scholarly journals Long-term results, therapeutic problems and management in patients with large bowel cancer, with special reference to local recurrence following curative surgery for rectal cancer.

1988 ◽  
Vol 21 (4) ◽  
pp. 1171-1174 ◽  
Author(s):  
Tomoyuki KATO ◽  
Takashi HIRAI ◽  
Junichi SAKAMOTO ◽  
Kenzo YASUI ◽  
Takeshi MORIMOTO ◽  
...  
1984 ◽  
Vol 71 (1) ◽  
pp. 12-16 ◽  
Author(s):  
R. K. S. Phillips ◽  
Rosemary Hittinger ◽  
Lynda Blesovsky ◽  
J. S. Fry ◽  
L. P. Fielding

1984 ◽  
Vol 71 (1) ◽  
pp. 17-20 ◽  
Author(s):  
R. K. S. Phillips ◽  
Rosemary Hittinger ◽  
Lynda Blesovsky ◽  
J. S. Fry ◽  
L. P. Fielding

2018 ◽  
Vol 36 (4_suppl) ◽  
pp. 738-738
Author(s):  
Thilo Sprenger ◽  
Tim Beissbarth ◽  
Rolf Sauer ◽  
Emmanouil Fokas ◽  
Werner Hohenberger ◽  
...  

738 Background: The association of hospital and surgeon volume with the outcome of rectal cancer patients is under debate. In this study the long-term influence of the hospital as well as the surgeon volume on overall survival and local recurrence were investigated. Methods: In a post-hoc analysis of the randomized phase III CAO/ARO/AIO-94 trial after a follow-up of more than 10 years, 799 patients with locally advanced rectal cancers were evaluated. Survival and local recurrence rates were stratified by the hospital recruitment volume (≤20 vs. 21-90 vs. > 90 patients) and by the surgeon volume (≤10 vs. 11-50 vs. > 50 procedures). Results: Patients treated in „high-volume“ hospitals had a longer overall survival than those treated in hospitals with medium or low treatment volume (p = 0.03). The surgeon volume was significantly associated with decreased local recurrences (p = 0.01) but had no influence on overall survival. The effect of neoadjuvant chemoradiation on local control was the strongest in patients being operated by medium-volume surgeons. Conclusions: Patients with locally advanced rectal cancers might benefit from treatment in in specialized high-volume hospitals. In particular, the surgeon volume had significant influence on local control.


2005 ◽  
Vol 23 (24) ◽  
pp. 5644-5650 ◽  
Author(s):  
Joakim Folkesson ◽  
Helgi Birgisson ◽  
Lars Pahlman ◽  
Bjorn Cedermark ◽  
Bengt Glimelius ◽  
...  

Purpose To evaluate the long-term effects on survival and recurrence rates of preoperative radiotherapy in the treatment of curatively operated rectal cancer patients. Patients and Methods Of 1,168 randomly assigned patients in the Swedish Rectal Cancer Trial between 1987 and 1990, 908 had curative surgery; 454 of these patients had surgery alone, and 454 were administered preoperative radiotherapy (25 Gy in 5 days) followed by surgery within 1 week. Follow-up was performed by matching against three Swedish nationwide registries (the Swedish Cancer Register, the Hospital Discharge Register, and the Cause of Death Register). Results Median follow-up time was 13 years (range, 3 to 15 years). The overall survival rate in the irradiated group was 38% v 30% in the nonirradiated group (P = .008). The cancer-specific survival rate in the irradiated group was 72% v 62% in the nonirradiated group (P = .03), and the local recurrence rate was 9% v 26% (P < .001), respectively. The reduction of local recurrence rates was observed at all tumor heights, although it was not statistically significant for tumors greater than 10 cm from the anal verge. Conclusion Preoperative radiotherapy with 25 Gy in 1 week before curative surgery for rectal cancer is beneficial for overall and cancer-specific survival and local recurrence rates after long-term follow-up.


2007 ◽  
Vol 25 (28) ◽  
pp. 4379-4386 ◽  
Author(s):  
Laurence Collette ◽  
Jean-Francois Bosset ◽  
Marcel den Dulk ◽  
France Nguyen ◽  
Laurent Mineur ◽  
...  

Purpose European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) trial 22921 compared adjuvant fluorouracil-based chemotherapy (CT) to no adjuvant treatment in a 2 × 2 factorial trial with randomization for preoperative (chemo)radiotherapy in patients with resectable T3-4 rectal cancer. The results showed no significant impact of adjuvant CT on progression-free or overall survival, although a difference seemed to emerge at approximately, respectively, 2 and 5 years after the start of preoperative treatment. We further explored the data with the aim of refining our understanding of the long-term results. Patients and Methods Data of 785 of the 1,011 randomly assigned patients who whose disease was M0 at curative surgery were used. Using meta-analytic methods, we investigated the homogeneity of the effect of adjuvant CT on the time to relapse or death after surgery (disease-free survival [DFS]) and survival in patient subgroups. Results Although there was no statistically significant impact of adjuvant CT on DFS for the whole group (P > .5), the treatment effect differed significantly between the ypT0-2 and the ypT3-4 patients (heterogeneity P = .009): only the ypT0-2 patients seemed to benefit from adjuvant CT (P = .011). The same pattern was observed for overall survival. Conclusion Exploratory analyses suggest that only good-prognosis patients (ypT0-2) benefit from adjuvant CT. This could explain why, in the whole group, the progression-free and overall survival diverged only after the poor-prognosis patients (ypT3-4) had experienced treatment failure. Patients in whom no downstaging was achieved did not benefit. This also suggests that the same prognostic factors may drive both tumor sensitivity for the primary treatment and long-term clinical benefit from further adjuvant CT.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document