Occult tumor metastasis and the prognostic value of sentinel lymph nodes in rectal cancer

Guo,Xiutian; Wang,Cun; Shen,Xiao-Gang; Ding,Si-Qin; Yu,Yong-Yang; Zhou,Zong-Guang

doi:10.3892/ol.2011.490

Occult tumor metastasis and the prognostic value of sentinel lymph nodes in rectal cancer

Authors:
- Xiutian Guo
- Cun Wang
- Xiao-Gang Shen
- Si-Qin Ding
- Yong-Yang Yu
- Zong-Guang Zhou
View Affiliations

Affiliations: Department of Anal and Rectal Surgery, Longhua Hospital, Shanghai University of TCM, Shanghai 200032, P.R. China, Department of Gastrointestinal Surgery, West China Hospital, Sichuan University, Chengdu 610041, P.R. China
Published online on: November 17, 2011 https://doi.org/10.3892/ol.2011.490
Pages: 411-414

Metrics: Total Views: 0 (Spandidos Publications: | PMC Statistics: )

Metrics: Total PDF Downloads: 0 (Spandidos Publications: | PMC Statistics: )

Cited By (CrossRef): 0 citations Loading Articles...

Abstract

The aim of the present study to evaluate the application of sentinel lymph node (SLN) pathology in rectal cancer using ex vivo mapping and to investigate the incidence and prognostic value of occult SLN metastasis in routine node-negative specimens. Specimens (n=117) of rectal cancer were examined using a combination of routine pathology and ex vivo SLN mapping. The inspected SLNs were further treated with immunohistochemical staining for occult cancer foci. The log-rank test was used to assess survival. SLNs were examined in 112 of the included specimens with a total number of 212, resulting in an identification rate of 95.7% (112/117). The status of SLNs accurately reflected N stage in 93.8% (105/112) of cases and the sensitivity was 75.6% (31/41) in detecting nodal metastasis. The accuracy of SLN pathology decreased in cancers of more advanced TNM stages (P=0.001). In 74 cases with routine node-negative (N0) disease, SLN micrometastasis (MIC) and isolated tumor cells (ITC) were examined in 9 and 4 cases, while the remaining 61 were regarded as negative (NEG). The log-rank test revealed poorer disease-free and overall survival of the MIC group compared with the NEG group. However, the findings from the ITC group were not significant compared with those from the MIC and NEG groups. In conclusion, ex vivo SLN pathology is practical and accurate in rectal cancer; however, its utility is limited in cases of advanced disease. Immunohistochemically detected SLN micrometastasis in node-negative cases is therefore a predictor of poorer outcome, and may therefore be listed as a marker for adjuvant therapy.

View Figures

View References

1	Nelson H, Petrelli N, Carlin A, Couture J, Fleshman J, Guillem J, Miedema B, Ota D and Sargent D: Guidelines 2000 for colon and rectal cancer surgery. J Natl Cancer. 93:583–596. 2001. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
2	Jemal A, Siegel R, Ward E, Murray T, Xu J and Thun MJ: Cancer statistics. CA Cancer J Clin. 57:43–66. 2007.
3	Bruch HP, Schwandner O, Schiedeck TH and Roblick UJ: Actual standards and controversies on operative technique and lymph-node dissection in colorectal cancer. Langenbecks Arch Surg. 384:167–175. 1999. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
4	Joseph NE, Sigurdson ER, Hanlon AL, Wang H, Mayer RJ, MacDonald JS, Catalano PJ and Haller DG: Accuracy of determining nodal negativity in colorectal cancer on the basis of the number of nodes retrieved on resection. Ann Surg Oncol. 10:213–218. 2003. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
5	Gill S, Loprinzi CL, Sargent DJ, Alberts SR, Haller DG, Benedetti J, Francini G, Shepherd LE, Francois Seitz J, Labianca R, et al: Pooled analysis of fluorouracil-based adjuvant therapy for stage II and III colon cancer: who benefits and by how much? J Clin Oncol. 22:1797–1806. 2004. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
6	Morton DL, Duan-Ren W, Wong JH, Economou JS, Cagle LA, Storm FK, Foshag LJ and Cochran AJ: Technical details of intraoperative lymphatic mapping for early stage melanoma. Arch Surg. 127:392–399. 1992. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
7	Hill AD, Mann GB, Borgen PI and Cody HS III: Sentinel lymphatic mapping in breast cancer. J Am Coll Surg. 188:545–549. 1999. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
8	Faerden AE, Sjo OH, Bukholm IR, Andersen SN, Svindland A, Nesbakken A and Bakka A: Lymph node micrometastases and isolated tumor cells influence survival in stage I and II colon cancer. Dis Colon Rectum. 54:200–206. 2011. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
9	Bilchik AJ, Hoon DS, Saha S, Turner RR, Wiese D, DiNome M, Koyanagi K, McCarter M, Shen P, Iddings D, et al: Prognostic impact of micrometastases in colon cancer: interim results of a prospective multicenter trial. Ann Surg. 246:568–575. 2007. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
10	Belt EJ, van Stijn MF, Bril H, De Lange-De Klerk ES, Meijer GA, Meijer S and Stockmann HB: Lymph node negative colorectal cancers with isolated tumor deposits should be classified and treated as stage III. Ann Surg Oncol. 17:3203–3211. 2010. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
11	Saha S, Wiese D, Badin J, Beutler T, Nora D, Ganatra BK, Desai D, Kaushal S, Nagaraju M, Arora M and Singh T: Technical details of sentinel lymph node mapping in colorectal cancer and its impact on staging. Ann Surg Oncol. 7:120–124. 2000. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
12	Wong JH, Steinemann S, Calderia C, Bowles J and Namiki T: Ex vivo sentinel node mapping in carcinoma of the colon and rectum. Ann Surg. 233:515–521. 2001. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
13	Colon and rectum. AJCC Cancer Staging Manual. 6th ed. Greene FL, Page DL and Fleming ID: Springer; New York: pp. 143–164. 2002
14	Bilimoria KY, Bentrem DJ, Stewart AK, Talamonti MS, Winchester DP, Russell TR and Ko CY: Lymph node evaluation as a colon cancer quality measure: a national hospital report card. J Natl Cancer Inst. 100:1310–1317. 2008. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
15	Wang C, Zhou ZG, Wang Z, Li L, Zheng YC, Zhao GP, Chen DY and Liu WP: Mesorectal spread and micrometastasis of rectal cancer studied with large slice technique and tissue microarray. J Surg Oncol. 91:167–172. 2005. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
16	Mekenkamp LJ, van Krieken JH, Marijnen CA, van de Velde CJ and Nagtegaal ID: 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. 33:1547–1553. 2009.PubMed/NCBI
17	Baxter NN, Virnig DJ, Rothenberger DA, Morris AM, Jessurun J and Virnig BA: Lymph node evaluation in colorectal cancer patients: a population-based study. J Natl Cancer Inst. 97:219–225. 2005. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
18	Mulsow J, Winter DC, O’Keane JC and O’Connell PR: Sentinel lymph node mapping in colorectal cancer. Br J Surg. 90:659–567. 2003. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
19	Smith FM, Coffey JC, Khasri NM, Walsh MF, Parfrey N, Gaffney E, Stephens R, Kennedy MJ, Kirwan W and Redmond HP: Sentinel nodes are identifiable in formalin-fixed specimens after surgeon-performed ex vivo sentinel lymph node mapping in colorectal cancer. Ann Surg Oncol. 12:504–509. 2005. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
20	De Haas RJ, Wicherts DA, Hobbelink MG, Borel Rinkes IH, Schipper ME, van der Zee JA and van Hillegersberg R: Sentinel lymph node mapping in colon cancer: current status. Ann Surg Oncol. 14:1070–1080. 2007.
21	Bilchik AJ, Saha S, Wiese D, Stonecypher JA, Wood TF, Sostrin S, Turner RR, Wang HJ, Morton DL and Hoon DS: Molecular staging of early colon cancer on the basis of sentinel node analysis: a multicenter phase II trial. J Clin Oncol. 19:1128–1136. 2001.PubMed/NCBI
22	Kelder W, Braat A, van den Berg A, Platteel I, Hollema H, Groen H and Plukker J: Value of RT-PCR analysis of sentinel nodes in determining the pathological nodal status in colon cancer. Anticancer Res. 27:2855–2859. 2007.PubMed/NCBI
23	Doekhie FS, Kuppen PJ, Peeters KC, Mesker WE, van Soest RA, Morreau H, van de Velde CJ, Tanke HJ and Tollenaar RA: Prognostic relevance of occult tumour cells in lymph nodes in colorectal cancer. Eur J Surg Oncol. 32:253–258. 2006. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI