4.5 Article

Transplant oncology: assessment of response and tolerance to systemic chemotherapy for metastatic colorectal cancer after liver transplantation - a retrospective study

Journal

TRANSPLANT INTERNATIONAL
Volume 32, Issue 11, Pages 1144-1150

Publisher

WILEY
DOI: 10.1111/tri.13471

Keywords

chemotherapy; colorectal cancer; liver transplant recipients; overall survival

Funding

  1. Oslo University Hospital
  2. South-Eastern Norway Health Authority
  3. Norwegian Cancer Society

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Solid organ recipients have a 2-5 fold increased risk of malignancy compared to the general population. Because of the broader indications for transplantation, it is anticipated that an increasing number of organ graft recipients will present with malignancy. There are limited data about responses and tolerance to chemotherapy in solid organ transplanted patients. Twenty-three of 46 colorectal cancer (CRC) patients with nonresectable liver metastases who had undergone liver transplantation (LT) in three different studies were included. All patients had received chemotherapy both prior to LT and after LT, at recurrence of metastatic CRC (mCRC). Adverse reactions (grades 3-4) and clinical and radiological outcome were retrospectively registered. Overall survival was determined from start of palliative chemotherapy after LT. No graft rejection was observed. Chemotherapy for mCRC was overall well-tolerated and there was no increased bone marrow toxicity registered after LT; however, mucositis and diarrhea were more frequent in post-LT chemotherapy. Median overall survival from start of palliative chemotherapy after LT was 13 months. No graft loss was observed when chemotherapy for mCRC was given to LT recipients who had developed nonresectable metastases. Overall, the chemotherapy for mCRC was well-tolerated, induced responses, and long-term survival was obtained in some patients.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.5
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available