We have located links that may give you full text access.
Comparative Study
Journal Article
Is neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy always necessary for mid/high local advanced rectal cancer: A comparative analysis after propensity score matching.
European Journal of Surgical Oncology 2017 August
AIM: This study was aimed to compare perioperative and oncological outcomes of mid/high locally advanced midrectal cancer (LARC) treated with neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy (NCRT) vs. surgery alone, and to identify risk factors for local recurrence in mid/high LARC.
METHOD: A total of 471 mid/high LARC patients treated with surgery alone or NCRT (50.4 Gy in 28 fractions) with concurrent FOLFOX/XELOX followed by TME in 6-8 weeks from 2008 to 2014 were matched 1:1 by using propensity score analysis. Perioperative and survival outcome was compared between groups. Multivariate analyze was performed to identify risk factors for local recurrence.
RESULTS: Two hundred and two patients were matched for the analysis. Postoperative morbidity was similar between groups. With a mean follow-up of 57 months, the 5-year overall survival (NCRT vs. surgery alone: 80.4% vs. 81.4%; p = 0.978), 5-year local recurrence rates (3.1% vs. 5%; p = 0.467), and 5-year distant metastasis rates (29.5% vs. 23.7%; p = 0.140) were similar between two groups. Cox regression analysis showed that the circumferential resection margin (CRM) involvement (OR = 5.205, p = 0.005) was the only risk factor for local recurrence in mid/high LARC patients.
CONCLUSION: In matched cohorts of mid/high LARC patients, surgery alone provided comparable oncological outcome, when compared with NCRT. CRM involvement was the only risk factor for local recurrence in mid/high rectal cancer. NCRT may not be always needed in mid/high LARC. A threatened CRM could be diagnosed up front and prevented by selecting CRT for these patients.
METHOD: A total of 471 mid/high LARC patients treated with surgery alone or NCRT (50.4 Gy in 28 fractions) with concurrent FOLFOX/XELOX followed by TME in 6-8 weeks from 2008 to 2014 were matched 1:1 by using propensity score analysis. Perioperative and survival outcome was compared between groups. Multivariate analyze was performed to identify risk factors for local recurrence.
RESULTS: Two hundred and two patients were matched for the analysis. Postoperative morbidity was similar between groups. With a mean follow-up of 57 months, the 5-year overall survival (NCRT vs. surgery alone: 80.4% vs. 81.4%; p = 0.978), 5-year local recurrence rates (3.1% vs. 5%; p = 0.467), and 5-year distant metastasis rates (29.5% vs. 23.7%; p = 0.140) were similar between two groups. Cox regression analysis showed that the circumferential resection margin (CRM) involvement (OR = 5.205, p = 0.005) was the only risk factor for local recurrence in mid/high LARC patients.
CONCLUSION: In matched cohorts of mid/high LARC patients, surgery alone provided comparable oncological outcome, when compared with NCRT. CRM involvement was the only risk factor for local recurrence in mid/high rectal cancer. NCRT may not be always needed in mid/high LARC. A threatened CRM could be diagnosed up front and prevented by selecting CRT for these patients.
Full text links
Related Resources
Trending Papers
Challenges in Septic Shock: From New Hemodynamics to Blood Purification Therapies.Journal of Personalized Medicine 2024 Februrary 4
Molecular Targets of Novel Therapeutics for Diabetic Kidney Disease: A New Era of Nephroprotection.International Journal of Molecular Sciences 2024 April 4
The 'Ten Commandments' for the 2023 European Society of Cardiology guidelines for the management of endocarditis.European Heart Journal 2024 April 18
A Guide to the Use of Vasopressors and Inotropes for Patients in Shock.Journal of Intensive Care Medicine 2024 April 14
Diagnosis and Management of Cardiac Sarcoidosis: A Scientific Statement From the American Heart Association.Circulation 2024 April 19
Essential thrombocythaemia: A contemporary approach with new drugs on the horizon.British Journal of Haematology 2024 April 9
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app
All material on this website is protected by copyright, Copyright © 1994-2024 by WebMD LLC.
This website also contains material copyrighted by 3rd parties.
By using this service, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy.
Your Privacy Choices
You can now claim free CME credits for this literature searchClaim now
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app