[Impacts of participation in surgical clinical trial on safety and survival outcomes in patients with right-sided colon cancer].

Q3 Medicine
H Q Zhang, G Q Wang, B Wu, G L Lin, H Z Qiu, B Z Niu, J Y Lu, L Xu, X Y Sun, G N Zhang, Y Xiao
{"title":"[Impacts of participation in surgical clinical trial on safety and survival outcomes in patients with right-sided colon cancer].","authors":"H Q Zhang, G Q Wang, B Wu, G L Lin, H Z Qiu, B Z Niu, J Y Lu, L Xu, X Y Sun, G N Zhang, Y Xiao","doi":"10.3760/cma.j.cn441530-20240129-00048","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p><b>Objective:</b> To explore the impact on safety and prognosis in patients with right-sided colon cancer participating in surgical clinical research. <b>Methods:</b> This retrospective cohort study utilized data from a randomized controlled trial (RELARC study) conducted by the colorectal surgery group at Peking Union Medical College Hospital in which laparoscopic complete mesocolic excision (CME) was compared with D2 radical resection for the management of right-sided colon cancer. The eligibility criteria were age 18-75 years, biopsy-proven colon adenocarcinoma, tumor located between the cecum and right 1/3 of the transverse colon, enhanced chest, abdomen, and pelvic CT scans suggesting tumor stage T2-T4N0M0 or TanyN+ M0, and having undergone radical surgical treatment from January 2016 to December 2019. Exclusion factors included multiple primary colorectal cancers, preoperative stage T1N0 or enlarged central lymph nodes, tumor involving surrounding organs requiring their resection, definite distant metastasis or otherwise unable to undergo R0 resection, history of any other malignant tumors within previous 5 years, intestinal obstruction, perforation, or gastrointestinal bleeding requiring emergency surgery, and assessed as unsuitable for laparoscopic surgery. Patients who had participated in the RELARC study were included in the RELARC group, whereas those who met the inclusion criteria but refused to participate in the RELAEC study were included in the control group. The main indicators studied were the patient's baseline data, surgery and perioperative conditions, pathological characteristics, adjuvant treatment, and postoperative follow-up (including average frequency of follow-up within the first 3 years) and survival (including 3-year disease-free survival rate (DFS) and 3-year overall survival rate (OS). Differences in these indicators between the RELARC and control groups were compared. <b>Results:</b> The study cohort comprised 290 patients, 173 in the RELARC group (RELARC-CME group, 82; RELARC-D2 group, 91) and 117 in the control group (CME control group, 72; D2 control group, 45). There was a significantly higher proportion of overweight patients (BMI ≥24 kg/m<sup>2</sup>) in the RELARC-CME than in the CME control group (67.1% [55/82] vs. 33.3% [24/72], χ<sup>2</sup>=17.469, <i>P</i><0.001). There were no other statistically significant differences in baseline characteristics (all <i>P</i>>0.05). No significant disparities were found between the CME and D2 groups in terms of operation duration, intraoperative blood loss, rate of conversion to open surgery, combined organ resection, intraoperative blood transfusion, or intraoperative complications (all <i>P</i>>0.05). There was a trend toward Clavien-Dindo grade II or higher postoperative complications in the RELARC-CME group (24.4% [20/82]) than in the CME control group (18.1% [13/72]); however, this difference was not statistically significant (χ<sup>2</sup>=0.914, <i>P</i>=0.339). Similarly, the difference in this rate did not differ significantly between the RELARC-D2 group (25.3% [23/91]) and D2 control group (24.4% [11/45], χ<sup>2</sup>=0.011, <i>P</i>=0.916). The median duration of postoperative follow-up was significantly shorter in the RELARC groups than in the corresponding control groups. Specifically, the median duration of follow-up was 4.5 (4.5, 4.5) months in the RELARC-CME and 7.2 (6.0, 9.0) months in the CME control group (<i>Z</i>=-10.608, <i>P</i><0.001). Similarly, the median duration of follow-up was 4.5 (4.5, 4.5) months in the RELARC-D2 group as opposed to 8.3 (6.6, 9.0) months in the D2 control group (<i>Z</i>=-10.595, <i>P</i><0.001). The 3-year DFS rate (91.5%) and OS rate (96.3%) tended to be higher in the RELARC-CME group than in the CME control group (84.7% and 90.3%, respectively). The 3-year DFS rate (87.9%) and OS rate (96.7%) tended to be higher in the RELARC-D2 group than in the D2 control group (81.8% and 88.6%, respectively); however, these differences were not statistically significant (all <i>P</i>>0.05). Subgroup analysis according to pathological stage revealed that patients in the RELARC-D2 group with pN0 stage achieved a significantly superior 3-year OS rate than did those in the D2 control group (100% vs. 88.9%, <i>P</i>=0.008). We identified no statistically significant differences in survival rates between the remaining subgroups (all <i>P</i>>0.05). <b>Conclusions:</b> A high-quality surgical clinical trial with close follow-up can achieve perioperative safety and a trend toward improved survival outcomes.</p>","PeriodicalId":23959,"journal":{"name":"中华胃肠外科杂志","volume":"27 9","pages":"928-937"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-09-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"中华胃肠外科杂志","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3760/cma.j.cn441530-20240129-00048","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"Medicine","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objective: To explore the impact on safety and prognosis in patients with right-sided colon cancer participating in surgical clinical research. Methods: This retrospective cohort study utilized data from a randomized controlled trial (RELARC study) conducted by the colorectal surgery group at Peking Union Medical College Hospital in which laparoscopic complete mesocolic excision (CME) was compared with D2 radical resection for the management of right-sided colon cancer. The eligibility criteria were age 18-75 years, biopsy-proven colon adenocarcinoma, tumor located between the cecum and right 1/3 of the transverse colon, enhanced chest, abdomen, and pelvic CT scans suggesting tumor stage T2-T4N0M0 or TanyN+ M0, and having undergone radical surgical treatment from January 2016 to December 2019. Exclusion factors included multiple primary colorectal cancers, preoperative stage T1N0 or enlarged central lymph nodes, tumor involving surrounding organs requiring their resection, definite distant metastasis or otherwise unable to undergo R0 resection, history of any other malignant tumors within previous 5 years, intestinal obstruction, perforation, or gastrointestinal bleeding requiring emergency surgery, and assessed as unsuitable for laparoscopic surgery. Patients who had participated in the RELARC study were included in the RELARC group, whereas those who met the inclusion criteria but refused to participate in the RELAEC study were included in the control group. The main indicators studied were the patient's baseline data, surgery and perioperative conditions, pathological characteristics, adjuvant treatment, and postoperative follow-up (including average frequency of follow-up within the first 3 years) and survival (including 3-year disease-free survival rate (DFS) and 3-year overall survival rate (OS). Differences in these indicators between the RELARC and control groups were compared. Results: The study cohort comprised 290 patients, 173 in the RELARC group (RELARC-CME group, 82; RELARC-D2 group, 91) and 117 in the control group (CME control group, 72; D2 control group, 45). There was a significantly higher proportion of overweight patients (BMI ≥24 kg/m2) in the RELARC-CME than in the CME control group (67.1% [55/82] vs. 33.3% [24/72], χ2=17.469, P<0.001). There were no other statistically significant differences in baseline characteristics (all P>0.05). No significant disparities were found between the CME and D2 groups in terms of operation duration, intraoperative blood loss, rate of conversion to open surgery, combined organ resection, intraoperative blood transfusion, or intraoperative complications (all P>0.05). There was a trend toward Clavien-Dindo grade II or higher postoperative complications in the RELARC-CME group (24.4% [20/82]) than in the CME control group (18.1% [13/72]); however, this difference was not statistically significant (χ2=0.914, P=0.339). Similarly, the difference in this rate did not differ significantly between the RELARC-D2 group (25.3% [23/91]) and D2 control group (24.4% [11/45], χ2=0.011, P=0.916). The median duration of postoperative follow-up was significantly shorter in the RELARC groups than in the corresponding control groups. Specifically, the median duration of follow-up was 4.5 (4.5, 4.5) months in the RELARC-CME and 7.2 (6.0, 9.0) months in the CME control group (Z=-10.608, P<0.001). Similarly, the median duration of follow-up was 4.5 (4.5, 4.5) months in the RELARC-D2 group as opposed to 8.3 (6.6, 9.0) months in the D2 control group (Z=-10.595, P<0.001). The 3-year DFS rate (91.5%) and OS rate (96.3%) tended to be higher in the RELARC-CME group than in the CME control group (84.7% and 90.3%, respectively). The 3-year DFS rate (87.9%) and OS rate (96.7%) tended to be higher in the RELARC-D2 group than in the D2 control group (81.8% and 88.6%, respectively); however, these differences were not statistically significant (all P>0.05). Subgroup analysis according to pathological stage revealed that patients in the RELARC-D2 group with pN0 stage achieved a significantly superior 3-year OS rate than did those in the D2 control group (100% vs. 88.9%, P=0.008). We identified no statistically significant differences in survival rates between the remaining subgroups (all P>0.05). Conclusions: A high-quality surgical clinical trial with close follow-up can achieve perioperative safety and a trend toward improved survival outcomes.

[参加外科临床试验对右侧结肠癌患者安全性和生存结果的影响]。
目的探讨参与外科临床研究的右侧结肠癌患者对安全性和预后的影响。方法: 采用随机对照试验(RELARC 研究)的数据进行回顾性队列研究:这项回顾性队列研究利用了北京协和医院结直肠外科小组开展的一项随机对照试验(RELARC 研究)的数据,该试验比较了腹腔镜完整结肠系膜切除术(CME)和 D2 根治性切除术治疗右侧结肠癌的效果。入选标准为年龄18-75岁,活检证实为结肠腺癌,肿瘤位于盲肠和横结肠右1/3之间,胸部、腹部和盆腔CT增强扫描提示肿瘤分期为T2-T4N0M0或TanyN+ M0,2016年1月至2019年12月期间接受过根治性手术治疗。排除因素包括:多发性原发性结直肠癌、术前分期T1N0或中央淋巴结肿大、肿瘤累及周围器官需要切除、明确远处转移或因其他原因无法进行R0切除、前5年内有任何其他恶性肿瘤病史、肠梗阻、穿孔或消化道出血需要紧急手术,以及经评估不适合腹腔镜手术。参加过RELARC研究的患者被纳入RELARC组,而符合纳入标准但拒绝参加RELAEC研究的患者被纳入对照组。研究的主要指标包括患者的基线数据、手术和围手术期情况、病理特征、辅助治疗、术后随访(包括前3年的平均随访频率)和生存率(包括3年无病生存率(DFS)和3年总生存率(OS))。比较了 RELARC 组和对照组在这些指标上的差异。研究结果研究队列由 290 名患者组成,其中 RELARC 组 173 人(RELARC-CME 组 82 人;RELARC-D2 组 91 人),对照组 117 人(CME 对照组 72 人;D2 对照组 45 人)。RELARC-CME组超重患者(体重指数≥24 kg/m2)的比例明显高于CME对照组(67.1% [55/82] vs. 33.3% [24/72],χ2=17.469,PP>0.05)。CME组和D2组在手术时间、术中失血量、转为开放手术率、合并器官切除、术中输血和术中并发症等方面没有发现明显差异(均P>0.05)。与CME对照组(18.1% [13/72])相比,RELARC-CME组(24.4% [20/82])的术后并发症呈Clavien-Dindo II级或更高的趋势,但这一差异无统计学意义(χ2=0.914,P=0.339)。同样,这一比例在 RELARC-D2 组(25.3% [23/91])和 D2 对照组(24.4% [11/45],χ2=0.011,P=0.916)之间也没有明显差异。RELARC组术后随访的中位持续时间明显短于相应的对照组。具体来说,RELARC-CME组的中位随访时间为4.5(4.5,4.5)个月,CME对照组为7.2(6.0,9.0)个月(Z=-10.608,PZ=-10.595,PP>0.05)。根据病理分期进行的亚组分析显示,pN0 期的 RELARC-D2 组患者的 3 年 OS 率明显高于 D2 对照组(100% 对 88.9%,P=0.008)。我们发现,其余亚组之间的生存率差异无统计学意义(P>0.05)。结论:这是一项高质量的外科临床试验:密切随访的高质量外科临床试验可实现围手术期的安全性和改善生存结果的趋势。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
中华胃肠外科杂志
中华胃肠外科杂志 Medicine-Medicine (all)
CiteScore
1.00
自引率
0.00%
发文量
6776
期刊介绍:
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信