Annals of Surgical Oncology

, Volume 14, Issue 2, pp 396–404 | Cite as

Carcinoid of the Rectum Risk Stratification (CaRRS): A Strategy for Preoperative Outcome Assessment

  • Bridget N. Fahy
  • Laura H. Tang
  • David Klimstra
  • W. Douglas Wong
  • Jose G. Guillem
  • Philip B. Paty
  • Larissa K. F. Temple
  • Jinru Shia
  • Martin R. Weiser
Article

Abstract

Background

Predicting rectal carcinoid behavior exclusively on the basis of tumor size is imprecise. We sought to identify factors associated with outcome and incorporate them into a preoperative risk stratification scheme.

Methods

Seventy patients with rectal carcinoid evaluated at our institution were identified. Demographic, clinical, and histopathologic data were collected and correlated with recurrence and survival.

Results

The mean age of our cohort was 53.6 years. Fifty-seven percent of patients were women. The mean tumor size was 1.3 cm (range, .1–5 cm). Twenty-five percent of patients had deeply invasive tumors (into the muscularis propria or deeper); an equal percentage had tumors with lymphovascular invasion (LVI) or an increased mitotic rate (two or more mitoses per 50 high-power fields). Eleven patients (17%) had distant metastases at presentation. Sixty-one patients were followed for a median of 22 months (range, 2–308 months), during which seven patients developed recurrence and seven died of disease (including two of seven whose disease recurred). Poor outcome was associated with large tumor size, deep invasion, presence of LVI, and increased mitotic rate. These factors were incorporated into a Carcinoid of the Rectum Risk Stratification (CaRRS) score. CaRRS predicted recurrence-free and disease-specific survival better than any single factor alone.

Conclusions

Poor prognostic features of rectal carcinoids include large size, deep invasion, LVI, and increased mitotic rate. The CaRRS score incorporates these features and accurately predicts outcome. Because the CaRRS score is based on values available by preoperative biopsy, it can identify patients with favorable prognosis and those with poor prognosis who may benefit from additional staging or surveillance.

Keywords

Carcinoid Rectum Outcome Risk assessment 

References

  1. 1.
    Rorstad O. Prognostic indicators for carcinoid neuroendocrine tumors of the gastrointestinal tract. J Surg Oncol 2005; 89:151–60PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Soga J. Carcinoids of the rectum: an evaluation of 1271 reported cases. Surg Today 1997; 27:112–9PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Mani S, Modlin IM, Ballantyne G, Ahlman H, West B. Carcinoids of the rectum. J Am Coll Surg 1994; 179:231–48PubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Schindl M, Niederle B, Hafner M, et al. Stage-dependent therapy of rectal carcinoid tumors. World J Surg 1998; 22:628–33;discussion 634PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Jetmore AB, Ray JE, Gathright JB Jr, McMullen KM, Hicks TC, Timmcke AE. Rectal carcinoids: the most frequent carcinoid tumor. Dis Colon Rectum 1992; 35:717–25PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Naunheim KS, Zeitelrs J, Kaplan EL, et al. Rectal carcinoid tumors—treatment and prognosis. Surgery 1983; 94:670–6PubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Federspiel BH, Burke AP, Sobin LH, Shekitka KM. Rectal and colonic carcinoids. A clinicopathologic study of 84 cases. Cancer 1990; 65:135–40PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Koura AN, Giacco GG, Curley SA, Skibber JM, Feig BW, Ellis LM. Carcinoid tumors of the rectum: effect of size, histopathology, and surgical treatment on metastasis free survival. Cancer 1997; 79:1294–8PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Soga J. Early-stage carcinoids of the gastrointestinal tract: an analysis of 1914 reported cases. Cancer 2005; 103:1587–95PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Shirouzu K, Isomoto H, Kakegawa T, Morimatsu M. Treatment of rectal carcinoid tumors. Am J Surg 1990; 160:262–5PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Hochwald SN, Zee S, Conlon KC, et al. Prognostic factors in pancreatic endocrine neoplasms: an analysis of 136 cases with a proposal for low-grade and intermediate-grade groups. J Clin Oncol 2002; 20:2633–42PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Travis WD, Rush W, Flieder DB, et al. Survival analysis of 200 pulmonary neuroendocrine tumors with clarification of criteria for atypical carcinoid and its separation from typical carcinoid. Am J Surg Pathol 1998; 22:934–44PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Heah SM, Eu KW, Ooi BS, Ho YH, Seow-Choen F. Tumor size is irrelevant in predicting malignant potential of carcinoid tumors of the rectum. Tech Coloproctol 2001; 5:73–7PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Nikou GC, Lygidakis NJ, Toubanakis C, et al. Current diagnosis and treatment of gastrointestinal carcinoids in a series of 101 patients: the significance of serum chromogranin-A, somatostatin receptor scintigraphy and somatostatin analogues. Hepatogastroenterology 2005; 52:731–41PubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Society of Surgical Oncology 2006

Authors and Affiliations

  • Bridget N. Fahy
    • 1
  • Laura H. Tang
    • 2
  • David Klimstra
    • 2
  • W. Douglas Wong
    • 1
  • Jose G. Guillem
    • 1
  • Philip B. Paty
    • 1
  • Larissa K. F. Temple
    • 1
  • Jinru Shia
    • 2
  • Martin R. Weiser
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Surgery, Division of Colorectal SurgeryMemorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer CenterNew YorkUSA
  2. 2.Department of PathologyMemorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer CenterNew YorkUSA

Personalised recommendations