4.8 Article

Association of tumour site and sex with survival benefit from adjuvant chemotherapy in colorectal cancer

期刊

LANCET
卷 355, 期 9217, 页码 1745-1750

出版社

LANCET LTD
DOI: 10.1016/S0140-6736(00)02261-3

关键词

-

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Background Adjuvant chemotherapy can improve 5-year survival in Dukes' C colorectal carcinoma. Improved selection of patients who will respond to adjuvant treatments is required. We investigated whether site of tumour origin, sex, and presence of microsatellite instability (MSI) phenotype were associated with a survival benefit from adjuvant chemotherapy. Methods We analysed data for 656 consecutive patients with Dukes' C colorectal carcinoma, with median follow-up of 54 months (range 7-104) and mean age 66.7 years (SD 12.9). We screened tumour samples by PCR for deletions in the BAT-26 mononucleotide repeat to establish MSI status. Details of chemotherapy and survival were obtained by review of hospital and health-department records. Adjuvant chemotherapy (fluorouracil and levamisole) was given with curative intent to 272 (42%) patients. Findings Striking survival benefits were seen for patients who had right-sided tumours and who received adjuvant chemotherapy compared with those who did not (48 vs 27% alive at end of study [95% CI 0.25-0.56], p<0.0001), for women (53 vs 33% [0.25-0.56], p<0.0001), and for patients with MSI tumours (90 vs 35% [0.01-0.53], p=0.0007). MSI-positive tumours were slightly more frequent in women than in men (10 vs 7%). Right-sided tumours were more frequently MSI positive than left-sided tumours (20 vs 1%). Men with right-sided tumours benefited from chemotherapy (37 vs 12% [0.24-0.69], p=0.0007) but men with left-sided tumours did not. Interpretation The survival benefits seen in patients treated with adjuvant chemotherapy suggest that data from previous trials of adjuvant chemotherapy should be reassessed and the predictive value of MSI status confirmed. Validation of our results will allow better selection of patients for chemotherapy.

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

4.8
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