| 1. |
|
|
| 2. |
|
|
| 3. |
- Bujko, K., et al.
(author)
-
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
-
In: European Journal of Surgical Oncology. - : Elsevier BV. - 0748-7983 .- 1532-2157. ; 41:6, s. 713-723
-
Journal article (peer-reviewed)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.
|
|
| 4. |
|
|
| 5. |
- van Gijn, W., et al.
(author)
-
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
-
In: Annals of Oncology. - : Elsevier BV. - 0923-7534 .- 1569-8041. ; 26:5, s. 928-935
-
Journal article (peer-reviewed)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.
|
|
