Extramural Depth of Tumor Invasion at Thin-Section MR in Patients with Rectal Cancer: Results of the MERCURY Study

    Purpose: To prospectively evaluate the accuracy of magnetic resonance (MR) imaging in depicting the extramural depth of tumor invasion in patients who have rectal cancer, with histopathologic results as the reference standard.

    Materials and Methods: The Magnetic Resonance Imaging and Rectal Cancer European Equivalence (MERCURY) Study received ethics approval from all participating centers, and all patients gave informed consent. Consecutive patients (n = 679) with adenocarcinoma of the rectum consented to participate. Imaging workshops for participating specialist gastrointestinal radiologists were held to ensure standardization of image acquisition techniques. Standardized MR image interpretation and data reporting were performed by using previously validated criteria. MR images were prospectively singly read by the specialist gastrointestinal radiologists. The maximal extramural depth (EMD) of tumor spread, defined at histopathologic analysis as the distance from the outer edge of the longitudinal muscularis propria to the outer edge of the tumor, was measured and recorded. The maximal EMD was the reference standard. The MR and histopathologic results were considered to be equivalent when the 95% confidence interval of the difference between them was within ±0.5 mm.

    Results: Tumor EMD measurements obtained at both MR imaging and histopathologic analysis were available for 295 (95%) of 311 patients after primary surgery. Mean EMDs were 2.80 mm ± 4.60 (standard deviation) and 2.81 mm ± 4.28 at MR imaging and histopathologic analysis, respectively. The mean difference between the MR-derived and histopathologically derived EMDs was −0.05 mm ± 3.85 (95% confidence interval: −0.49 mm, 0.40 mm). Therefore, MR and histopathologic assessments of tumor spread were considered equivalent to within 0.5 mm.

    Conclusion: Demonstration of accurate measurement of the depth of extramural tumor spread in the MERCURY Study enabled accurate preoperative prognostication.

    Supplemental material: http://radiology.rsnajnls.org/cgi/content/full/2431051825/DC1 http://radiology.rsnajnls.org/cgi/content/full/2431051825/DC2 http://radiology.rsnajnls.org/cgi/content/full/2431051825/DC3

    © RSNA, 2007


    • 1 Jass JR, Atkin WS, Cuzick J, et al. The grading of rectal cancer: historical perspectives and a multivariate analysis of 447 cases. Histopathology 1986; 10: 437–459. Crossref, MedlineGoogle Scholar
    • 2 Harrison JC, Dean PJ, el-Zeky F, Vander Zwaag R. From Dukes through Jass: pathological prognostic indicators in rectal cancer. Hum Pathol 1994;25:498–505. Crossref, MedlineGoogle Scholar
    • 3 Willett CG, Badizadegan K, Ancukiewicz M, Shellito PC. Prognostic factors in stage T3N0 rectal cancer: do all patients require postoperative pelvic irradiation and chemotherapy? Dis Colon Rectum 1999;42:167–173. Crossref, MedlineGoogle Scholar
    • 4 Shepherd NA, Baxter KJ, Love SB. Influence of local peritoneal involvement on pelvic recurrence and prognosis in rectal cancer. J Clin Pathol 1995;48:849–855. Crossref, MedlineGoogle Scholar
    • 5 Merkel S, Mansmann U, Siassi M, Papadopoulos T, Hohenberger W, Hermanek P. The prognostic inhomogeneity in pT3 rectal carcinomas. Int J Colorectal Dis 2001;16:298–304. Crossref, MedlineGoogle Scholar
    • 6 Kapiteijn E, Marijnen CA, Nagtegaal ID, et al. Preoperative radiotherapy combined with total mesorectal excision for resectable rectal cancer. N Engl J Med 2001;345:638–646. Crossref, MedlineGoogle Scholar
    • 7 Improved survival with preoperative radiotherapy in resectable rectal cancer: Swedish Rectal Cancer Trial. N Engl J Med 1997;336:980–987. [Published correction appears in N Engl J Med 1997;336:1539.] Google Scholar
    • 8 Sauer R, Becker H, Hohenberger W, et al. Preoperative versus postoperative chemoradiotherapy for rectal cancer. N Engl J Med 2004;351:1731–1740. Crossref, MedlineGoogle Scholar
    • 9 Nicholls RJ, Galloway DJ, Mason AY, Boyle P. Clinical local staging of rectal cancer. Br J Surg 1985;72(suppl):S51–S52. Crossref, MedlineGoogle Scholar
    • 10 Mackay SG, Pager CK, Joseph D, Stewart PJ, Solomon MJ. Assessment of the accuracy of transrectal ultrasonography in anorectal neoplasia. Br J Surg 2003;90:346–350. Crossref, MedlineGoogle Scholar
    • 11 Bipat S, Glas AS, Slors FJ, Zwinderman AH, Bossuyt PM, Stoker J. Rectal cancer: local staging and assessment of lymph node involvement with endoluminal US, CT, and MR imaging—a meta-analysis. Radiology 2004;232:773–783. LinkGoogle Scholar
    • 12 Zerhouni EA, Rutter C, Hamilton SR, et al. CT and MR imaging in the staging of colorectal carcinoma: report of the Radiology Diagnostic Oncology Group II. Radiology 1996;200:443–451. LinkGoogle Scholar
    • 13 Brown G, Radcliffe AG, Newcombe RG, Dallimore NS, Bourne MW, Williams GT. Preoperative assessment of prognostic factors in rectal cancer using high-resolution magnetic resonance imaging. Br J Surg 2003;90:355–364. Crossref, MedlineGoogle Scholar
    • 14 Beets-Tan RG, Beets GL, Vliegen RF, et al. Accuracy of magnetic resonance imaging in prediction of tumour-free resection margin in rectal cancer surgery. Lancet 2001;357:497–504. Crossref, MedlineGoogle Scholar
    • 15 Brown G, Richards CJ, Newcombe RG, et al. Rectal carcinoma: thin-section MR imaging for staging in 28 patients. Radiology 1999;211:215–222. LinkGoogle Scholar
    • 16 Brown G, Kirkham A, Williams GT, et al. High-resolution MRI of the anatomy important in total mesorectal excision of the rectum. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2004;182:431–439. Crossref, MedlineGoogle Scholar
    • 17 Heald RJ, Moran BJ, Ryall RD, Sexton R, MacFarlane JK. Rectal cancer: the Basingstoke experience of total mesorectal excision, 1978–1997. Arch Surg 1998;133:894–899. Crossref, MedlineGoogle Scholar
    • 18 Maughan NJ, Quirke P. Modern management of colorectal cancer: a pathologist's view. Scand J Surg 2003;92:11–19. Crossref, MedlineGoogle Scholar
    • 19 Nagtegaal ID, van de Velde CJ, van der Worp E, Kapiteijn E, Quirke P, van Krieken JH. Macroscopic evaluation of rectal cancer resection specimen: clinical significance of the pathologist in quality control. J Clin Oncol 2002;20:1729–1734. Crossref, MedlineGoogle Scholar
    • 20 Fleiss J. Statistical methods for rates and proportions. 2nd ed. New York, NY: Wiley, 1981; 223–224. Google Scholar
    • 21 Habr-Gama A, Perez RO, Kiss DR, et al. Preoperative chemoradiation therapy for low rectal cancer: impact on downstaging and sphincter-saving operations. Hepatogastroenterology 2004;51:1703–1707. MedlineGoogle Scholar
    • 22 Habr-Gama A, Perez RO, Nadalin W, et al. Long-term results of preoperative chemoradiation for distal rectal cancer correlation between final stage and survival. J Gastrointest Surg 2005;9:90–101. Crossref, MedlineGoogle Scholar
    • 23 Dahlberg M, Glimelius B, Graf W, Pahlman L. Preoperative irradiation affects functional results after surgery for rectal cancer: results from a randomized study. Dis Colon Rectum 1998;41:543–549. Crossref, MedlineGoogle Scholar
    • 24 Blomqvist L, Holm T, Rubio C, Hindmarsh T. Rectal tumours: MR imaging with endorectal and/or phased-array coils, and histopathological staging on giant sections—a comparative study. Acta Radiol 1997;38:437–444. MedlineGoogle Scholar
    • 25 Blomqvist L, Rubio C, Holm T, Machado M, Hindmarsh T. Rectal adenocarcinoma: assessment of tumour involvement of the lateral resection margin by MRI of resected specimen. Br J Radiol 1999;72:18–23. Crossref, MedlineGoogle Scholar
    • 26 Sobin L, Wittekind C, eds. TNM classification of malignant tumors. New York, NY: Wiley, 1997. Google Scholar
    • 27 Hermanek P, Henson DE, Hutter RV, Sobin LH. UICC TNM supplement 1993: a commentary on uniform use. Berlin, Germany: Springer, 1993. Google Scholar
    • 28 Compton CC. Pathologic prognostic factors in the recurrence of rectal cancer. Clin Colorectal Cancer 2002;2:149–160. Crossref, MedlineGoogle Scholar
    • 29 Ueno H, Hase K, Mochizuki H. Criteria for extramural perineural invasion as a prognostic factor in rectal cancer. Br J Surg 2001;88:994–1000. Crossref, MedlineGoogle Scholar
    • 30 Compton CC, Fielding LP, Burgart LJ, et al. Prognostic factors in colorectal cancer: College of American Pathologists consensus statement 1999. Arch Pathol Lab Med 2000;124:979–994. Crossref, MedlineGoogle Scholar
    • 31 Bull AD, Biffin AH, Mella J, et al. Colorectal cancer pathology reporting: a regional audit. J Clin Pathol 1997;50:138–142. Crossref, MedlineGoogle Scholar
    • 32 Compton CC. Updated protocol for the examination of specimens from patients with carcinomas of the colon and rectum, excluding carcinoid tumors, lymphomas, sarcomas, and tumors of the vermiform appendix: a basis for checklists—cancer committee. Arch Pathol Lab Med 2000;124:1016–1025. Crossref, MedlineGoogle Scholar
    • 33 Tepper JE, O'Connell MJ, Niedzwiecki D, et al. Impact of number of nodes retrieved on outcome in patients with rectal cancer. J Clin Oncol 2001;19:157–163. Crossref, MedlineGoogle Scholar
    • 34 Brown G, Richards CJ, Bourne MW, et al. Morphologic predictors of lymph node status in rectal cancer with use of high-spatial-resolution MR imaging with histopathologic comparison. Radiology 2003;227:371–377. LinkGoogle Scholar
    • 35 Koh DM, Brown G, Temple L, et al. Rectal cancer: mesorectal lymph nodes at MR imaging with USPIO versus histopathologic findings—initial observations. Radiology 2004;231:91–99. LinkGoogle Scholar
    • 36 What is the government doing to improve outcomes for patients with bowel cancer? Colorectal Dis 2004;6:521–524. Crossref, MedlineGoogle Scholar

    Article History

    Published in print: 2007