Table 11.
Ref. | Year | TRG scale used (histological stage based upon) | Scales accurate? | Good response definition | Total (n) | Good responders (n) | Average F/up in months | LR (%) 5 yr | DR (%) 5 yr | DFS (%) | OS (%) |
Shihab et al[52] | 2011 | MRI TRG (based on Mandard) | Yes | TRG 1,2,3 | 37 | 20 | 1 | 3 | |||
Patel et al[6] | 2012 | MRI TRG (based on Dworak) | Yes | TRG 1,2,3 | 69 | 47 | |||||
Patel et al[5] and Patel et al[7] | 2011 and 2012 | MRI TRG (based on Dworak) | Yes | TRG 1,2,3 | 66 | 32 | 60 | 14 | Yr. 5: 64 | Yr. 5: 72 | |
Yu[53] | 2014 (unpublished data from our centre) | MRI TRG (based on Mandard and Dworak) | Yes | TRG 1,2 | 152 | 61 | DFS, Yr. 5: 83% | DFS, Yr. 5: 90% |
LR: Local recurrence; DR: Distant recurrence; DFS: Disease- free survival; OS: Overall survival; TRG: Tumour regression grade.