http://repub.eur.nl/res/aut/8690/ List of Publications en http://repub.eur.nl/static-eur/img/logo.png http://repub.eur.nl http://repub.eur.nl/res/pub/32385/ 2008-10-21T00:00:00Z Aim: To analyze, retrospectively in a population-based study, the management and survival of patients with recurrent rectal cancer initially treated with a macroscopically radical resection obtained with total mesorectal excision (TME). Methods: All rectal carcinomas diagnosed during 1998 to 2000 and initially treated with a macroscopically radical resection (632 patients) were selected from the Amsterdam Cancer Registry. For patients with recurrent disease, information on treatment of the recurrence was collected from the medical records. Results: Local recurrence with or without clinically apparent distant dissemination occurred in 62 patients (10%). Thirty-two patients had an isolated local recurrence. Ten of these 32 patients (31%) underwent radical re-resection and experienced the highest survival (three quarters survived for at least 3 years). Eight patients (25%) underwent non-radical surgery (median survival 24 mo), seven patients (22%) were treated with radio- and/or chemotherapy without surgery (median survival 15 mo) and seven patients (22%) only received best supportive care (median survival 5 mo). Distant dissemination occurred in 124 patients (20%) of whom 30 patients also had a local recurrence. The majority (54%) of these patients were treated with radio- and/or chemotherapy without surgery (median survival 15 mo). Twenty-seven percent of these patients only received best supportive care (median survival 6 mo), while 16% underwent surgery for their recurrence. Survival was best in the latter group (median survival 32 mo). Conclusion: Although treatment options and survival are limited in case of recurrent rectal cancer after radical local resection obtained with TME, patients can benefit from additional treatment, especially if a radical resection is feasible. http://repub.eur.nl/res/pub/8450/ 2004-01-01T00:00:00Z BACKGROUND: The value of regular surveillance for breast cancer in women with a genetic or familial predisposition to breast cancer is currently unproven. We compared the efficacy of magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) with that of mammography for screening in this group of high-risk women. METHODS: Women who had a cumulative lifetime risk of breast cancer of 15 percent or more were screened every six months with a clinical breast examination and once a year by mammography and MRI, with independent readings. The characteristics of the cancers that were detected were compared with the characteristics of those in two different age-matched control groups. RESULTS: We screened 1909 eligible women, including 358 carriers of germ-line mutations. Within a median follow-up period of 2.9 years, 51 tumors (44 invasive cancers, 6 ductal carcinomas in situ, and 1 lymphoma) and 1 lobular carcinoma in situ were detected. The sensitivity of clinical breast examination, mammography, and MRI for detecting invasive breast cancer was 17.9 percent, 33.3 percent, and 79.5 percent, respectively, and the specificity was 98.1 percent, 95.0 percent, and 89.8 percent, respectively. The overall discriminating capacity of MRI was significantly better than that of mammography (P<0.05). The proportion of invasive tumors that were 10 mm or less in diameter was significantly greater in our surveillance group (43.2 percent) than in either control group (14.0 percent [P<0.001] and 12.5 percent [P=0.04], respectively). The combined incidence of positive axillary nodes and micrometastases in invasive cancers in our study was 21.4 percent, as compared with 52.4 percent (P<0.001) and 56.4 percent (P=0.001) in the two control groups. CONCLUSIONS: MRI appears to be more sensitive than mammography in detecting tumors in women with an inherited susceptibility to breast cancer.