| 1. |
|
|
| 2. |
|
|
| 3. |
|
|
| 4. |
|
|
| 5. |
- Bujko, K., et al.
(författare)
-
Postoperative chemotherapy in patients with rectal cancer receiving preoperative radio(chemo)therapy : A meta-analysis of randomized trials comparing surgery +/- a fluoropyrimidine and surgery plus a fluoropyrimidine +/- oxaliplatin
- 2015
-
Ingår i: European Journal of Surgical Oncology. - : Elsevier BV. - 0748-7983 .- 1532-2157. ; 41:6, s. 713-723
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Background: There is no consensus on the role of postoperative chemotherapy in patients with rectal cancer who have received preoperative radio(chemo)therapy. Materials and methods: A systematic review and meta-analysis were performed of trials that used preoperative radio(chemo)therapy and randomized patients either between postoperative chemotherapy and observation or between a fluoropyrimidine only (FU-only) and a fluoropyrimidine with oxaliplatin (FU-OXA) as postoperative chemotherapy. Results: Five randomized studies compared postoperative chemotherapy with observation in a total of 2398 patients. None of these trials demonstrated a statistically significant benefit of chemotherapy for OS and DFS. The pooled differences in OS and DFS did not differ statistically significantly between the chemotherapy group and the observation group. The hazard ratios (HRs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were 0.95 (CI: 0.82-1.10), P = 0.49 and 0.92 (CI: 0.80-1.04), P = 0.19, respectively. In the subgroup of trials in which randomization was performed after surgery (n = 753), a statistically significant positive pooled chemotherapy effect was observed for DFS (HR = 0.79, 95% CI: 0.62-1.00, P = 0.047), but not for OS (P = 0.39). Four randomized trials compared adjuvant FU OXA with adjuvant FU-only in 2710 patients. In two trials, the difference in DFS between groups was statistically significant in favour of FU OXA, and in the other two trials, the difference was not significant. The pooled difference in DFS between the FU OXA group and the FU-only group was not statistically significant: HR = 0.84 (CI: 0.66-1.06), P = 0.15. Conclusion: The use of postoperative chemotherapy in patients with rectal cancer receiving preoperative radio(chemo)therapy is not based on strong scientific evidence. (C) 2015 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
|
|
| 6. |
|
|
| 7. |
- den Dulk, M., et al.
(författare)
-
Multicentre analysis of oncological and survival outcomes following anastomotic leakage after rectal cancer surgery
- 2009
-
Ingår i: British Journal of Surgery. - : Oxford University Press (OUP). - 0007-1323 .- 1365-2168. ; 96:9, s. 1066-75
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- BACKGROUND: The association between diverting stomas and symptomatic anastomotic leakage after rectal cancer surgery was studied, as well as the impact of leakage on local recurrence, distant metastasis, and disease-free, overall and cancer-specific survival. METHODS: Data from the Swedish Rectal Cancer Trial, Dutch TME trial, CAO/ARO/AIO-94 trial, EORTC 22921 trial and Polish Rectal Cancer Trial were pooled (n = 5187). All eligible patients without distant metastases at the time of low anterior resection were selected (n = 2726); overall survival was studied in patients aged 75 years or less (n = 2480). Multivariable models were used to study the association between diverting stomas and anastomotic leakage, and between leakage and recurrence or survival. RESULTS: Some 9.7 per cent of patients were diagnosed with a symptomatic anastomotic leak; diverting stomas were negatively associated with leakage (11.6 per cent without and 7.8 per cent with a stoma; P = 0.002). Anastomotic leakage was negatively associated with overall survival in the multivariable analysis (hazard ratio (HR) 1.29 (95 per cent confidence interval 1.02 to 1.63); P = 0.034), but not with cancer-specific survival (HR 1.12 (0.83 to 1.52); P = 0.466). CONCLUSION: Diverting stomas were associated with less symptomatic anastomotic leakage. Oncological outcome was not significantly influenced by leakage, but overall survival was reduced.
|
|
| 8. |
- Påhlman, Lars, et al.
(författare)
-
Altering the therapeutic paradigm towards a distal bowel margin of < 1 cm in patients with low-lying rectal cancer : a systematic review and commentary
- 2013
-
Ingår i: Colorectal Disease. - : Wiley. - 1462-8910 .- 1463-1318. ; 15:4, s. E166-E174
-
Forskningsöversikt (refereegranskat)abstract
- Aim The 1-cm rule of distal bowel clearance in patients with low-lying rectal cancer undergoing anterior resection is based mainly on pathological data showing distal intramural spread. Because clinical data are contradictory, a review that includes only cancers located 5 or 6cm from the anal verge was carried out. Method A systematic review of the literature identified seven studies that presented results in relation to a margin of 1cm (n=293) vs >1cm (n=315). In six studies, pre- or postoperative radiotherapy was implemented, and in one study patients were treated with surgery alone. Three studies, all implementing radiotherapy, reported results related to a margin of 5mm (n=51) vs >5mm (n=125). Results In none of the studies were the differences in local recurrence rate between the small and large margin groups statistically significant. The pooled analysis of six studies, in which patients received perioperative radiotherapy, showed a 1.2% [95% confidence interval (Cl) 4.57.0%] higher local recurrence rate in the 1cm margin group compared with the >1cm margin group (P=0.6). The corresponding figures for the 5mm cut-off point were 0.5% (95% CI 7.68.7%, P=0.9). The 5-year local recurrence rate in the only study in which radiotherapy had not been used was 8.6% higher in the 1cm margin group compared with the >1cm margin group (P=0.09). Conclusion Clinical evidence does not support the 1-cm rule in patients with low-lying rectal cancer undergoing pre- or postoperative radiotherapy.
|
|
| 9. |
- Siegel, R., et al.
(författare)
-
Laparoscopic extraperitoneal rectal cancer surgery : the clinical practice guidelines of the European Association for Endoscopic Surgery (EAES)
- 2011
-
Ingår i: Surgical Endoscopy. - : Springer Science and Business Media LLC. - 0930-2794 .- 1432-2218. ; 25:8, s. 2423-2440
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- BACKGROUND: The laparoscopic approach is increasingly applied in colorectal surgery. Although laparoscopic surgery in colon cancer has been proved to be safe and feasible with equivalent long-term oncological outcome compared to open surgery, safety and long-term oncological outcome of laparoscopic surgery for rectal cancer remain controversial. Laparoscopic rectal cancer surgery might be efficacious, but indications and limitations are not clearly defined. Therefore, the European Association for Endoscopic Surgery (EAES) has developed this clinical practice guideline. METHODS: An international expert panel was invited to appraise the current literature and to develop evidence-based recommendations. The expert panel constituted for a consensus development conference in May 2010. Thereafter, the recommendations were presented at the annual congress of the EAES in Geneva in June 2010 in a plenary session. A second consensus process (Delphi process) of the recommendations with the explanatory text was necessary due to the changes after the consensus conference. RESULTS: Laparoscopic surgery for extraperitoneal (mid- and low-) rectal cancer is feasible and widely accepted. The laparoscopic approach must offer the same quality of surgical specimen as in open surgery. Short-term outcomes such as bowel function, surgical-site infections, pain and hospital stay are slightly improved with the laparoscopic approach. Laparoscopic resection of rectal cancer is not inferior to the open in terms of disease-free survival, overall survival or local recurrence. Laparoscopic pelvic dissection may impair genitourinary and sexual function after rectal resection, like in open surgery. CONCLUSIONS: Laparoscopic surgery for mid- and low-rectal cancer can be recommended under optimal conditions. Still, most level 1 evidence is for colon cancer surgery rather than rectal cancer. Upcoming results from large randomised trials are awaited to strengthen the evidence for improved short-term results and equal long-term results in comparison with the open approach.
|
|
| 10. |
- van Gijn, W., et al.
(författare)
-
Nomograms to predict survival and the risk for developing local or distant recurrence in patients with rectal cancer treated with optional short-term radiotherapy
- 2015
-
Ingår i: Annals of Oncology. - : Elsevier BV. - 0923-7534 .- 1569-8041. ; 26:5, s. 928-935
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Background: In many European countries, short-term 5 x 5 Gy radiotherapy has become the standard preoperative treatment of patients with resectable rectal cancer. Individualized risk assessment might allow a better selection of patients who will benefit from postoperative treatment and intensified follow-up. Patients and methods: From patient's data from three European rectal cancer trials (N = 2881), we developed multivariate cox nomograms reflecting the risk for local recurrence (LR), distant metastases (DM) and overall survival (OS). Evaluated variables were age, gender, tumour distance from the anal verge, the use of radiotherapy, surgical technique (total mesorectal excision/conventional surgery), surgery type (low anterior resection/abdominoperineal resection), time from randomization to surgery, residual disease (R0 versus R1 + 2), pT-stage, pN-stage and surgical complications. Results: Pathological T-and N-status are of vital importance for an accurate prediction of LR, DM and OS. Short-course radiotherapy reduces the rate of LR. The developed nomograms are capable of predicting events with a validation c-index of 0.79 (LR), 0.76 (DM) and 0.75 (OS). The proposed stratification in risk groups allowed significant distinction between Kaplan-Meier curves for outcome. Conclusion: The developed nomograms can contribute to better individual risk prediction for LR, DM and OS for patients operated on rectal cancer. The practicality of the defined risk groups makes decision support in the consulting room feasible, assisting physicians to select patients for adjuvant therapy or intensified follow-up.
|
|
