Dataset Information

Oncologic outcomes of patients with resectable primary gastric squamous cell carcinoma: a systematic review.

ABSTRACT:

Background

Primary gastric squamous cell carcinoma (PGSCC) is an uncommon type of gastric malignancy estimated to comprise around 0.04-0.5% of all gastric malignancies. PGSCC's long-term survival has been quoted to range from 17-50% depending on stage, with surgery arguably representing the most useful modality for prolonging oncologic survival. Nevertheless, reliable data on its effectiveness are still lacking in the literature.

Method

A systematic literature search of the Medline, Cochrane library and Scopus databases was undertaken, to identify cases of surgically managed PGSCC reporting patient-related outcomes.

Results

In total, 23 case reports and 1 case series incorporating 38 patients were identified. Mean patient age was 61.2 years and the male/female ratio was 18:1. Most tumors were high-stage at the time of diagnosis, with the T4 stage predominating in the patient pool (n=15, 50%) along with a high percentage of lymphatic spread (N positive tumors, n=15, 47%). All patients underwent curative-intent surgical resection and were subsequently followed for an average of 30.7±14 months. Extrapolated survival data revealed a projected 3- and 5-year overall survival of 62.2% and 51.9%, respectively, while the 3-year probability for being disease-free was calculated to be 30.8%. T4 stage and lymphatic spread were found to be predictors of poor survival in univariate but not in multivariate analysis.

Conclusion

Notwithstanding the methodological limitations inherent to the present review, the obtained results, when superimposed on existing cross-sectional survival data, suggest significantly enhanced patient survival following surgery, solidifying its role in the management of patients with PGSCC.

SUBMITTER: Schizas D

PROVIDER: S-EPMC9210788 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundThere is uncertainty in the treatment options for resectable hypopharyngeal squamous cell carcinoma.MethodsA systematic review of randomised controlled trials (RCTs) was performed. Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) (The Cochrane Library), MEDLINE, EMBASE, Science Citation Index, and Conference Proceedings databases and trial registries were searched until November 2020 for randomized controlled trials performed on resectable hypopharyngeal squamous cell carcinoma. Two systematic review authors independently identified studies and extracted data. The primary outcomes evaluated were overall survival, disease-free survival, any recurrence, local recurrence, loco-regional recurrence, distal recurrence and laryngectomy-free survival. The secondary outcomes were response rates following neoadjuvant treatment and comparison of treatment-related toxicity. Assessment of risk of bias was performed for the selected studies using Cochrane's tool for assessing risk of bias. The studies were evaluated for the quality of evidence using GRADE (Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluations). Risk ratios (RR), rate ratios, and hazard ratios (HR) were calculated along with 95% confidence intervals (95% CI). The Meta-analysis was performed using a random-effects model.ResultsFive RCTs met the inclusion criteria for this review. The risk of bias was unclear or high for the trials. Non-organ preservation(n = 140) versus organ preservation (n = 144) (two trials): no statistically significant difference could be identified for any of the primary outcomes. Concurrent chemoradiotherapy (n = 37) versus sequential chemotherapy followed by radiotherapy (n = 34) (one trial): no statistically significant difference was noted between the two treatment arms for overall survival, disease-free survival and loco-regional recurrence. Laryngectomy-free survival was found to be superior in concurrent chemoradiotherapy arm (HR:0.28, 95% CI 0.13, 0.57). Induction chemotherapy followed by concurrent chemoradiotherapy (n = 53) versus induction chemotherapy followed by radiotherapy (n = 60) (one trial): no statistically significant difference was noted between the treatment arms for overall survival, disease-free survival and laryngectomy-free survival. Preoperative radiotherapy (n = 24) versus postoperative radiotherapy (n = 23) (one trial): overall survival was found to be better in the postoperative radiotherapy arm (HR:2.44, 95% CI1.18, 5.03). No statistically significant difference was noted in terms of treatment-related toxicity.ConclusionsThere are considerable uncertainties in the management of resectable hypopharyngeal cancer.Trail registrationPROSPERO registration: CRD42019155613.

Project description:BackgroundWe performed a meta-analysis to investigate the efficacy of complete omentectomy (CO) in patients undergoing radical gastrectomy for gastric cancer.MethodsWe conducted a literature search in PubMed, Web of Science, and the Cochrane Library databases for clinical research that compared CO with non-complete omentectomy (NCO). These articles were published prior to April 2021. Overall survival (OS) rates, relapse-free survival (RFS) rates, recurrence rates, operation times, estimates of blood loss, numbers of harvested lymph nodes, complications, and lengths of hospital stays were compared using relative risks (RRs) and weighted mean differences (WMDs). RevMan 5.3 software was used for statistical analysis.ResultsNine studies that included 3329 patients (1960 in the CO group) and 1369 in the NCO group comprised the analysis. The meta-analysis showed that CO was associated with a decreased 3-year OS rate (RR = 0.94, 95% CI 0.90-0.98, P = 0.005) and 5-year OS rate (RR = 0.93, 95% CI 0.88-0.98, P = 0.007). However, it was not associated with the 3-year RFS rate (RR = 0.97, 95% CI 0.90-1.04, P = 0.44), 5-year RFS (RR = 0.98, 95% CI 0.90-1.06, P = 0.60), or recurrence rate (RR = 1.17, 95% CI 0.95-1.45, P = 0.15) compared to the NCO group. For surgical-related outcomes, significant heterogeneity existed between the studies. Compared to the NCO group, CO was found to be associated with significantly more estimated blood loss (WMD = 250.90, 95% CI 105.90-396.28, P = 0.0007) and less harvested lymph nodes (WMD = - 3.59, 95% CI - 6.88, - 0.29, P = 0.03). Although, there was no significant difference in the surgical time (WMD = 15.93, 95% CI - 0.21, 32.07, P = 0.05). No statistically significant differences were observed in the rates of overall (P = 0.79) and major complications (P = 0.90), or the lengths of hospital stays (P = 0.11) between the two groups.ConclusionsBased on the available evidence, CO is not superior to NCO in terms of survival. CO is not recommended as a routine surgery for gastric cancer. Future well-designed high-quality RCTs are warranted.

Project description:BackgroundA large variety of oral anticancer agents have become available and while at first glance these therapies appear to provide only benefits, patients have expressed their need for educational interventions and raised safety issues. Although both patients and providers have recognized patient education's importance, and an interplay with safety has been acknowledged, no systematic reviews of the literature that summarize all of the current evidence related to patient education's outcomes for patients who receive oral anticancer agents have been performed to date. Accordingly, this systematic review will attempt to fill the gap in the literature as well as to map (1) contents, (2) methodologies, (3) settings, (4) timing/duration, and (5) healthcare professionals involved.MethodsThis protocol is being reported in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines. A systematic review will be performed. Studies that targeted eligible adult patients (≥ 18 years old) in hospital, outpatient, and home settings, and reported patient education's outcomes for those taking oral anticancer agents will be included. Searches will be conducted in PubMed/MEDLINE, CINAHL, Embase, and Scopus, and gray literature will be also sought. Two researchers will screen the search results independently and blindly in two phases: (1) title/abstract screening and (2) full-text screening using the Rayyan AI platform. An electronic data extraction form will be implemented and piloted, and then, two trained data extractors will extract the data cooperatively. Thereafter, a quality appraisal will be conducted using the Critical Appraisal Tools from The Joanna Briggs Institute. The results will be analyzed, grouped, clustered into categories, and discussed until a consensus is reached. Emerging evidence will be synthesized narratively and reported in accordance with the synthesis without meta-analysis guidelines.DiscussionThe systematic review's results will be relevant to (1) policymakers and management at an institutional level, and (2) for clinical practice, in an evidence-based paradigm, potentially leading to a quality improvement with respect to safety and patient satisfaction.Systematic review registrationPROSPERO CRD42022341797.