Skip to main content
. 2017 Mar 7;12:48. doi: 10.1186/s13014-017-0790-3

Table 3.

Pathological results and tumor response to neoadjuvant treatment (N = 34)b

No. (%)
ypT
 0 9 (26.4)
 1 0 (0)
 2 5 (14.7)
 3 17 (50.0)
 4 3 (8.9)
ypN
 0 28 (82.4)
 1 5 (14.7)
 2 1 (2.9)
Median number of resected nodesa 11 (3–26)
Median number of involved nodesa 0 (0–6)
Lymph node with extranodal involvement 4 (11.7)
Lymphovascular invasion
 Yes 5 (14.7)
 No 29 (85.3)
Perineural invasion
 Yes 2 (5.9)
 No 32 (94.1)
Tumor differentiation
 Well 2 (5.9)
 Moderately 28 (82.4)
 Poorly 4 (11.7)
Resection margin (CRM)
 Negative 31 (91.2)
 Positive 3 (8.8)
Pathologic complete response
 Yes 9 (26.4)
 No 25 (73.6)
Tumor regression grade
 0 9 (26.4)
 1 11 (32.4)
 2 7 (20.6)
 3 7 (20.6)
ypT0-2 vs. ypT3-4
 ypT0-2 14 (41.2)
 ypT3-4 20 (58.8)
Pathologic T stage
 Downstaging 24 (70.6)
 Stable 10 (29.4)
 Progressive 0 (0)
Pathologic N stage
 Downstaging 31 (91.2)
 Stable 3 (8.8)
 Progressive 0 (0)
Pathologic TN stage
 Downstaging 29 (85.3)
 Stable 5 (14.7)
 Progressive 0 (0)

aMedian (range)

bTwo patients (T4bN2M0 and T4aN2M0) did not receive surgical resection due to unresectable tumor despite chemoradiotherapy

ypT postoperative pathologic tumor stage, ypN postoperative pathologic nodal stage, CRM circuferential resection margin