CMCristina Graham Martinez

Cristina Graham Martinez

*This is an algorithmically generated author record based on publicly available information.

Current Organizations / Institutes

The organizations/institutes from the scholar's latest article


Cristina Graham Martinez has a total of 42 co-authors. Here are the top co-authors by number of shared publications:


Latest Publications

  • Open Access

    Relevance of shrinkage versus fragmented response patterns in rectal cancer

    by Sonay Kus Ozturk, Cristina Graham Martinez, Kieran Sheahan, Desmond C Winter, Susan Aherne, Éanna J Ryan, Cornelis Jh van de Velde, Corrie Am Marijnen, Geke AP Hospers, Annet Gh Roodvoets, et al.

    Aims: Partial response to neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy (CRT) presents with one of two main response patterns: shrinkage or fragmentation. This study investigated the relevance of these response patterns in rectal cancer, correlation with other response indicators, and outcome.Methods and results: The study included a test (n = 197) and a validation cohort (n = 218) of post‐CRT patients with rectal adenocarcinoma not otherwise specified and a partial response. Response patterns were scored by two independent observers using a previously developed three‐step flowchart. Tumour regression grading (TRG) was established according to both the College of American Pathologists (CAP) and Dworak classifications. In both cohorts, the predominant response pattern was fragmentation (70% and 74%), and the scoring interobserver agreement was excellent (k = 0.85). Patients with a fragmented pattern presented with significantly higher pathological stage (ypTNM II‐IV, 78% versus 35%; P < 0.001), less tumour regression with Dworak (P = 0.004), and CAP TRG (P = 0.005) compared to patients with a shrinkage pattern. As a predictor of prognosis, the shrinkage pattern outperformed the TRG classification and stratified patients better in overall (fragmented pattern, hazard ratio [HR] 2.04, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.19–3.50, P = 0.008) and disease‐free survival (DFS; fragmented pattern, HR 2.50, 95% CI 1.23–5.10, P = 0.011) in the combined cohorts. The multivariable regression analyses revealed pathological stage as the only independent predictor of DFS.Conclusions: The heterogeneous nature of tumour response following CRT is reflected in fragmentation and shrinkage. In rectal cancer there is a predominance of the fragmented pattern, which is associated with advanced stage and less tumour regression. While not independently associated with survival, these reproducible patterns give insights into the biology of tumour response.


  • Open Access

    The immune microenvironment landscape shows treatment-specific differences in rectal cancer patients

    by Cristina Graham Martínez, Yari Barella, Sonay Kus Öztürk, Marleen Ansems, Mark A.J Gorris, Shannon van Vliet, Corrie A.M Marijnen, Iris D Nagtegaal

    Neoadjuvant therapy is the cornerstone of modern rectal cancer treatment. Insights into the biology of tumor responses are essential for the successful implementation of organ-preserving strategies, as different treatments may lead to specific tumor responses. In this study, we aim to explore treatment-specific responses of the tumor microenvironment. Patients with locally advanced adenocarcinoma of the rectum who had received neo-adjuvant chemotherapy (CT), neo-adjuvant radiochemotherapy (RCT), neo-adjuvant radiotherapy with a long-interval (LRT) or short-interval (SRT) or no neoadjuvant therapy (NT) as control were included. Multiplex-immunofluorescence was performed to determine the presence of cytotoxic T-cells (T-cyt; CD3+CD8+), regulatory T-cells (T-reg; CD3+FOXP3+), T-helper cells (T-helper; CD3+CD8-FOXP3-), B cells (CD20+), dendritic cells (CD11c+) and tumor cells (panCK+). A total of 80 rectal cancer patients were included. Treatment groups were matched for gender, tumor location, response to therapy, and TNM stage. The pattern of response (shrinkage vs. fragmentation) was, however, different between treatment groups. Our analyses reveal that RCT-treated patients exhibited lower stromal T-helper, T-reg, and T-cyt cells compared to other treatment regimens. In conclusion, we demonstrated treatment-specific differences in the immune microenvironment landscape of rectal cancer patients. Understanding the underlying mechanisms of this landscape after a specific therapy will benefit future treatment decisions.


  • Open Access

    Microsatellite instability in rectal cancer: what does it mean? A study of two randomized trials and a systematic review of the literature

    by Marloes Swets, Cristina Graham Martinez, Shannon van Vliet, Arjan van Tilburg, Hans Gelderblom, Corrie A M Marijnen, Cornelis J H van de Velde, Iris D Nagtegaal

    Aim: Currently, compelling evidence illustrates the significance of determining microsatellite instability (MSI) in colorectal cancer (CRC). The association of MSI with proximal CRC is well established, however, its implications in patients with rectal cancer remain undefined. We therefore aimed to determine the role of MSI with respect to incidence and outcome in patients with rectal cancer.Methods and Results: For this we examined patients from two prospective phase III trials: TME trial and PROCTOR‐SCRIPT trial (n = 1250). In addition, we performed a literature review to evaluate the overall prevalence, the effect on survival and the response to neo‐adjuvant treatment in patients with MSI rectal cancer compared with microsatellite stable (MSS) rectal cancer. Our TME and PROCTOR‐SCRIPT cohort showed no differences in terms of overall survival (OS) (hazard ratio [HR] 1.00, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.69–1.47) and disease‐free survival (DFS) (HR 1.00, 95% CI 0.68–1.45) in patients with MSI compared to MSS rectal cancer. The total number of MSI cases in all included studies (including our own) was 1220 (out of 16,526 rectal cancer patients), with an overall prevalence of 6.7% (standard error 1.19%). Both for OS as for DFS there was no impact of MSI status on prognosis (HR 1.00, 95% CI 0.77–1.29 and HR 0.86, 95% CI 0.60–1.22, respectively). The risk ratio (RR) for downstaging and pathological complete response showed also no impact of MSI status (RR 1.15, 95% CI 0.86–1.55 and RR 0.81, 95% CI 0.54–1.22, respectively).Conclusion: Rectal cancer patients with MSI form a distinct and rare subcategory, however, there is no prognostic effect of MSI in rectal cancer patients.


  • Open Access

    Shrinkage versus fragmentation response in neoadjuvantly treated oesophageal adenocarcinoma: significant prognostic relevance

    by Cristina Graham Martinez, Sonay Kus Öztürk, Ali Al‐Kaabi, Maria J Valkema, John‐Melle Bokhorst, Camiel Rosman, Heidi Rütten, Carla A P Wauters, Michail Doukas, Joseph Jan‐Baptist van Lanschot, et al.

    Aims: No consensus exists on the clinical value of tumour regression grading (TRG) systems for therapy effects of neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy (nCRT) in oesophageal adenocarcinoma. Existing TRG systems lack standardization and reproducibility, and do not consider the morphological heterogeneity of tumour response. Therefore, we aim to identify morphological tumour regression patterns of oesophageal adenocarcinoma after nCRT and their association with survival.Methods and results: Patients with oesophageal adenocarcinoma, who underwent nCRT followed by surgery and achieved a partial response to nCRT, were identified from two Dutch upper‐gastrointestinal (GI) centres (2005–18; test cohort). Resection specimens were scored for regression patterns by two independent observers according to a pre‐defined three‐step flowchart. The results were validated in an external cohort (2001–17). In total, 110 patients were included in the test cohort and 115 in the validation cohort. In the test cohort, two major regression patterns were identified: fragmentation (60%) and shrinkage (40%), with an excellent interobserver agreement (κ = 0.87). Here, patients with a fragmented pattern had a significantly higher pathological stage (stages III/IV: 52 versus 16%; P < 0.001), less downstaging (48 versus 91%; P < 0.001), a higher risk of recurrence [risk ratio (RR) = 2.9, 95% confidence interval (CI) = 1.5–5.6] and poorer 5‐year overall survival (30 versus 80% respectively, P = 0.001).Conclusions: The validation cohort confirmed these findings, although had more advanced cases (case‐stages = III/IV 91 versus 73%, P = 0.005) and a higher prevalence of fragmented‐pattern cases (80 versus 60%, P = 0.002). When combining the cohorts in multivariate analysis, the pattern of response was an independent prognostic factor [hazard ratio (HR) = 1.76, 95% CI = 1.0–3.0]. In conclusion, we established an externally validated, reproducible and clinically relevant classification of tumour response.


  • Open Access

    Tumour deposits are a significant prognostic factor in gastric cancer – a systematic review and meta‐analysis

    by Cristina Graham Martínez, Nikki Knijn, Marcel Verheij, Iris D. Nagtegaal, Rachel S. van der Post

    Aims: Tumour deposits (TDs) are clusters of cancer cells in the soft tissue that are discontinuous from the primary tumour. In this review we are exploring their relevance for prognosis in patients with gastric cancer.Methods and results: A literature search was performed to identify studies providing data on TDs and prognosis in gastric cancer patients. Eight papers were included in the meta‐analysis, which was carried out in terms of risk ratios (RR) and hazard ratios (HR) with 95% confidence interval (95% CI). Of 7445 patients, 1551 had TDs (20.9%). TDs were associated with a decreased overall survival (OS) in univariate (HR = 2.82, 95% CI = 1.9–4.3) and multivariate analyses (HR = 1.65, 95% CI = 1.3–2.1). TDs were also associated with known prognostic factors such as synchronous metastatic disease (RR = 9.5), invasion depth (RR = 1.8), lymph node metastasis (RR = 1.7), lymphatic invasion (RR = 1.7), vascular invasion (RR = 2.6) and poor differentiation (RR = 1.2).Conclusions: We found a strong indication that TDs are independent predictors of prognosis in patients with gastric cancer; hence, TDs should be included in the staging of gastric cancers.