Short Course Radiation in the Treatment of Localized Rectal Cancer: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT:
SUBMITTER: Chen C
PROVIDER: S-EPMC4460726 | biostudies-other | 2015
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-other
Similar Datasets
Project description:Short-course preoperative radiotherapy (RT) is widely used in northern Europe for locally advanced resectable rectal cancer, but its role in the era of advanced imaging techniques is uncertain. Here, we reviewed articles and abstracts on SCRT published from 1974 through 2013 with the goal of identifying patients who might be best suited for short-course RT. We included relevant articles comparing surgery with or without preoperative radiation published before and after the advent of total mesorectal excision. We also analyzed two randomized trials directly comparing short-course RT with conventionally fractionated chemoradiation (the Polish Colorectal Study Group and the Trans-Tasman Radiation Oncology Group) that compared short-course RT with conventional chemoradiotherapy. We conclude from our review that short-course RT can be generally applied for operable rectal cancer and produces high rates of pelvic control with acceptable toxicity; it reduces local recurrence rates but does not increase overall survival. SCRT seems to be best used for tumors considered "low risk," i.e., those that are >5 cm from the anal margin, without circumferential margin involvement, and involvement of fewer than 4 lymph nodes. Whether sequential chemotherapy can further improve outcomes remains to be seen, as does the best time for surgery (immediately or 6-8 weeks after RT). We further recommend that selection of patients for short-course RT should be based on findings from magnetic resonance imaging or transrectal ultrasonography.
| S-EPMC4268599 | biostudies-literature
Project description:What is known and objectiveGram-negative bacteremia remains a major health problem around the world. The optimal duration of antibiotic treatment has been poorly defined, and there are significant differences of opinion between clinicians. We conducted this systematic review and meta-analysis to compare the clinical outcomes of short-course and long-course treatments in patients with uncomplicated gram-negative bacteremia.MethodsWe searched public databases (PubMed, EMBASE and Cochrane Library) to identify eligible studies. The primary outcomes were all-cause mortality and the incidence of recurrent bacteremia through day 30. We used the Cochrane risk of bias assessment tool to evaluate the risk of bias for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale for non-RCTs.Results and discussionSix studies involving 2689 patients were included in the systematic review and meta-analysis. No significant difference was found between short-course and long-course antibiotic treatments in 30-day mortality (risk ratio [RR] 0.85; 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.65-1.13; P = .26), 30-day recurrent bacteremia (RR 1.07; 95% CI 0.68-1.67; P = .78), 90-day mortality (RR 0.84; 95% CI 0.57-1.24; P = .38), 90-day recurrent bacteremia (RR 0.98; 95% CI 0.50-1.89; P = .94), adverse events (RR 1.14; 95% CI 0.89-1.45; P = .30), Clostridium difficile infection (RR 0.86; 95% CI 0.40-1.86; P = .71) or resistance development (RR 1.19; 95% CI 0.66-2.14; P = .57).What is new and conclusionShort-course was non-inferior to long-course antibiotic treatments for patients with uncomplicated gram-negative bacteremia. Considering the drug-related side effects and cost-effectiveness, a shorter duration of antibiotic treatment may be preferable for this particular population. However, additional high-quality RCTs are needed to further assess whether a shorter course of antibiotic treatment is of greater benefit for patients with uncomplicated gram-negative bacteremia.
| S-EPMC7820952 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundThe addition of consolidation chemotherapy to preoperative short-course radiotherapy during the prolonged interval between the completion of radiation and surgery in locally advanced rectal cancer (LARC) could enhance pathologic response and might act on potential micrometastasis. We performed this meta-analysis to evaluate whether short-course radiotherapy followed by consolidation chemotherapy (SCRT/CCT) could be a neoadjuvant treatment option compared with conventional long-course chemoradiotherapy (LCCRT).MethodsWe searched the PubMed, EMBASE, MEDLINE, and Cochrane Library databases. The primary endpoints were pathological outcomes, and the secondary endpoints included survival rate, sphincter preservation rate, R0 resection rate and toxicity. RevMan 5.3 was used to calculate pooled risk ratio (RRs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs).ResultsA total of seven eligible studies and 1865 participants were included in this meta-analysis. Compared with the LCCRT, SCRT/CCT increased pathologic complete response (pCR) rate [RR = 1.74, 95% CI (1.41, 2.15), P < 0.01] and led to a lower proportion of patients with adjuvant pathologic tumor stage 3-4 (ypT3-4) disease [RR = 0.88, 95% CI (0.80, 0.97), P = 0.01] or lymph node positive (ypN +) disease [RR = 0.83, 95% CI (0.71, 0.98), P = 0.02]. In addition, the disease-free survival (DFS) was better in SCRT/CCT group [RR = 1.10, 95% CI (1.02, 1.18), P = 0.01], while overall survival rate and toxicity and surgical procedures were similar between two groups.ConclusionBased on better pathological outcomes and DFS in SCRT/CCT group, we recommended preoperative short-course radiotherapy followed by consolidation chemotherapy as the optional neoadjuvant treatment for LARC.
| S-EPMC8785003 | biostudies-literature
Project description:To evaluate the effectiveness of short courses of antibiotic therapy for patients with acute streptococcal pharyngitis. Randomized controlled trials comparing short-course antibiotic therapy (≤5 days) with long-course antibiotic therapy (≥7 days) for patients with streptococcal pharyngitis were included. Two primary outcomes: early clinical cure and early bacterial eradication. Fifty randomized clinical trials were included. Overall, short-course antibiotic treatment was as effective as long-course antibiotic treatment for early clinical cure (odds ratio (OR) 0.85; 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.79 to 1.15). Subgroup analysis showed that short-course penicillin was less effective for early clinical cure (OR 0.43; 95% CI, 0.23 to 0.82) and bacteriological eradication (OR 0.34; 95% CI, 0.19 to 0.61) in comparison to long-course penicillin. Short-course macrolides were equally effective, compared to long-course penicillin. Finally, short-course cephalosporin was more effective for early clinical cure (OR 1.48; 95% CI, 1.11 to 1.96) and early microbiological cure (OR 1.60; 95% CI, 1.13 to 2.27) in comparison to long-course penicillin. In total, 1211 (17.7%) participants assigned to short-course antibiotic therapy, and 893 (12.3%) cases assigned to long-course, developed adverse events (OR 1.35; 95% CI, 1.08 to 1.68). Macrolides and cephalosporins belong to the list of "Highest Priority Critically Important Antimicrobials"; hence, long-course penicillin V should remain as the first line antibiotic for the management of patients with streptococcal pharyngitis as far as the benefits of using these two types of antibiotics do not outweigh the harms of their unnecessary use.
| S-EPMC7692631 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ImportanceAlthough both short-course radiotherapy and long-course chemoradiotherapy have been practiced in parallel for more than 15 years, no cost-effectiveness analysis comparing these 2 approaches in patients with locally advanced rectal cancer has been published.ObjectiveTo analyze the cost-effectiveness of short-course radiotherapy vs long-course chemoradiotherapy for the treatment of patients with locally advanced rectal cancer.Design, setting, and participantsThis economic evaluation used a cost-effectiveness model simulating 10-year outcomes for 1 million hypothetical patients aged 65 years with locally advanced rectal cancer treated with either short-course radiotherapy or long-course chemoradiotherapy, followed by surgery and chemotherapy. Utilities and probabilities from the literature and costs from the Healthcare Bluebook and Medicare fee schedules were used to determine incremental cost-effectiveness ratios. It was assumed that long-course chemoradiotherapy would result in higher rates of low anterior resection (LAR). To model preference-sensitive care, a 2-way sensitivity analysis was conducted in which the utilities of the no-evidence-of-disease (NED) states with LAR and abdominoperineal resection (APR) were simultaneously varied. The analysis was repeated for patients with distal rectal tumors. Analysis was conducted from January to October 2018.ExposuresShort-course radiotherapy and long-course chemoradiotherapy.Main outcomes and measuresIncremental cost-effectiveness ratios.ResultsShort-course radiotherapy was the cost-effective strategy compared with long-course chemoradiotherapy (incremental cost-effectiveness ratio, $133 495 per quality-adjusted life-year). Two-way sensitivity analysis revealed that the cost-effective approach for a given patient depended on the utilities for the NED-LAR and NED-APR states. Assuming that a greater proportion of patients with locally advanced distal tumors undergoing long-course chemoradiotherapy (39%) would proceed to LAR compared with those treated with short-course radiotherapy (19%), long-course chemoradiotherapy was the cost-effective approach (incremental cost-effectiveness ratio, $61 123 per quality-adjusted life-year).Conclusions and relevanceShort-course radiotherapy was the cost-effective strategy compared with long-course chemoradiotherapy for patients with locally advanced rectal cancer. The cost-effectiveness of short-course radiotherapy vs long-course chemoradiotherapy was sensitive to the utilities of the NED-LAR and NED-APR health states, highlighting the importance of care that is sensitive to patient preference. Long-course chemoradiotherapy was the cost-effective approach for patients with distal tumors.
| S-EPMC6481445 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundCurrent standard practice for locally advanced rectal cancer (LARC) entails a multidisciplinary approach that includes preoperative chemoradiotherapy, followed by total mesorectal excision, and then adjuvant chemotherapy. The latter has been accompanied by low compliance rates and no survival benefit in phase III randomized trials, so the strategy of administering neoadjuvant, rather than adjuvant, chemotherapy has been adapted by many trials, with improvement in pathologic complete response. Induction chemotherapy with oxaliplatin has been shown to have increased efficacy in rectal cancer, while short-course radiation therapy with consolidation chemotherapy increased short-term overall survival rate and decreased toxicity levels, making it cheaper and more convenient than long-course radiation therapy. This led to recognition of total neoadjuvant therapy as a valid treatment approach in many guidelines despite limited available survival data. With the upregulation (PDL-1) expression in rectal tumors after radiotherapy and the increased use of in malignant melanoma, the novel approach of combining immunotherapy with chemotherapy after radiation may have a role in further increasing pCR and improving overall outcomes in rectal cancer.MethodsThe study is an open label single arm multi- center phase II trial. Forty-four recruited LARC patients will receive 5Gy x 5fractions of SCRT, followed by 6 cycles of mFOLFOX-6 plus avelumab, before TME is performed. The hypothesis is that the addition of avelumab to mFOLFOX-6, administered following SCRT, will improve pCR and overall outcomes. The primary outcome measure is the proportion of patients who achieve a pCR, defined as no viable tumor cells on the excised specimen. Secondary objectives are to evaluate 3-year progression-free survival, tumor response to treatment (tumor regression grades 0 & 1), density of tumor-infiltrating lymphocytes, correlation of baseline Immunoscore with pCR rates and changes in PD-L1 expression.DiscussionRecent studies show an increase in PD-L1 expression and density of CD8+ TILs after CRT in rectal cancer patients, implying a potential role for combinatory strategies using PD-L1- and programmed-death- 1 inhibiting drugs. We aim through this study to evaluate pCR following SCRT, followed by mFOLFOX-6 with avelumab, and then TME procedure in patients with LARC.Trial registrationTrial Registration Number and Date of Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT03503630, April 20, 2018.
| S-EPMC7466814 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Primary outcome(s): Colorectal cancer incidence, Colorectal tumor incidence
| 79216 | ecrin-mdr-crc
Project description:The purpose of this work was to conduct a systematic review and meta-analysis of all randomized controlled trials comparing the efficacy and side effect profile of hypofractionated versus conventional external-beam radiation therapy for prostate cancer.Several databases were searched, including Medline, EmBase, LiLACS, and Central. The endpoints were freedom from biochemical failure and side effects. We performed a meta-analysis of the published data. The results are expressed as the hazard ratio (HR) or risk ratio (RR), with the corresponding 95% confidence interval (CI).The final analysis included nine trials comprising 2702 patients. Freedom from biochemical failure was reported in only three studies and was similar in patients who received hypofractionated or conventional radiotherapy (fixed effect, HR 1.03, 95% CI 0.88-1.20; P = 0.75), with heterogeneity [?(2) = 15.32, df = 2 (P = 0.0005); I2 = 87%]. The incidence of acute adverse gastrointestinal events was higher in the hypofractionated group (fixed effect, RR 2.02, 95% CI 1.45-2.81; P < 0.0001). We also found moderate heterogeneity on this analysis [?(2) = 7.47, df = 5 (P = 0.19); I2 = 33%]. Acute genitourinary toxicity was similar among the groups (fixed effect, RR 1.19, 95% CI 0.95-1.49; P = 0.13), with moderate heterogeneity [?(2) = 5.83, df = 4 (P = 0.21); I2 = 31%]. The incidence of all late adverse events was the same in both groups (fixed effect, gastrointestinal toxicity, RR 1.17, 95% CI 0.79-1.72, P = 0.44; and acute genitourinary toxicity, RR 1.16, 95% CI 0.80-1.68, P = 0.44).Hypofractionated radiotherapy in localized prostate cancer was not superior to conventional radiotherapy and showed higher acute gastrointestinal toxicity in this meta-analysis. Because the number of published studies is still small, future assessments should be conducted to clarify better the true role of hypofractionated radiotherapy in patients with prostate cancer.
| S-EPMC3596128 | biostudies-other
Project description:Background and purposeThe role of preoperative short-course radiotherapy (SCRT) in rectal cancer treatment, when compared to long-course radiochemotherapy (LCRT), is still controversial. Thus the meta-analysis with trial sequential analysis (TSA) was performed to evaluate the long-term survival of SCRT and LCRT as therapeutic regimens for locally advanced rectal cancer.Material and methodsPubMed, Embase, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials were searched up to August 2017 for eligible studies. Hazard ratios (HRs) or odds ratios (ORs) of overall survival (OS), disease free survival (DFS) and local recurrence (LR) with the corresponding 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated and TSA was applied.Results11 studies with 1984 patients were included. There was no significant difference in OS (HR = 0.92, 95% CI: 0.75-1.13, p = 0.44), DFS (HR = 0.94, 95% CI: 0.79-1.12, p = 0.50) and LR (OR = 0.73, 95% CI: 0.49-1.08, p = 0.11) between SCRT and LCRT groups. TSA suggested firm evidence for lacking on average a -10% relative risk reduction (RRR) in 4-year OS but no statistical significance in 4-year DFS.ConclusionsPreoperative SCRT is as effective as LCRT for locally advanced colorectal cancer in long-term survival. SCRT could be preferential while facing long waiting lists or lacking medical resource.
| S-EPMC6042715 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundNeoadjuvant chemotherapy and short-course radiotherapy followed by resection has been gaining recognition in the treatment of rectal cancer. Avelumab is a fully human immunoglobulin that binds Programmed Death-Ligand 1 (PD-L1) and prevents the suppression of the cytotoxic T cell immune response. This phase II trial evaluates the safety and pathologic response rate of short-course radiation followed by 6 cycles of mFOLFOX6 with avelumab in patients with locally advanced rectal cancer (LARC).MethodsThis study is prospective single-arm, multicenter phase II trial adopting Simon's two-stage. Short-course radiation is given over 5 fractions to a total dose of 25 Gy. mFOLFOX6 plus avelumab (10 mg/kg) are given every 2 weeks for 6 cycles. Total mesorectal excision is performed 3-4 weeks after the last cycle of avelumab. Follow up after surgery is done every 3 months to a total of 36 months. Adverse event data collection is recorded at every visit.Results13 out of 44 patients with LARC were enrolled in the first stage of the study (30% from total sample size). All patients met the inclusion criteria and received the full short-course radiation course followed by 6 cycles of mFOLFOX6 plus avelumab. 12 out of the 13 patients completed TME while one patient had progression of disease and was dropped out of the study. The sample consisted of 9 (69%) males and 4 (31%) females with median age of 62 (33-73) years. The first interim analysis revealed that 3 (25%) patients achieved pathologic complete response (pCR) (tumor regression grade, TRG 0) out of 12. While 3 (25%) patients had near pCR with TRG 1. In total, 6 out of 12 patients (50%) had a major pathologic response. All patients were found to be MMR proficient. The protocol regimen was well tolerated with no serious adverse events of grade 4 reported.ConclusionIn patients with LARC, neoadjuvant radiation followed by mFOLFOX6 with avelumab is safe with a promising pathologic response rate. Trial Registration Number and Date of Registration ClinicalTrials.gov NCT03503630, April 20, 2018. https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT03503630?term=NCT03503630&draw=2&rank=1 .
| S-EPMC7542723 | biostudies-literature