4.6 Article

Health-related quality of life in a randomized trial of neoadjuvant chemotherapy or chemoradiotherapy plus surgery in patients with oesophageal cancer (NeoRes trial)

期刊

BRITISH JOURNAL OF SURGERY
卷 106, 期 11, 页码 1452-1463

出版社

WILEY
DOI: 10.1002/bjs.11246

关键词

-

类别

资金

  1. Swedish Cancer Society
  2. Cancer Research Foundations of Radiumhemmet, Stockholm County

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Background There are few data comparing health-related quality of life (HRQoL) after neoadjuvant chemotherapy alone (nCT) compared with neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy (nCRT) in patients with oesophageal cancer. Methods In the NeoRes trial, patients were assigned randomly in a 1 : 1 ratio to receive either cisplatin 100 mg/m(2) on day 1 and an infusion of 750 mg per m(2) 5-fluorouracil over 24 h on days 1-5 in three 21-day cycles (nCT) or the same chemotherapy regimen, but with the addition of 40 Gy radiotherapy (nCRT). HRQoL data were collected at baseline, after neoadjuvant therapy and at 1, 3 and 5 years after surgery. The European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) core questionnaire QLQ-C30 and disease-specific modules were used. Results Of 181 patients randomized, 165 were included in the analysis of HRQoL. In a direct comparison between the allocated treatments, odynophagia after completion of neoadjuvant therapy but before surgery (P = 0 center dot 047) and troublesome coughing at 3 years' follow-up (P = 0 center dot 011) were more pronounced in the nCRT arm. In the longitudinal analyses within each treatment arm, a large deterioration in HRQoL was noted at 1 year. Some recovery was seen in both arms over time but, after 3 and 5 years, patients in the nCRT arm reported more symptoms compared with baseline than patients in the nCT arm. Conclusion HRQoL after multimodal treatment for cancer of the oesophagus or gastro-oesophageal junction was impaired and more pronounced in patients who underwent nCRT, with only partial recovery over time.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据