4.6 Review

Systematic review and meta-analysis of outcomes following pathological complete response to neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy for rectal cancer

期刊

BRITISH JOURNAL OF SURGERY
卷 99, 期 7, 页码 918-928

出版社

OXFORD UNIV PRESS
DOI: 10.1002/bjs.8702

关键词

-

类别

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Background: Following neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy (CRT) and interval proctectomy, 1520 per cent of patients are found to have a pathological complete response (pCR) to combined multimodal therapy, but controversy persists about whether this yields a survival benefit. This systematic review evaluated current evidence regarding long-term oncological outcomes in patients found to have a pCR to neoadjuvant CRT. Methods: Three major databases (PubMed, MEDLINE and the Cochrane Library) were searched. The systematic review included all original articles reporting long-term outcomes in patients with rectal cancer who had a pCR to neoadjuvant CRT, published in English, from January 1950 to March 2011. Results: A total of 724 studies were identified for screening. After applying inclusion and exclusion criteria, 16 studies involving 3363 patients (1263 with pCR and 2100 without) were included (mean age 60 years, 65.0 per cent men). Some 73.4 per cent had a sphincter-saving procedure. Mean follow-up was 55.5 (range 4087) months. For patients with a pCR, the weighted mean local recurrence rate was 0.7 (range 02.6) per cent. Distant failure was observed in 8.7 per cent. Five-year overall and disease-free survival rates were 90.2 and 87.0 per cent respectively. Compared with non-responders, a pCR was associated with fewer local recurrences (odds ratio (OR) 0.25; P = 0.002) and less frequent distant failure (OR 0.23; P < 0.001), with a greater likelihood of being alive (OR 3.28; P = 0.001) and disease-free (OR 4.33, P < 0.001) at 5 years. Conclusion: A pCR following neoadjuvant CRT is associated with excellent long-term survival, with low rates of local recurrence and distant failure. Copyright (C) 2012 British Journal of Surgery Society Ltd. Published by John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

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