{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.027628032345013476, 'fraction_numerical': 0.011455525606469003, 'mean_word_length': 5.1875, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 1, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 1, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
[The experience of diagnostic and therapeutic integration in rectal cancer. Preliminary notes].

In our University, many different radiosurgical options are available to treat rectal carcinoma. Selecting the patients to submit to treatment requires accurate clinical and radiological staging. A team of radiologists, radiotherapists, surgeons, endoscopists and pathologists has been created to stage the patients and to follow the final results. The team have decided the diagnostic and therapeutic protocols. The patients with rectal cancer undergo radiotherapy after staging and are subsequently restaged. If indicated, surgery is performed and histology is compared with restaging, to assess the accuracy of the diagnostic procedures. All diagnostic and therapeutic decisions are made collectively by the team, during scheduled meetings. All data are stored in a computer program. This paper deals with the working method we used, its advantages and the outcome of the first 23 studied patients. Restaging was compared with histology: transrectal US (performed in 8 patients) showed 100% accuracy in evaluating local tumor spread (T). CT had 91% accuracy in defining T and 60% accuracy in N, with a tendency to overstaging. In 78% of patients > 50% reduction of tumor size was observed and the distance from the anal canal increased in 95.5%. This study will provide the overall accuracy of the clinico-radiologic staging, the survival rates and the indication of prognostic signs.