Dataset Information

Chemoradiotherapy alone vs. chemoradiotherapy and hysterectomy for locally advanced cervical cancer: A systematic review and updated meta-analysis.

ABSTRACT: The benefit of adjuvant hysterectomy after definitive concurrent chemoradiotherapy (CCRT) for locally-advanced cervical cancer (LACC) is controversial. The purpose of the present study was to systematically search the literature and perform a meta-analysis to compare overall survival (OS) and disease-free survival (DFS) between patients subjected to CCRT with hysterectomy and those who underwent CCRT alone. The PubMed, Scopus, Embase and Google scholar databases were searched. A meta-analysis to determine hazard ratios (HRs) and odds ratios (ORs) with meta-regression was performed for the following moderators: Disease stage, histology and proportion of radical hysterectomy. Data from 14 studies were included. The results indicated that patients who received CCRT with hysterectomy had significantly better OS (HR, 0.72; 95% CI, 0.56 to 0.91; I²=19%; P=0.007) and DFS (HR, 0.72; 95% CI, 0.56 to 0.93; I²=27%; P=0.01) than those treated with CCRT alone. However, in a subgroup analysis by study type, the results were significant only for retrospective studies but not for randomized controlled trials (RCTs). However, only 2 RCTs were included with small sample size, heterogeneity and low overall quality. Subgroup analyses based on the use of brachytherapy in the CCRT with hysterectomy group demonstrated no difference in OS and DFS between the two groups. Regarding the absolute numbers of death and recurrence events, no significant difference in mortality (OR, 0.91; 95% CI, 0.62 to 1.33; I²=0%; P=0.64) was determined between the two groups, but a significantly reduced incidence of recurrence was observed in the CCRT with hysterectomy group (OR, 0.61; 95% CI, 0.47-0.79; I²=29%; P=0.0002). The meta-regression results point to a significant influence of the proportion of stage II patients on OS. Despite the overall analysis indicating improved OS and DFS with the use of adjuvant hysterectomy after CCRT, subgroup analysis based on similar treatment protocols failed to demonstrate any significant benefit of hysterectomy in LACC. However, the results indicated that the recurrence rate may be higher in patients undergoing CCRT without hysterectomy. The limited quality of the studies included and selection bias from retrospective studies restrict the possibility to draw strong conclusions.

SUBMITTER: Lu W

PROVIDER: S-EPMC7798101 | biostudies-literature | 2021 Feb

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Chemoradiotherapy alone vs. chemoradiotherapy and hysterectomy for locally advanced cervical cancer: A systematic review and updated meta-analysis.

Lu Weijia W Lu Canxiong C Yu Zhiwu Z Gao Lei L

Oncology letters 20201231 2

The benefit of adjuvant hysterectomy after definitive concurrent chemoradiotherapy (CCRT) for locally-advanced cervical cancer (LACC) is controversial. The purpose of the present study was to systematically search the literature and perform a meta-analysis to compare overall survival (OS) and disease-free survival (DFS) between patients subjected to CCRT with hysterectomy and those who underwent CCRT alone. The PubMed, Scopus, Embase and Google scholar databases were searched. A meta-analysis to ...[more]

PMID: 33552278

Similar Datasets

Project description:This study is to compare the survival outcomes of laparoscopic radical hysterectomy (LRH) to those of abdominal radical hysterectomy (ARH) for patients with locally advanced cervical cancer (LACC). Patients with the International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics (FIGO) 2009 stage IB2 to IIB LACC who underwent radical hysterectomy between 2001 and 2015 were identified. The disease-free survival (DFS) and overall survival (OS) were compared according to the surgical approach and were adjusted based on clinicopathologic characteristics. A total of 396 patients were included in the study, with 179 (45.2%) and 217 (54.8%) patients in the ARH and LRH groups, respectively. The LRH group showed a significantly lower amount of estimated blood loss, lower blood transfusion rate and shorter length of hospital stay. Overall, there were no significant differences in the 5-year DFS and 5-year OS between the LRH and ARH groups with the Kaplan-Meier method. However, multivariate analyses identified LRH as an independent prognostic factor for a poor DFS (hazard ratio [HR] 2.5; 95% confidence interval [95% CI] 0.19 to 0.87; p = 0.02). The analysis of stage IB2 disease and the squamous subtype (61.9% and 87.9% of all participants, respectively) reached the same conclusion. When stratifying by FIGO stage, the patients with IB2 (n = 348) in the ARH group had a significantly better DFS (HR 0.14, 95% CI 0.05-0.42, p < 0.01) and OS (HR 0.17, 95% CI 0.04-0.67, p = 0.11) than those in the LRH group in the Cox regression model. However, no differences were found in patient with stage IIA1, IIA2, or IIB in Cox regression model. When stratifying by histological types, for the patients with squamous carcinomas (n = 375), in Cox model, ARH had a significantly superior DFS compared with those who underwent LRH (HR 0.45, 95% CI 0.25-0.82, p = 0.01), but the OS was not statistically significant (HR 0.57, 95% CI 0.27-1.20, p = 0.14). However, no differences were found in patient with adenocarcinoma and adenosquamous carcinomas in the Cox model. Therefore, ARH was associated with a higher DFS than LRH in patients with LACC, especially in patients with stage IB2 disease or the squamous subtype.

Project description:PurposeInduction chemotherapy plus concurrent chemoradiotherapy and concurrent chemoradiotherapy alone are both standard treatment regimens for managing locally advanced nasopharyngeal carcinoma. However, the results of comparisons between them in clinical trials vary. Therefore, we designed this meta-analysis to illustrate their advantages and disadvantages in patients with locally advanced nasopharyngeal carcinoma.MethodsWe thoroughly searched the PubMed, EMBASE, and Cochrane Library databases and then merged the effect indicators of hazard ratios and risk ratios using RevMan 5.1.ResultsSeven randomized controlled trials totaling 2,319 patients were included in our research. The synthesized results showed that induction chemotherapy plus concurrent chemoradiotherapy improved overall survival (HR = 0.75, 95% CI: 0.63-0.89, P = 0.001), progression-free survival (HR = 0.69, 95% CI: 0.60-0.80, P < 0.001), distant metastasis-free survival (HR = 0.65, 95% CI: 0.53-0.80, P < 0.001) and locoregional recurrence-free survival (HR = 0.68 95%, CI: 0.54-0.86, P = 0.001) versus concurrent chemoradiotherapy alone. It also increased the risk of anemia, thrombocytopenia, and neutropenia during concurrent chemoradiotherapy. However, the incidence of leukopenia and mucositis was similar in induction chemotherapy and induction chemotherapy plus concurrent chemoradiotherapy. Furthermore, the subgroup analysis showed better survival outcomes with induction chemotherapy plus concurrent chemoradiotherapy than with concurrent chemoradiotherapy alone in the triweekly cisplatin subgroup (all P < 0.01), whereas induction chemotherapy plus concurrent chemoradiotherapy could only improve progression-free survival and locoregional recurrence-free survival in the weekly cisplatin subgroup (HR = 0.78, P = 0.02; and HR = 0.66, P = 0.03, respectively).ConclusionsInduction chemotherapy plus concurrent chemoradiotherapy improved survival outcomes in patients with locally advanced nasopharyngeal carcinoma versus concurrent chemoradiotherapy. For the weekly cisplatin regimen subgroup, it did not improve remote control or overall survival versus concurrent chemoradiotherapy alone, warranting further clarification.

Dataset Information

Chemoradiotherapy alone vs. chemoradiotherapy and hysterectomy for locally advanced cervical cancer: A systematic review and updated meta-analysis.

Publications

Chemoradiotherapy alone vs. chemoradiotherapy and hysterectomy for locally advanced cervical cancer: A systematic review and updated meta-analysis.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets