Skip to main content

Main menu

  • Home
  • Current Issue
  • Archive
  • Info for
    • Authors
    • Editorial Policies
    • Subscribers
    • Advertisers
    • Editorial Board
  • Other Publications
    • In Vivo
    • Cancer Genomics & Proteomics
    • Cancer Diagnosis & Prognosis
  • More
    • IIAR
    • Conferences
    • 2008 Nobel Laureates
  • About Us
    • General Policy
    • Contact
  • Other Publications
    • Anticancer Research
    • In Vivo
    • Cancer Genomics & Proteomics

User menu

  • Register
  • Subscribe
  • My alerts
  • Log in
  • My Cart

Search

  • Advanced search
Anticancer Research
  • Other Publications
    • Anticancer Research
    • In Vivo
    • Cancer Genomics & Proteomics
  • Register
  • Subscribe
  • My alerts
  • Log in
  • My Cart
Anticancer Research

Advanced Search

  • Home
  • Current Issue
  • Archive
  • Info for
    • Authors
    • Editorial Policies
    • Subscribers
    • Advertisers
    • Editorial Board
  • Other Publications
    • In Vivo
    • Cancer Genomics & Proteomics
    • Cancer Diagnosis & Prognosis
  • More
    • IIAR
    • Conferences
    • 2008 Nobel Laureates
  • About Us
    • General Policy
    • Contact
  • Visit us on Facebook
  • Follow us on Linkedin
Research ArticleClinical Studies

Essentiality of Imaging Diagnostic Criteria Specific to Rectal Neuroendocrine Tumors for Detecting Metastatic Lymph Nodes

MICHIHIRO KUDOU, TOMOHIRO ARITA, MASAYOSHI NAKANISHI, YOSHIAKI KURIU, YASUTOSHI MURAYAMA, KATSUTOSHI SHODA, TOSHIYUKI KOSUGA, HIROTAKA KONISHI, RYO MORIMURA, ATSUSHI SHIOZAKI, HISASHI IKOMA, TAKESHI KUBOTA, HITOSHI FUJIWARA, KAZUMA OKAMOTO and EIGO OTSUJI
Anticancer Research January 2019, 39 (1) 505-510; DOI: https://doi.org/10.21873/anticanres.13141
MICHIHIRO KUDOU
Division of Digestive Surgery, Department of Surgery, Kyoto Prefectural University of Medicine, Kyoto, Japan
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
TOMOHIRO ARITA
Division of Digestive Surgery, Department of Surgery, Kyoto Prefectural University of Medicine, Kyoto, Japan
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • For correspondence: t-art@koto.kpu-m.ac.jp
MASAYOSHI NAKANISHI
Division of Digestive Surgery, Department of Surgery, Kyoto Prefectural University of Medicine, Kyoto, Japan
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
YOSHIAKI KURIU
Division of Digestive Surgery, Department of Surgery, Kyoto Prefectural University of Medicine, Kyoto, Japan
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
YASUTOSHI MURAYAMA
Division of Digestive Surgery, Department of Surgery, Kyoto Prefectural University of Medicine, Kyoto, Japan
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
KATSUTOSHI SHODA
Division of Digestive Surgery, Department of Surgery, Kyoto Prefectural University of Medicine, Kyoto, Japan
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
TOSHIYUKI KOSUGA
Division of Digestive Surgery, Department of Surgery, Kyoto Prefectural University of Medicine, Kyoto, Japan
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
HIROTAKA KONISHI
Division of Digestive Surgery, Department of Surgery, Kyoto Prefectural University of Medicine, Kyoto, Japan
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
RYO MORIMURA
Division of Digestive Surgery, Department of Surgery, Kyoto Prefectural University of Medicine, Kyoto, Japan
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
ATSUSHI SHIOZAKI
Division of Digestive Surgery, Department of Surgery, Kyoto Prefectural University of Medicine, Kyoto, Japan
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
HISASHI IKOMA
Division of Digestive Surgery, Department of Surgery, Kyoto Prefectural University of Medicine, Kyoto, Japan
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
TAKESHI KUBOTA
Division of Digestive Surgery, Department of Surgery, Kyoto Prefectural University of Medicine, Kyoto, Japan
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
HITOSHI FUJIWARA
Division of Digestive Surgery, Department of Surgery, Kyoto Prefectural University of Medicine, Kyoto, Japan
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
KAZUMA OKAMOTO
Division of Digestive Surgery, Department of Surgery, Kyoto Prefectural University of Medicine, Kyoto, Japan
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
EIGO OTSUJI
Division of Digestive Surgery, Department of Surgery, Kyoto Prefectural University of Medicine, Kyoto, Japan
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • Article
  • Figures & Data
  • Info & Metrics
  • PDF
Loading

Abstract

Background/Aim: The present study aimed to clarify an accurate diagnostic method for lymph node metastasis (LN+) in rectal neuroendocrine tumors (rNETs). Patients and Methods: This was a retrospective study of 14 rNETs and 45 rectal adenocarcinoma patients undergoing rectal resection. The short axis of LNs was measured using CT and pathological findings (43 paraffin-fixed LNs in rNETs and 786 LNs in adenocarcinoma). Results: The size of LN+ in CT and pathological findings was smaller in rNETs than adenocarcinoma (p=0.082 and p<0.001, respectively). The AUC values of ROC curves for detecting LN+ using LN sizes on CT were 0.837 for rNETs and 0.885 for adenocarcinoma (Cut-off values: 5 mm for rNETs, 7 mm for adenocarcinoma). rNETs were diagnosed with high accuracy using the cut-off value of rNETs (5 mm) (sensitivity: 80.0%, and specificity: 87.5%). Conclusion: The size of LN+ was smaller in rNETs than in adenocarcinoma, suggesting the essentiality of diagnostic criteria specific for rNETs.

  • Rectal neuroendocrine tumor
  • pre-operative staging
  • lymph node metastasis

Rectal neuroendocrine tumors (rNETs) are epithelial tumors derived from endocrine cells with malignant potential, such as invasion to deep layers or metastasis, which develops in the deep portions of glands (1). In recent years, the number of patients with rNETs has markedly increased because of recent advances in preventive screening for colorectal disease, which has resulted in increasing attention to its pathophysiology by many clinicians and more focused research (2, 3). Based on this recent background, a new classification system has been established, in which rectal carcinoids are classified as rNETs, and are staged according to tumor size, lymph node metastasis (LN+), distant metastasis, the mitotic count, and Ki-67 labeling index (4). The clinical utility of this classification system has been already reported (5). Despite an increase in incidence, rNETs are still rare tumors; their incidence was previously reported to be only 1-2% of all rectal tumors (6). Their clinicopathological and biological characteristics have gradually been clarified; however, their rarity prevents the establishment of clinical guidelines with strong statistical power.

The behavior of LN+ in rNETs is specific, which complicates decision-making by clinicians. Previous studies reported that LN+ was sometimes detected in small rNETs, with diameters less than 10 mm (7, 8). The survival of rNET cases with LN+ was previously reported to be as poor as that of rectal cancer cases with LN+ (9, 10). Therefore, similar to surgical indications for rectal cancer, radical rectal resection with lymphadenectomy has been strongly recommended for rNETs with potential LN+. Although risk factors for rNETs with potential LN+ currently remain unclear, the criteria of surgical indications for rNETs are generally recognized as the following: 1) rNETs with diameters of 20 mm or larger in the primary tumor, 2) 10-20 mm with a suspected invaded muscularis propria (MP) and lymph ductal invasion, and 3) suspected LN+ on computed tomography (CT) or magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) findings (11, 12). Tumor size or invasion depth may be evaluated with high accuracy using endoscopic ultrasonography (13). However, a precise diagnostic method for detecting LN+ has not yet been established; therefore, it may often be evaluated using the diagnostic criteria of CT or MRI, which were established based on clinicopathological data in rectal adenocarcinoma, despite the diagnostic accuracy of these criteria for LN+ not being demonstrated in rNETs.

In the present study, we examined whether the size of regional LNs in rNETs may be evaluated using the same diagnostic criteria of contrast-enhanced CT (CECT) as rectal adenocarcinoma through a retrospective analysis of non-metastatic and metastatic LN sizes on CECT and in paraffin-fixed specimens. Furthermore, the cut-off value for the size of LN with metastasis in pre-operative CECT findings was calculated. The present study aimed to establish an appropriate diagnostic method for LN+ in rNETs using pre-operative CECT through a retrospective analysis, in order to provide rNET patients with more curative treatments based on a precise clinical diagnosis.

Patients and Methods

Patients. This study included 14 rNET cases that underwent curative surgery between April 2006 and March 2017 in the Division of Digestive Surgery of Kyoto Prefectural University of Medicine (KPUM), Kyoto, Japan. Pathological diagnoses were made by two expert pathologists based on the UICC/AJCC classification system (14). This study was approved by the Research Ethics Committee of Kyoto Prefectural University of Medicine (No. ERB-C-1178).

Middle and lower rectal adenocarcinoma patients undergoing curative surgery between April 2013 and March 2017 in KPUM where included in the analysis. Patients receiving neoadjuvant chemotherapies or radiotherapies or with a previous history of rectal resection were excluded from the present study. Therefore, 45 rectal adenocarcinoma cases were ultimately selected.

Preoperative evaluation by CECT. All eligible cases underwent CECT in the 2 months before rectal resection. CECT was mainly performed in KPUM or an affiliated medical center. CT examinations were performed using a multidetector CT with 64 or 320 layers. Briefly, all patients fasted for more than 6 h, and received an intravenous injection of 510 mg/kg iopamidol (Bayer, Osaka, Japan) or iohexol (Daiichi-Sankyo, Tokyo, Japan) over 45 sec. A CT scan was then performed for 100 sec after the contrast material injection in order to obtain equilibrium phase images. The sizes of LNs were evaluated in the short axis on horizontal CECT images by at least one radiologist and two or more digestive surgeons.

Evaluation of LN sizes in paraffin-fixed specimens. LNs were sampled from surgically resected specimens by digestive surgeons and were subsequently embedded in paraffin after 12 h of formalin fixation. They were sliced at the maximum cut surface by expert technicians, and samples were then re-fixed on slide glasses. The short axes of all re-fixed LNs derived from eligible rNETs and adenocarcinoma tumors were measured.

Surgical procedures. All surgeries were performed or supervised by surgeons with sufficient experience in rectal resection. A surgical method was selected in a preoperative conference by an expert rectal surgical team according to the Japanese colorectal cancer guidelines (15, 16). Briefly, anal preservation surgery was performed for rectal tumors that were without invasion to the anal canal. In tumors with invasion to the anal canal, intersphincteric resection (ISR) was performed if the tumor was localized to the mucosal and submucosal layers and it was possible to secure a surgical margin. If not, anterior perineal resection was performed. Lateral LN dissection was basically performed for lower rectal adenocarcinoma and rNETs with invasion to the mesorectum or with suspected LN metastases. Clinically suspected LN+ in the perirectal and lateral regions were defined as 7 mm and 5 mm or larger in the short diameter, respectively (17). Temporary diverting ileostomy was simultaneously constructed in ISR and super low anterior resection. Diverting ileostomy was closed 3 months after initial surgery.

Statistical analysis. Comparisons were performed between both groups using the Student's t-test or chi-squared test. p-Values of less than 0.05 were regarded as significant. Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves were generated to evaluate diagnostic performance for detecting LN+ using measurements of the LN short diameter on CECT. Corresponding sizes under the ROC curve (AUC), sensitivities, specificities, and accuracies were calculated. Statistical analyses were performed using JMP version 10.

Results

Clinicopathological characteristics of rNET and adeno-carcinoma patients. Patient characteristics are summarized in Table I. rNET patients were significantly younger than rectal adenocarcinoma patients (Mean: 54.6 vs. 66.2, p<0.001). Tumor sizes were significantly smaller for rNETs than for rectal adenocarcinomas (Mean: 9.9 vs. 44.2, p<0.001). rNETs were more frequently located on the lower rectum than rectal adenocarcinomas (11/14 vs. 14/45, p<0.001). More cases were undergoing preceding endoscopic resection, such as endoscopic mucosal resection or endoscopic submucosal dissection, among rNETs cases than adenocarcinoma cases (2/45 vs. 8/14: p<0.001). A permanent stoma was not constructed in rNET cases. D3 LN dissection was more frequently performed for rectal adenocarcinoma than for rNETs (p<0.001). The pathological invasion depth was significantly deeper in rectal adenocarcinoma cases than in rNET cases (p<0.001). Lymph ductal or venous invasion were more frequently observed in adenocarcinoma cases (p=0.034 and 0.016, respectively). Seventeen rectal adenocarcinoma and 5 rNET cases were pathologically diagnosed with LN+. All rNET tumors with LN+ had some vessel invasion, and LN+ was also detected in all rNET tumors with invasion to the MP. The Ki-67 labeling index of rNET cases was 0.9-19.5% (data not shown).

Comparison of regional LN sizes in rNETs and adenocarcinomas on CT images. The short axis of the greatest LN in the circumrectal region on pre-operative CECT images was measured and compared between rectal rNETs and adenocarcinomas (Table II). LN sizes were slightly smaller in rNET cases with LN+ than in carcinoma cases (Mean: 6.0 vs. 8.8 mm, p=0.082). Moreover, LN sizes were smaller in rNETs without LN+ than in adenocarcinoma cases (2.7 vs. 4.5 mm, p=0.026). A ROC curve was used to select the cut-off value for LN size in LN+. The AUC values of ROC curves were used to detect the LN+ of rNETs and adenocarcinomas. By measuring the short axis of the greatest LN on CT images the AUCs for rNETs and adenocarcinomas were 0.837 and 0.885, respectively. The cut-off values for adenocarcinomas and rNETs were 7 and 5 mm, respectively.

View this table:
  • View inline
  • View popup
  • Download powerpoint
Table I.

Patient characteristics.

Comparison of regional LN sizes in rNETs and adenocarcinoma in paraffin-fixed specimens. As previously described (18), LN+ sizes were smaller in rNETs than in rectal adenocarcinoma in the present study; however, there was a limitation due to the small number of rNETs cases examined. Thus, the sizes of all dissected LNs fixed by paraffin were measured in order to validate the hypothesis that the LN+ of rNETs are smaller than those of rectal adenocarcinomas (Table III). The total numbers of dissected LNs in rNETs and adenocarcinoma were 143 and 786, respectively. In these LNs, the numbers of LN+ in rNETs and adenocarcinomas were 8 (5.5%) and 28 (3.5%), respectively. The metastatic or non-metastatic LNs of rNETs were significantly smaller than those of rectal adenocarcinomas, which was consistent with CT findings.

View this table:
  • View inline
  • View popup
  • Download powerpoint
Table II.

Size of lymph nodes evaluated by CT findings in rectal adenocarcinoma and neuroendocrine tumors.

View this table:
  • View inline
  • View popup
  • Download powerpoint
Table III.

Size of lymph nodes evaluated using paraffin-fixed specimens in rectal adenocarcinoma and neuroendocrine tumors.

Diagnostic accuracy of CT for detecting LN+ using cut-off values calculated by ROC curves. The diagnostic accuracy of CT was evaluated using novel size criteria based on the calculated cut-off values (Table IV). When defining LN+ as 7 mm or larger in the short axis, the sensitivity, specificity, and accuracy of CT were 82.4%, 82.1%, and 82.2%, respectively, for rectal adenocarcinoma and 20.0%, 100.0%, and 71.4%, respectively, for rNETs. The sensitivity of the cut-off value of 7 mm in the short axis calculated by the ROC curve of rectal adenocarcinoma was insubstantial for rNETs. In contrast, LN+ was diagnosed with high accuracy using the cut-off value of 5 mm in the short axis calculated by data obtained for rNETs (sensitivity: 80.0%, specificity: 87.5%, and accuracy: 84.6%).

View this table:
  • View inline
  • View popup
  • Download powerpoint
Table IV.

Diagnostic accuracy of CT in detecting lymph node metastasis using cut-off values calculated by a ROC analysis.

Discussion

The size of LN+ in rNETs has been previously examined. Fujimoto et al. performed a retrospective analysis of their rNETs cases and reported that regional LNs with a minor axis of 5 mm or greater needs to be regarded as metastasis (19). Kim BC et al. showed that LN size alone is not a sufficient predictor of tumor metastasis through a retrospective analysis on paraffin-fixed LN+ derived from rNETs, because of wide variations in the sizes of LNs with metastasis, with some being very small (18). Although this evaluation method of LNs using paraffin-fixed specimens had the advantage of allowing the analysis of a higher number of resected LNs, difficulties were associated with calculating precise cut-off values for LN sizes with metastasis in clinical settings because the dewatering process by formalin, which was used in the preparation of pathological specimens, may reduce the size of LNs (20). In contrast, although only a small number of LNs may be evaluated in pre-operative CECT findings, these sizes may be examined in actual clinical settings. Based on these advantages and disadvantages, we examined LN sizes in rNETs using LN data derived from CECT findings and paraffin-fixed specimens.

LN+ in rNETs is often diagnosed in clinical settings using the criteria of rectal adenocarcinoma despite the diagnostic accuracy of these criteria for LN metastasis not being demonstrated for rNETs. In order to clarify this ambiguous point, we compared LN+ sizes in rNETs and adenocarcinomas. To the best of our knowledge, this is the first study to show an appropriate diagnostic method for LN+ using CECT in rNETs through a comparison with rectal adenocarcinoma.

The results of the present study revealed that the sizes of LN+ were smaller in rNETs than in rectal adenocarcinoma using CECT and pathological findings. Moreover, the cut-off values for the LN minor axis of the LN+ of rNETs and adenocarcinoma on CECT images were calculated as 5 and 7 mm, respectively, in the present study. The diagnostic accuracy of CECT was not satisfactory (sensitivity: 20.0%, and accuracy: 71.4%) when applying the cut-off value for rectal adenocarcinoma (7 mm) to rNETs. However, the LN+ of rNETs were diagnosed with very high accuracy (sensitivity: 80.0%, accuracy: 84.6%) by CECT when the cut-off value was defined as 5 mm or larger in the minor axis. These results suggest that the diagnostic criteria of LN+ for rectal adenocarcinoma cannot be applied to rNETs in clinical settings. We considered the evaluation of LNs in preoperative CECT findings using as criterion for assessing the existence of LN+ in rNETs “a short axis of 5 mm or greater”, to potentially decrease the rate of false-staging in pre-operative settings and avoid misleading over or under-treatments.

Furthermore, the present study revealed an interesting characteristic of regional LNs in rNETs; they were significantly smaller than in rectal adenocarcinoma regardless of metastasis. This may have been due to the following differences in the characteristics between each tumor. Colorectal cancer tissues generally induce inflammation through the production of proinflammatory cytokines, which often facilitate cancer proliferation or metastasis (21). This inflammatory reaction spreads in the tissue surrounding a tumor, resulting in the swelling of LNs. Therefore, some large LNs regardless of metastasis are often detected around cancer tissues and exhibit strong inflammatory reactions. In contrast, the relationship between rNETs and inflammation has not yet been examined. This difference in the strength of inflammation derived from a tumor may result in various LN sizes irrespective of metastasis.

There were some limitations that need to be addressed. This was a retrospective and single-institution study with a small sample size, which may limit statistical power and generate a statistical bias. Furthermore, the study included cases undergoing pre-operative non-thin slice CT. In one rNET case with pathologically diagnosed LN+ among the present cases, non-thin slice CECT (slice thickness: 5 mm) did not reveal swollen regional LNs, such as 5 mm or larger in the minor axis, in pre-operative screening. These LNs may have been detected if thin-slice CECT was used for the pre-operative evaluation of this case. Another limitation is that the sizes of fresh samples, unaffected by formalin fixation, were not analyzed just after surgery in the present study because of the lack of these data in our Institution. However, a previous study reported that radiographic tumor sizes were significantly smaller than post-resection fresh tumor sizes (22). It is not, therefore, evident whether radiologic findings of LN size are consistent with those of fresh samples. In addition, it was not possible to examine the diagnostic accuracy of LN+ in rNETs by MRI in the present study because there were some cases without pre-operative MRI, which has recently been regarded as one of the indispensable pre-operative examinations in surgery for rectal tumors. Further investigations of its diagnostic accuracy for rNETs are needed. Nevertheless, the present study demonstrated the essentiality of diagnostic criteria specific to rNETs, and the diagnostic accuracy of the clinical staging of rNETs. The results of the present study need to be validated in studies with large sample sizes for a precise clinical diagnosis and appropriate decision-making regarding surgical indications for rNETs.

Conclusion

The present study revealed that the sizes of LN+ were smaller in rNETs than in rectal adenocarcinoma on CECT and in pathological findings, suggesting that the imaging criteria of LNs used for rectal adenocarcinoma in clinical evaluations of regional LNs cannot be applied to rNETs. Furthermore, in consideration of many limitations, LN+ in rNETs may be clinically evaluated with a high accuracy when defining it with a minor axis of 5 mm or greater on CT images.

Footnotes

  • Conflicts of Interest

    The Authors of this article have no relevant financial relationships with commercial interests to disclose.

  • Received November 22, 2018.
  • Revision received November 28, 2018.
  • Accepted November 29, 2018.
  • Copyright© 2019, International Institute of Anticancer Research (Dr. George J. Delinasios), All rights reserved

References

  1. ↵
    1. Shimizu T,
    2. Tanaka S,
    3. Haruma K,
    4. Kitadai Y,
    5. Yoshihara M,
    6. Sumii K,
    7. Kajiyama G,
    8. Shimamoto F
    : Growth characteristics of rectal carcinoid tumors. Oncology 59(3): 229-237, 2000.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  2. ↵
    1. Soga J
    : Carcinoids of the rectum: An evaluation of 1271 reported cases. Surg Today 27(2): 112-119, 1997.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  3. ↵
    1. Ito T,
    2. Sasano H,
    3. Tanaka M,
    4. Osamura RY,
    5. Sasaki I,
    6. Kimura W,
    7. Takano K,
    8. Obara T,
    9. Ishibashi M,
    10. Nakao K,
    11. Doi R,
    12. Shimatsu A,
    13. Nishida T,
    14. Komoto I,
    15. Hirata Y,
    16. Nakamura K,
    17. Igarashi H,
    18. Jensen RT,
    19. Wiedenmann B,
    20. Imamura M
    : Epidemiological study of gastroenteropancreatic neuroendocrine tumors in japan. J Gastroenterol 45(2): 234-243, 2010.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  4. ↵
    1. Edge SB,
    2. Compton CC
    : The American Joint Committee on Cancer: The 7th edition of the ajcc cancer staging manual and the future of tnm. Ann Surg Oncol 17(6): 1471-1474, 2010.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  5. ↵
    1. Kim MS,
    2. Hur H,
    3. Min BS,
    4. Baik SH,
    5. Lee KY,
    6. Kim NK
    : Clinical outcomes for rectal carcinoid tumors according to a new (AJCC 7th edition) tnm staging system: A single institutional analysis of 122 patients. J Surg Oncol 107(8): 835-841, 2013.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  6. ↵
    1. Jetmore AB,
    2. Ray JE,
    3. Gathright JB Jr..,
    4. McMullen KM,
    5. Hicks TC,
    6. Timmcke AE
    : Rectal carcinoids: The most frequent carcinoid tumor. Dis Colon Rectum 35(8): 717-725, 1992.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  7. ↵
    1. Heah SM,
    2. Eu KW,
    3. Ooi BS,
    4. Ho YH,
    5. Seow-Choen F
    : Tumor size is irrelevant in predicting malignant potential of carcinoid tumors of the rectum. Tech Coloproctol 5(2): 73-77, 2001.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  8. ↵
    1. Konishi T,
    2. Watanabe T,
    3. Nagawa H,
    4. Oya M,
    5. Ueno M,
    6. Kuroyanagi H,
    7. Fujimoto Y,
    8. Akiyoshi T,
    9. Yamaguchi T,
    10. Muto T
    : Treatment of colorectal carcinoids: A new paradigm. World J Gastrointest Surg 2(5): 153-156, 2010.
    OpenUrlPubMed
  9. ↵
    1. Konishi T,
    2. Watanabe T,
    3. Kishimoto J,
    4. Kotake K,
    5. Muto T,
    6. Nagawa H,
    7. Japanese Society for Cancer of the Colon and Rectum
    : Prognosis and risk factors of metastasis in colorectal carcinoids: Results of a nationwide registry over 15 years. Gut 56(6): 863-868, 2007.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  10. ↵
    1. Anthony LB,
    2. Strosberg JR,
    3. Klimstra DS,
    4. Maples WJ,
    5. O'Dorisio TM,
    6. Warner RR,
    7. Wiseman GA,
    8. Benson AB 3rd.,
    9. Pommier RF
    : The nanets consensus guidelines for the diagnosis and management of gastrointestinal neuroendocrine tumors (nets): Well-differentiated nets of the distal colon and rectum. Pancreas 39(6): 767-774, 2010.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  11. ↵
    1. Kulke MH,
    2. Shah MH,
    3. Benson AB 3rd.,
    4. Bergsland E,
    5. Berlin JD,
    6. Blaszkowsky LS,
    7. Emerson L,
    8. Engstrom PF,
    9. Fanta P,
    10. Giordano T,
    11. Goldner WS,
    12. Halfdanarson TR,
    13. Heslin MJ,
    14. Kandeel F,
    15. Kunz PL,
    16. Kuvshinoff BW 2nd.,
    17. Lieu C,
    18. Moley JF,
    19. Munene G,
    20. Pillarisetty VG,
    21. Saltz L,
    22. Sosa JA,
    23. Strosberg JR,
    24. Vauthey JN,
    25. Wolfgang C,
    26. Yao JC,
    27. Burns J,
    28. Freedman-Cass D
    : Neuroendocrine tumors, version 1.2015. J Natl Compr Canc Netw 13(1): 78-108, 2015.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  12. ↵
    1. Ramage JK,
    2. Ahmed A,
    3. Ardill J,
    4. Bax N,
    5. Breen DJ,
    6. Caplin ME,
    7. Corrie P,
    8. Davar J,
    9. Davies AH,
    10. Lewington V,
    11. Meyer T,
    12. Newell-Price J,
    13. Poston G,
    14. Reed N,
    15. Rockall A,
    16. Steward W,
    17. Thakker RV,
    18. Toubanakis C,
    19. Valle J,
    20. Verbeke C,
    21. Grossman AB,
    22. UK and Ireland Neuroendocrine Tumour Society
    : Guidelines for the management of gastroenteropancreatic neuroendocrine (including carcinoid) tumours (NETs). Gut 61(1): 6-32, 2012.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  13. ↵
    1. Varas MJ,
    2. Gornals JB,
    3. Pons C,
    4. Espinos JC,
    5. Abad R,
    6. Lorente FJ,
    7. Bargallo D
    : Usefulness of endoscopic ultrasonography (eus) for selecting carcinoid tumors as candidates to endoscopic resection. Rev Esp Enferm Dig 102(10): 577-582, 2010.
    OpenUrlPubMed
  14. ↵
    1. Edge S,
    2. Byrd D,
    3. Compton C
    : Ajcc cancer staging manual seventh edition. New York: Springer-Verlag, 2009.
  15. ↵
    1. Japan Neuroendocrine tumor siciety (JNETs)
    , Guidelines for the management of gastroenteropancreatic neuroendocrine tumor ver1.1, 2015
  16. ↵
    1. Watanabe T,
    2. Muro K,
    3. Ajioka Y,
    4. Hashiguchi Y,
    5. Ito Y,
    6. Saito Y,
    7. Hamaguchi T,
    8. Ishida H,
    9. Ishiguro M,
    10. Ishihara S,
    11. Kanemitsu Y,
    12. Kawano H,
    13. Kinugasa Y,
    14. Kokudo N,
    15. Murofushi K,
    16. Nakajima T,
    17. Oka S,
    18. Sakai Y,
    19. Tsuji A,
    20. Uehara K,
    21. Ueno H,
    22. Yamazaki K,
    23. Yoshida M,
    24. Yoshino T,
    25. Boku N,
    26. Fujimori T,
    27. Itabashi M,
    28. Koinuma N,
    29. Morita T,
    30. Nishimura G,
    31. Sakata Y,
    32. Shimada Y,
    33. Takahashi K,
    34. Tanaka S,
    35. Tsuruta O,
    36. Yamaguchi T,
    37. Yamaguchi N,
    38. Tanaka T,
    39. Kotake K,
    40. Sugihara K,
    41. Japanese Society for Cancer of the C and Rectum
    : Japanese society for cancer of the colon and rectum (jsccr) guidelines 2016 for the treatment of colorectal cancer. Int J Clin Oncol 23(1): 1-34, 2018.
    OpenUrl
  17. ↵
    1. Pomerri F,
    2. Maretto I,
    3. Pucciarelli S,
    4. Rugge M,
    5. Burzi S,
    6. Zandona M,
    7. Ambrosi A,
    8. Urso E,
    9. Muzzio PC,
    10. Nitti D
    : Prediction of rectal lymph node metastasis by pelvic computed tomography measurement. Eur J Surg Oncol 35(2): 168-173, 2009.
    OpenUrlPubMed
  18. ↵
    1. Kim BC,
    2. Kim YE,
    3. Chang HJ,
    4. Lee SH,
    5. Youk EG,
    6. Lee DS,
    7. Lee JB,
    8. Lee EJ,
    9. Kim MJ,
    10. Sohn DK,
    11. Oh JH
    : Lymph node size is not a reliable criterion for predicting nodal metastasis in rectal neuroendocrine tumours. Colorectal Dis 18(7): O243-251, 2016.
    OpenUrl
  19. ↵
    1. Fujimoto Y,
    2. Oya M,
    3. Kuroyanagi H,
    4. Ueno M,
    5. Akiyoshi T,
    6. Yamaguchi T,
    7. Muto T
    : Lymph-node metastases in rectal carcinoids. Langenbecks Arch Surg 395(2): 139-142, 2010.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  20. ↵
    1. Goldstein NS,
    2. Soman A,
    3. Sacksner J
    : Disparate surgical margin lengths of colorectal resection specimens between in vivo and in vitro measurements. The effects of surgical resection and formalin fixation on organ shrinkage. Am J Clin Pathol 111(3): 349-351, 1999.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  21. ↵
    1. Klampfer L
    : Cytokines, inflammation and colon cancer. Curr Cancer Drug Targets 11(4): 451-464, 2011.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  22. ↵
    1. Tran T,
    2. Sundaram CP,
    3. Bahler CD,
    4. Eble JN,
    5. Grignon DJ,
    6. Monn MF,
    7. Simper NB,
    8. Cheng L
    : Correcting the shrinkage effects of formalin fixation and tissue processing for renal tumors: Toward standardization of pathological reporting of tumor size. J Cancer 6(8): 759-766, 2015.
    OpenUrl
PreviousNext
Back to top

In this issue

Anticancer Research: 39 (1)
Anticancer Research
Vol. 39, Issue 1
January 2019
  • Table of Contents
  • Table of Contents (PDF)
  • Index by author
  • Back Matter (PDF)
  • Ed Board (PDF)
  • Front Matter (PDF)
Print
Download PDF
Article Alerts
Sign In to Email Alerts with your Email Address
Email Article

Thank you for your interest in spreading the word on Anticancer Research.

NOTE: We only request your email address so that the person you are recommending the page to knows that you wanted them to see it, and that it is not junk mail. We do not capture any email address.

Enter multiple addresses on separate lines or separate them with commas.
Essentiality of Imaging Diagnostic Criteria Specific to Rectal Neuroendocrine Tumors for Detecting Metastatic Lymph Nodes
(Your Name) has sent you a message from Anticancer Research
(Your Name) thought you would like to see the Anticancer Research web site.
CAPTCHA
This question is for testing whether or not you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.
18 + 1 =
Solve this simple math problem and enter the result. E.g. for 1+3, enter 4.
Citation Tools
Essentiality of Imaging Diagnostic Criteria Specific to Rectal Neuroendocrine Tumors for Detecting Metastatic Lymph Nodes
MICHIHIRO KUDOU, TOMOHIRO ARITA, MASAYOSHI NAKANISHI, YOSHIAKI KURIU, YASUTOSHI MURAYAMA, KATSUTOSHI SHODA, TOSHIYUKI KOSUGA, HIROTAKA KONISHI, RYO MORIMURA, ATSUSHI SHIOZAKI, HISASHI IKOMA, TAKESHI KUBOTA, HITOSHI FUJIWARA, KAZUMA OKAMOTO, EIGO OTSUJI
Anticancer Research Jan 2019, 39 (1) 505-510; DOI: 10.21873/anticanres.13141

Citation Manager Formats

  • BibTeX
  • Bookends
  • EasyBib
  • EndNote (tagged)
  • EndNote 8 (xml)
  • Medlars
  • Mendeley
  • Papers
  • RefWorks Tagged
  • Ref Manager
  • RIS
  • Zotero
Reprints and Permissions
Share
Essentiality of Imaging Diagnostic Criteria Specific to Rectal Neuroendocrine Tumors for Detecting Metastatic Lymph Nodes
MICHIHIRO KUDOU, TOMOHIRO ARITA, MASAYOSHI NAKANISHI, YOSHIAKI KURIU, YASUTOSHI MURAYAMA, KATSUTOSHI SHODA, TOSHIYUKI KOSUGA, HIROTAKA KONISHI, RYO MORIMURA, ATSUSHI SHIOZAKI, HISASHI IKOMA, TAKESHI KUBOTA, HITOSHI FUJIWARA, KAZUMA OKAMOTO, EIGO OTSUJI
Anticancer Research Jan 2019, 39 (1) 505-510; DOI: 10.21873/anticanres.13141
Reddit logo Twitter logo Facebook logo Mendeley logo
  • Tweet Widget
  • Facebook Like
  • Google Plus One

Jump to section

  • Article
    • Abstract
    • Patients and Methods
    • Results
    • Discussion
    • Conclusion
    • Footnotes
    • References
  • Figures & Data
  • Info & Metrics
  • PDF

Related Articles

  • No related articles found.
  • PubMed
  • Google Scholar

Cited By...

  • No citing articles found.
  • Google Scholar

More in this TOC Section

  • A Novel Filtration Membrane for Clustered Circulating Tumor Cell Extraction: A Prospective Feasibility Study
  • Atezolizumab for EGFR-mutated Non-small Cell Lung Cancer Patients: An Observation Study in Ibaraki Group (ATTENTION-IBARAKI)
  • Early Phase Persistent Changes in the White Blood Cell Fraction in Patients With Advanced Urothelial Carcinoma Treated With Pembrolizumab: A Multicenter Retrospective Study
Show more Clinical Studies

Similar Articles

Keywords

  • Rectal neuroendocrine tumor
  • pre-operative staging
  • lymph node metastasis
Anticancer Research

© 2023 Anticancer Research

Powered by HighWire