Dataset Information

Comparative Effectiveness of Neoadjuvant Chemoradiation Versus Upfront Surgery in the Management of Recto-Sigmoid Junction Cancer.

ABSTRACT: INTRODUCTION:The optimal management of locally advanced recto-sigmoid cancer is unclear. Although some experts advocate for upfront surgery, others recommend neoadjuvant chemoradiation followed by surgery. We used the National Cancer Database to characterize patterns-of-care and overall survival (OS) associated with these treatment strategies. PATIENTS AND METHODS:Patients with clinical stage II or III recto-sigmoid cancer who underwent surgery with or without adjunctive chemotherapy and/or radiotherapy from 2006 to 2014 were identified, and dichotomized into: (1) upfront surgery, and (2) neoadjuvant chemoradiation cohorts. Patterns-of-care were assessed using multivariable logistic regression. The association between neoadjuvant chemoradiation use and OS was assessed using Cox proportional hazards analysis with propensity score-matching. RESULTS:Of 9313 identified patients, 6756 (73%) underwent upfront surgery and 2557 (27%) received neoadjuvant chemoradiation. Treatment at academic facilities and higher clinical T stage were predictors of neoadjuvant chemoradiation use. Compared with upfront surgery, neoadjuvant chemoradiation resulted in fewer positive circumferential resection margins (384 [11%] patients vs. 108 [8%] patients; P = .001), and 478 [18.7%] patients achieved a pathologic complete response at surgery. In propensity score-matched analysis, neoadjuvant chemoradiation use was associated with improved OS (hazard ratio, 0.79; 95% confidence interval, 0.69-0.90) compared with upfront surgery; 5-year estimated OS was 77.0% versus 72.0%, respectively. The improvement in OS persisted in landmark analysis of patients who survived at least 12 months. CONCLUSION:Only a small percentage of patients with locally advanced recto-sigmoid cancer receive neoadjuvant chemoradiation even though its use might result in improved OS relative to upfront surgery. Prospective research is warranted to validate and standardize therapeutic strategies in patients with recto-sigmoid cancer.

SUBMITTER: Venigalla S

PROVIDER: S-EPMC6534143 | biostudies-literature | 2018 Sep

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Comparative Effectiveness of Neoadjuvant Chemoradiation Versus Upfront Surgery in the Management of Recto-Sigmoid Junction Cancer.

Venigalla Sriram S Chowdhry Amit K AK Wojcieszynski Andrzej P AP Lukens John Nicholas JN Plastaras John P JP Metz James M JM Ben-Josef Edgar E Mahmoud Najjia N NN Reiss Kim A KA Shabason Jacob E JE

Clinical colorectal cancer 20180517 3

<h4>Introduction</h4>The optimal management of locally advanced recto-sigmoid cancer is unclear. Although some experts advocate for upfront surgery, others recommend neoadjuvant chemoradiation followed by surgery. We used the National Cancer Database to characterize patterns-of-care and overall survival (OS) associated with these treatment strategies.<h4>Patients and methods</h4>Patients with clinical stage II or III recto-sigmoid cancer who underwent surgery with or without adjunctive chemother ...[more]

PMID: 29910004

Similar Datasets

Project description:BACKGROUND:Two randomized phase III trials (EORTC55971 and CHORUS) showed similar progression-free and overall survival in primary or interval debulking surgery in ovarian cancer, however both studies had limitations with lower rate of complete resection and lack of surgical qualifications for participating centers. There is no consensus on whether neoadjuvant chemotherapy followed by interval debulking surgery (NACT-IDS) could be a preferred approach in the management of advanced epithelial ovarian cancer (EOC) in the clinical practice. METHODS:The Asian SUNNY study is an open-label, multicenter, randomized controlled, phase III trial to compare the effect of primary debulking surgery (PDS) to NACT-IDS in stages IIIC and IV EOC, fallopian tube cancer (FTC) or primary peritoneal carcinoma (PPC). The hypothesis is that PDS enhances the survivorship when compared with NACT-IDS in advanced ovarian cancer. The primary objective is to clarify the role of PDS and NACT-IDS in the treatment of advanced ovarian cancer. Surgical quality assures include at least 50% of no gross residual (NGR) in PDS group in all centers and participating centers should be national cancer centers or designed ovarian cancer section or those with the experience participating surgical trials of ovarian cancer. Any participating center should be monitored evaluating the proportions of NGR by a training set. The aim of the surgery in both arms is maximal cytoreduction. Tumor burden of the disease is evaluated by diagnostic laparoscopy or positron emission tomography/computed tomography scan. Patients assigned to PDS group will undergo upfront maximal cytoreductive surgery within 3 weeks after biopsy, followed by 6 cycles of standard adjuvant chemotherapy. Patients assigned to NACT group will undergo 3 cycles of NACT-IDS, and subsequently 3 cycles of adjuvant chemotherapy. The maximal time interval between IDS and the initiation of adjuvant chemotherapy is 8 weeks. Major inclusion criteria are pathologic confirmed stage IIIC and IV EOC, FTC or PPC; ECOG performance status of 0 to 2; ASA score of 1 to 2. Major exclusion criteria are non-epithelial tumors as well as borderline tumors; low-grade carcinoma; mucinous ovarian cancer. The sample size is 456 subjects. Primary endpoint is overall survival. TRIAL REGISTRATION:ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02859038.

Project description:BACKGROUND:A previous systematic review found that giving neoadjuvant chemotherapy before surgery improved survival compared with radiotherapy. However, the role of neoadjuvant chemotherapy followed by surgery versus surgery alone is still unclear. OBJECTIVES:To assess the role of neoadjuvant chemotherapy in women with early or locally-advanced cervical cancer. SEARCH METHODS:We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL, The Cochrane Library) (to Issue 8, 2012), MEDLINE (OVID) (to Aug 2012), LILACS (to Aug 2012), Physician's Data Query (PDQ) (to Aug 2012). We sought both published and unpublished trials and undertook systematic searches of a number of trial sources with no restrictions. SELECTION CRITERIA:Randomised trials comparing neoadjuvant chemotherapy with surgery in women with early or locally-advanced cervical cancer who had not undergone any prior treatment likely to interfere with the treatment comparison. Trials giving radical radiotherapy for inoperable tumours and/or post-operative radiotherapy were also eligible. The primary outcome was overall survival (OS). Secondary outcomes were progression-free survival (PFS), local and distant recurrence, rates of resection and surgical morbidity. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS:Two authors independently extracted and checked data from trial reports, Depending on the type of outcome, trial hazard ratios (HRs) and odds ratios (ORs) were obtained or estimated from trial reports, or sought from trial investigators. MAIN RESULTS:Six trials (1078 women) were identified for inclusion in this updated review. All six trials provided data on OS (1071 women) and PFS (1027 women). Data on resection rates and pathological response were only available for five trials (908 to 940 women) and data on recurrence were only available for four trials (737 women). Both OS (HR 0.77, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.62 to 0.96, P = 0.02) and PFS (HR 0.75, 95% CI 0.61 to 0.93, P = 0.008) were significantly improved with neoadjuvant chemotherapy. The estimate for local recurrence was in favour of neoadjuvant chemotherapy (OR 0.67, 95% CI 0.45 to 0.99, P = 0.04), although heterogeneity was observed. The result was no longer significant when the random-effects model was used (OR 0.60, 95% CI 0.32 to 1.12, P = 0.11). Whilst not significant, estimates for distant recurrence (OR 0.72, 95% CI 0.45 to 1.14, P = 0.16) and rates of resection (OR 1.55, 95% CI 0.96 to 2.50, P = 0.07) tended to favour neoadjuvant chemotherapy, although heterogeneity was observed. Exploratory analyses of pathological response showed a significant decrease in adverse pathological findings with neoadjuvant chemotherapy (OR 0.54, 95% CI 0.40 to 0.73, P = < 0.0001 for lymph node status; OR 0.58, 95% CI 0.41 to 0.82, P = 0.002 for parametrial infiltration) which, despite substantial heterogeneity, was still significant when the random-effects model was used. There were also no differences in the effect of neoadjuvant chemotherapy on survival according to total cisplatin dose, chemotherapy cycle length or by cervical cancer stage. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS:Both OS and PFS were improved with neoadjuvant chemotherapy. Although the effects were less clear on all other pre-specified outcomes, they all tended to be in favour of neoadjuvant chemotherapy. Whilst these results appear to indicate that neoadjuvant chemotherapy may offer a benefit over surgery alone for women with early-stage or locally-advanced cervical cancer, the evidence is based on only a small number of trials, and further research may be warranted.

Dataset Information

Comparative Effectiveness of Neoadjuvant Chemoradiation Versus Upfront Surgery in the Management of Recto-Sigmoid Junction Cancer.

Publications

Comparative Effectiveness of Neoadjuvant Chemoradiation Versus Upfront Surgery in the Management of Recto-Sigmoid Junction Cancer.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets