R, Gibbons D, Hyland JM et al (2005) Pathological response following long-course neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy for locally advanced rectal cancer. Histopathology 47:141–146PubMedCrossRef

35.

Maas M, Nelemans PJ, Valentini V et al (2010) Long-term outcome in patients with a pathological complete response after chemoradiation for rectal cancer: a pooled analysis of individual patient data. Lancet Oncol 11:835–844PubMedCrossRef

36.

Capirci C, Valentini V, Cionini L et al (2008) Prognostic value of pathologic complete response after neoadjuvant therapy in locally advanced rectal cancer: long-term analysis of 566 ypCR patients. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 72:99–107PubMedCrossRef

37.

Quirke P, Cuvelier C, Ensari A et al (2010) Evidence-based medicine: the time has come to set standards for staging. J Pathol 221:357–360PubMed

38.

Quirke P, Williams GT, Ectors N, Ensari A, Piard F, Nagtegaal I (2007) The future of the TNM staging system in colorectal cancer: time for a debate? Lancet Oncol 8:651–657PubMedCrossRef

39.

Nagtegaal ID, Quirke P (2010) Revised staging: is it really better, or do we not know? J Clin Oncol 28:e397–e398PubMedCrossRef

40.

Nagtegaal ID, Tot T, Jayne DG et al (2011) Lymph nodes, tumor deposits, and TNM: are we getting better? J Clin Oncol 29:2487–2492PubMedCrossRef

41.

Nagtegaal ID, Quirke P, Schmoll HJ (2011) Has the new TNM classification for colorectal cancer improved care? Nat Rev Clin Oncol 9:119–123PubMedCrossRef

Title: EURECCA consensus conference highlights about colorectal cancer clinical management: the pathologists expert review
Authors: P. Quirke
N. P. West
I. D. Nagtegaal
Publication date: 01-02-2014
Publisher: Springer Berlin Heidelberg
Published in: Virchows Archiv / Issue 2/2014
Print ISSN: 0945-6317
Electronic ISSN: 1432-2307
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00428-013-1534-x

Keynote webinar | Spotlight on medication adherence

Springer Medicine

EURECCA consensus conference highlights about colorectal cancer clinical management: the pathologists expert review

Abstract

Keynote webinar | Spotlight on medication adherence

Springer Medicine

Abstract

Please log in to get access to this content

Other articles of this Issue 2/2014

FGFR2, HER2 and cMet in gastric adenocarcinoma: detection, prognostic significance and assessment of downstream pathway activation

Consensus on the histopathological evaluation of liver biopsies from patients following allogeneic hematopoietic cell transplantation

Expression of angiogenic factors is increased in metastasised renal cell carcinomas

Histopathological and clinical findings in renal transplants with Banff type II and III acute cellular rejection without tubulointerstitial infiltrates

The density of CD8+ T-cell infiltration and expression of BCL2 predicts outcome of primary diffuse large B-cell lymphoma of bone

Increased ALK1 copy number and renal cell carcinoma—a case report