Evaluation of the implementation of the sigmoid take-off landmark in the Netherlands

Aim: The sigmoid take-off (STO), the point on imaging where the sigmoid sweeps ventral from the sacrum, was chosen as the definition of the rectum during an international Delphi consensus meeting and has been incorporated into the Dutch guidelines since October 2019. The aim of this study was to evaluate the implementation of this landmark 1 year after the guideline implementation and to perform a quality assessment of the STO training. Method: Dutch radiologists, surgeons, surgical residents, interns, PhD students and physician assistants were asked to complete a survey and classify 20 tumours on MRI as ‘below’, ‘on’ or ‘above’ the STO. Outcomes were agreement with the expert reference, inter-rater variability and accuracy before and after the training. Results: Eighty-six collaborators participated. Six radiologists (32%) and 11 surgeons (73%) used the STO as the standard landmark to distinguish between rectal and sigmoidal tumours during multidisciplinary meetings. Overall agreement with the expert reference improved from 53% to 70% (p &lt; 0.001) after the training. The positive predictive value for diagnosing rectal tumours was high before and after the training (92% vs. 90%); the negative predictive value for diagnosing sigmoidal tumours improved from 39% to 63%. Conclusion: Approximately half of the represented hospitals have implemented the new definition of rectal cancer 1 year after the implementation of the Dutch national guidelines. Overall baseline agreement with the expert reference and accuracy for the tumours around the STO was low, but improved significantly after training. These results highlight the added value of training in implementation of radiological landmarks to ensure unambiguous assessment.</p

Impact of the new rectal cancer definition on multimodality treatment and interhospital variability:Results from a nationwide cross-sectional study

Aim: This study aimed to determine the consequences of the new definition of rectal cancer for decision-making in multidisciplinary team meetings (MDT). The new definition of rectal cancer, the lower border of the tumour is located below the sigmoid take-off (STO), was implemented in the Dutch guideline in 2019 after an international Delphi consensus meeting to reduce interhospital variations. Method: All patients with rectal cancer according to the local MDT, who underwent resection in 2016 in the Netherlands were eligible for this nationwide collaborative cross-sectional study. MRI-images were rereviewed, and the tumours were classified as above or on/below the STO. Results: This study registered 3107 of the eligible 3178 patients (98%), of which 2784 patients had an evaluable MRI. In 314 patients, the tumour was located above the STO (11%), with interhospital variation between 0% and 36%. Based on TN-stage, 175 reclassified patients with colon cancer (6%) would have received different treatment (e.g., omitting neoadjuvant radiotherapy, candidate for adjuvant chemotherapy). Tumour location above the STO was independently associated with lower risk of 4-year locoregional recurrence (HR 0.529; p = 0.030) and higher 4-year overall survival (HR 0.732; p = 0.037) compared to location under the STO. Conclusion: By using the STO, 11% of the prior MDT-based diagnosis of rectal cancer were redefined as sigmoid cancer, with potential implications for multimodality treatment and prognostic value. Given the substantial interhospital variation in proportion of redefined cancers, the use of the STO will contribute to standardisation and comparability of outcomes in both daily practice and trial settings.</p

Outcomes and potential impact of a virtual hands-on training program on MRI staging confidence and performance in rectal cancer

Objectives: To explore the potential impact of a dedicated virtual training course on MRI staging confidence and performance in rectal cancer. Methods: Forty-two radiologists completed a stepwise virtual training course on rectal cancer MRI staging composed of a pre-course (baseline) test with 7 test cases (5 staging, 2 restaging), a 1-day online workshop, 1 month of individual case readings (n = 70 cases with online feedback), a live online feedback session supervised by two expert faculty members, and a post-course test. The ESGAR structured reporting templates for (re)staging were used throughout the course. Results of the pre-course and post-course test were compared in terms of group interobserver agreement (Krippendorf’s alpha), staging confidence (perceived staging difficulty), and diagnostic accuracy (using an expert reference standard). Results: Though results were largely not statistically significant, the majority of staging variables showed a mild increase in diagnostic accuracy after the course, ranging between + 2% and + 17%. A similar trend was observed for IOA which improved for nearly all variables when comparing the pre- and post-course. There was a significant decrease in the perceived difficulty level (p = 0.03), indicating an improved diagnostic confidence after completion of the course. Conclusions: Though exploratory in nature, our study results suggest that use of a dedicated virtual training course and web platform has potential to enhance staging performance, confidence, and interobserver agreement to assess rectal cancer on MRI virtual training and could thus be a good alternative (or addition) to in-person training. Clinical relevance statement: Rectal cancer MRI reporting quality is highly dependent on radiologists’ expertise, stressing the need for dedicated training/teaching. This study shows promising results for a virtual web-based training program, which could be a good alternative (or addition) to in-person training. Key Points: • Rectal cancer MRI reporting quality is highly dependent on radiologists’ expertise, stressing the need for dedicated training and teaching. • Using a dedicated virtual training course and web-based platform, encouraging first results were achieved to improve staging accuracy, diagnostic confidence, and interobserver agreement. • These exploratory results suggest that virtual training could thus be a good alternative (or addition) to in-person training

Independent validation of CT radiomics models in colorectal liver metastases:predicting local tumour progression after ablation

Objectives:Independent internal and external validation of three previously published CT-based radiomics models to predict local tumor progression (LTP) after thermal ablation of colorectal liver metastases (CRLM). Materials and methods: Patients with CRLM treated with thermal ablation were collected from two institutions to collect a new independent internal and external validation cohort. Ablation zones (AZ) were delineated on portal venous phase CT 2–8 weeks post-ablation. Radiomics features were extracted from the AZ and a 10 mm peri-ablational rim (PAR) of liver parenchyma around the AZ. Three previously published prediction models (clinical, radiomics, combined) were tested without retraining. LTP was defined as new tumor foci appearing next to the AZ up to 24 months post-ablation. Results: The internal cohort included 39 patients with 68 CRLM and the external cohort 52 patients with 78 CRLM. 34/146 CRLM developed LTP after a median follow-up of 24 months (range 5–139). The median time to LTP was 8 months (range 2–22). The combined clinical-radiomics model yielded a c-statistic of 0.47 (95%CI 0.30–0.64) in the internal cohort and 0.50 (95%CI 0.38–0.62) in the external cohort, compared to 0.78 (95%CI 0.65–0.87) in the previously published original cohort. The radiomics model yielded c-statistics of 0.46 (95%CI 0.29–0.63) and 0.39 (95%CI 0.28–0.52), and the clinical model 0.51 (95%CI 0.34–0.68) and 0.51 (95%CI 0.39–0.63) in the internal and external cohort, respectively. Conclusion: The previously published results for prediction of LTP after thermal ablation of CRLM using clinical and radiomics models were not reproducible in independent internal and external validation. Clinical relevance statement: Local tumour progression after thermal ablation of CRLM cannot yet be predicted with the use of CT radiomics of the ablation zone and peri-ablational rim. These results underline the importance of validation of radiomics results to test for reproducibility in independent cohorts. </p

Artificial Intelligence-based Quantification of Pleural Plaque Volume and Association with Lung Function in Asbestos-exposed Patients

Purpose: Pleural plaques (PPs) are morphologic manifestations of long-term asbestos exposure. The relationship between PP and lung function is not well understood, whereas the time-consuming nature of PP delineation to obtain volume impedes research. To automate the laborious task of delineation, we aimed to develop automatic artificial intelligence (AI)-driven segmentation of PP. Moreover, we aimed to explore the relationship between pleural plaque volume (PPV) and pulmonary function tests.Materials and Methods: Radiologists manually delineated PPs retrospectively in computed tomography (CT) images of patients with occupational exposure to asbestos (May 2014 to November 2019). We trained an AI model with a no-new-UNet architecture. The Dice Similarity Coefficient quantified the overlap between AI and radiologists. The Spearman correlation coefficient (r) was used for the correlation between PPV and pulmonary function test metrics. When recorded, these were vital capacity (VC), forced vital capacity (FVC), and diffusing capacity for carbon monoxide (DLCO).Results: We trained the AI system on 422 CT scans in 5 folds, each time with a different fold (n = 84 to 85) as a test set. On these independent test sets combined, the correlation between the predicted volumes and the ground truth was r = 0.90, and the median overlap was 0.71 Dice Similarity Coefficient. We found weak to moderate correlations with PPV for VC (n = 80, r = -0.40) and FVC (n = 82, r = -0.38), but no correlation for DLCO (n = 84, r = -0.09). When the cohort was split on the median PPV, we observed statistically significantly lower VC (P = 0.001) and FVC (P = 0.04) values for the higher PPV patients, but not for DLCO (P = 0.19).Conclusion: We successfully developed an AI algorithm to automatically segment PP in CT images to enable fast volume extraction. Moreover, we have observed that PPV is associated with loss in VC and FVC.</p

Impact of the new rectal cancer definition on multimodality treatment and interhospital variability: Results from a nationwide cross-sectional study

Aim: This study aimed to determine the consequences of the new definition of rectal cancer for decision-making in multidisciplinary team meetings (MDT). The new definition of rectal cancer, the lower border of the tumour is located below the sigmoid take-off (STO), was implemented in the Dutch guideline in 2019 after an international Delphi consensus meeting to reduce interhospital variations. Method: All patients with rectal cancer according to the local MDT, who underwent resection in 2016 in the Netherlands were eligible for this nationwide collaborative cross-sectional study. MRI-images were rereviewed, and the tumours were classified as above or on/below the STO. Results: This study registered 3107 of the eligible 3178 patients (98%), of which 2784 patients had an evaluable MRI. In 314 patients, the tumour was located above the STO (11%), with interhospital variation between 0% and 36%. Based on TN-stage, 175 reclassified patients with colon cancer (6%) would have received different treatment (e.g., omitting neoadjuvant radiotherapy, candidate for adjuvant chemotherapy). Tumour location above the STO was independently associated with lower risk of 4-year locoregional recurrence (HR 0.529; p = 0.030) and higher 4-year overall survival (HR 0.732; p = 0.037) compared to location under the STO. Conclusion: By using the STO, 11% of the prior MDT-based diagnosis of rectal cancer were redefined as sigmoid cancer, with potential implications for multimodality treatment and prognostic value. Given the substantial interhospital variation in proportion of redefined cancers, the use of the STO will contribute to standardisation and comparability of outcomes in both daily practice and trial settings

Development and multicenter validation of a multiparametric imaging model to predict treatment response in rectal cancer

Funding Information: This study has received funding from the Dutch Cancer Society (project number 10138). Publisher Copyright: © 2023, The Author(s).Objectives: To develop and validate a multiparametric model to predict neoadjuvant treatment response in rectal cancer at baseline using a heterogeneous multicenter MRI dataset. Methods: Baseline staging MRIs (T2W (T2-weighted)-MRI, diffusion-weighted imaging (DWI) / apparent diffusion coefficient (ADC)) of 509 patients (9 centres) treated with neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy (CRT) were collected. Response was defined as (1) complete versus incomplete response, or (2) good (Mandard tumor regression grade (TRG) 1–2) versus poor response (TRG3-5). Prediction models were developed using combinations of the following variable groups: (1) Non-imaging: age/sex/tumor-location/tumor-morphology/CRT-surgery interval (2) Basic staging: cT-stage/cN-stage/mesorectal fascia involvement, derived from (2a) original staging reports, or (2b) expert re-evaluation (3) Advanced staging: variables from 2b combined with cTN-substaging/invasion depth/extramural vascular invasion/tumor length (4) Quantitative imaging: tumour volume + first-order histogram features (from T2W-MRI and DWI/ADC) Models were developed with data from 6 centers (n = 412) using logistic regression with the Least Absolute Shrinkage and Selector Operator (LASSO) feature selection, internally validated using repeated (n = 100) random hold-out validation, and externally validated using data from 3 centers (n = 97). Results: After external validation, the best model (including non-imaging and advanced staging variables) achieved an area under the curve of 0.60 (95%CI=0.48–0.72) to predict complete response and 0.65 (95%CI=0.53–0.76) to predict a good response. Quantitative variables did not improve model performance. Basic staging variables consistently achieved lower performance compared to advanced staging variables. Conclusions: Overall model performance was moderate. Best results were obtained using advanced staging variables, highlighting the importance of good-quality staging according to current guidelines. Quantitative imaging features had no added value (in this heterogeneous dataset). Clinical relevance statement: Predicting tumour response at baseline could aid in tailoring neoadjuvant therapies for rectal cancer. This study shows that image-based prediction models are promising, though are negatively affected by variations in staging quality and MRI acquisition, urging the need for harmonization. Key Points: This multicenter study combining clinical information and features derived from MRI rendered disappointing performance to predict response to neoadjuvant treatment in rectal cancer. Best results were obtained with the combination of clinical baseline information and state-of-the-art image-based staging variables, highlighting the importance of good quality staging according to current guidelines and staging templates. No added value was found for quantitative imaging features in this multicenter retrospective study. This is likely related to acquisition variations, which is a major problem for feature reproducibility and thus model generalizability.Peer reviewe

EURECCA colorectal: multidisciplinary mission statement on better care for patients with colon and rectal cancer in Europe

Background: Care for patients with colon and rectal cancer has improved in the last twenty years however still considerable variation exists in cancer management and outcome between European countries. 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 colon and rectum was held looking for multidisciplinary consensus. The expert panel consisted of representatives of European scientific organisations involved in cancer care of patients with colon and rectal cancer and representatives of national colorectal registries. Methods: The expert panel had delegates of the European Society of Surgical Oncology (ESSO), European Society for Radiotherapy & Oncology (ESTRO), European Society of Pathology (ESP), European Society for Medical Oncology (ESMO), European Society of Radiology (ESR), European Society of Coloproctology (ESCP), European CanCer Organisation (ECCO), European Oncology Nursing Society (EONS) and the European Colorectal Cancer Patient Organisation (EuropaColon), as well as delegates from national registries or audits. Experts commented and voted on the two web-based online voting rounds before the meeting (between 4th and 25th October and between the 20th November and 3rd December 2012) as well as one online round after the meeting (4th-20th March 2013) and were invited to lecture on the subjects during the meeting (13th-15th December 2012). The sentences in the consensus document were available during the meeting and a televoting round during the conference by all participants was performed. All sentences that were voted on are available on the EURECCA website www.canceraudit.eu. The consensus document was divided in sections describing evidence based algorithms of diagnostics, pathology, surgery, medical oncology, radiotherapy, and follow-up where applicable for treatment of colon cancer, rectal cancer and stage IV separately. Consensus was achieved using the Delphi method. Results: The total number of the voted sentences was 465. All chapters were voted on by at least 75% of the experts. Of the 465 sentences, 84% achieved large consensus, 6% achieved moderate consensus, and 7% resulted in minimum consensus. Only 3% was disagreed by more than 50% of the members. Conclusions: It is feasible to achieve European Consensus on key diagnostic and treatment issues using the Delphi method. This consensus embodies the expertise of professionals from all disciplines involved in the care for patients with colon and rectal cancer. Diagnostic and treatment algorithms were developed to implement the current evidence and to define core treatment guidance for multidisciplinary team management of colon and rectal cancer throughout Europe

Evaluation of National Surgical Practice for Lateral Lymph Nodes in Rectal Cancer in an Untrained Setting

Background: Involved lateral lymph nodes (LLNs) have been associated with increased local recurrence (LR) and ipsi-lateral LR (LLR) rates. However, consensus regarding the indication and type of surgical treatment for suspicious LLNs is lacking. This study evaluated the surgical treatment of LLNs in an untrained setting at a national level. Methods: Patients who underwent additional LLN surgery were selected from a national cross-sectional cohort study regarding patients undergoing rectal cancer surgery in 69 Dutch hospitals in 2016. LLN surgery consisted of either ‘node-picking’ (the removal of an individual LLN) or ‘partial regional node dissection’ (PRND; an incomplete resection of the LLN area). For all patients with primarily enlarged (≥7 mm) LLNs, those undergoing rectal surgery with an additional LLN procedure were compared to those undergoing only rectal resection. Results: Out of 3057 patients, 64 underwent additional LLN surgery, with 4-year LR and LLR rates of 26% and 15%, respectively. Forty-eight patients (75%) had enlarged LLNs, with corresponding recurrence rates of 26% and 19%, respectively. Node-picking (n = 40) resulted in a 20% 4-year LLR, and a 14% LLR after PRND (n = 8; p = 0.677). Multivariable analysis of 158 patients with enlarged LLNs undergoing additional LLN surgery (n = 48) or rectal resection alone (n = 110) showed no significant association of LLN surgery with 4-year LR or LLR, but suggested higher recurrence risks after LLN surgery (LR: hazard ratio [HR] 1.5, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.7–3.2, p = 0.264; LLR: HR 1.9, 95% CI 0.2–2.5, p = 0.874). Conclusion: Evaluation of Dutch practice in 2016 revealed that approximately one-third of patients with primarily enlarged LLNs underwent surgical treatment, mostly consisting of node-picking. Recurrence rates were not significantly affected by LLN surgery, but did suggest worse outcomes. Outcomes of LLN surgery after adequate training requires further research.</p

Prognostic significance of MRI-detected extramural venous invasion according to grade and response to neo-adjuvant treatment in locally advanced rectal cancer A national cohort study after radiologic training and reassessment

Background: Detection of grade 3–4 extra mural venous invasion (mrEMVI) on magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) is associated with an increased distant metastases (DM)-rate. This study aimed to determine the impact of different grades of mrEMVI and their disappearance after neoadjuvant therapy.Methods: A Dutch national retrospective cross-sectional study was conducted, including patients who underwent resection for rectal cancer in 2016 from 60/69 hospitals performing rectal surgery. Patients with a cT3-4 tumour ≤8 cm from the anorectal junction were selected and their MRI-scans were reassessed by trained abdominal radiologists. Positive mrEMVI grades (3 and 4) were analyzed in regard to 4-year local recurrence (LR), DM, disease-free survival (DFS) and overall survival (OS). Results: The 1213 included patients had a median follow-up of 48 months (IQR 30–54). Positive mrEMVI was present in 324 patients (27%); 161 had grade 3 and 163 had grade 4. A higher mrEMVI stage (grade 4 vs grade 3 vs no mrEMVI) increased LR-risk (21% vs 18% vs 7%, &lt;0.001) and DM-risk (49% vs 30% vs 21%, p &lt; 0.001) and decreased DFS (42% vs 55% vs 69%, p &lt; 0.001) and OS (62% vs 76% vs 81%, p &lt; 0.001), which remained independently associated in multivariable analysis. When mrEMVI had disappeared on restaging MRI, DM-rate was comparable to initial absence of mrEMVI (both 26%), whereas LR-rate remained high (22% vs 9%, p = 0.006). Conclusion: The negative oncological impact of mrEMVI on recurrence and survival rates was dependent on grading. Disappearance of mrEMVI on restaging MRI decreased the risk of DM, but not of LR.</p