Reduction in the size of enlarged pelvic lymph nodes after chemoradiation therapy is associated with fewer lymph node metastases in locally advanced rectal carcinoma

Abstract

A reduction in the size of enlarged lymph nodes after neoadjuvant therapy may be a useful prognostic factor for recurrence and survival.

Combining tumor size and diffusion-weighted imaging to diagnose normal-sized metastatic pelvic lymph nodes in cervical cancers

“…The size of LNs is known to be important in treating cancer patients. Increased node size is associated with node metastasis and a poor prognosis (30), and reduction in the size of LNs reflects chemotherapeutic effects and fewer metastases (31). In our study, cervical cancer patients with small LNs showed a relatively low rate of lymphovascular space invasion.…”

Lymph node hypoplasia is associated with adverse outcomes in node-negative colon cancer using advanced lymph node dissection methods

“…This study was restricted to colon cancer because of the commonly applied neoadjuvant therapy used in rectal cancer, which is well known to be an important factor that influences the number and size of retrieved lymph nodes [35]. Therefore, the inclusion of rectal cancers could have led to statistical bias.…”

The Addition of Preoperative Radiation Is Insufficient for Lateral Pelvic Control in a Subgroup of Patients With Low Locally Advanced Rectal Cancer: A Post Hoc Study of a Randomized Controlled Trial

“…8,14,20,21 Previous studies reported using the shrinkage percentage ((SA pre –SA restaging )/SA pre ×100%) of LLNs to reflect the responsiveness and predict the incidence of LPR. 20,22 By setting 60% as a cutoff value, the shrinkage percentage had shown the capacity to recognize patients at a higher risk of LPR. 22 In our study, we found nCRT group had a higher shrinkage rate than nCT group did.…”

“…20,22 By setting 60% as a cutoff value, the shrinkage percentage had shown the capacity to recognize patients at a higher risk of LPR. 22 In our study, we found nCRT group had a higher shrinkage rate than nCT group did. However, in univariable and multivariable analysis, we found no significant result in its prediction for LPR, even in the subgroup with positive pretreatment LLNs ( p = 0.15; HR, 0.227; 95% CI, 0.030–1.732).…”