Usefulness of close surveillance for rectal cancer patients after neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy.

IF 1.6
Open medicine (Warsaw, Poland) Pub Date : 2022-09-05 eCollection Date: 2022-01-01 DOI:10.1515/med-2022-0555
Yu-Jen Hsu, Yih-Jong Chern, I-Li Lai, Sum-Fu Chiang, Chun-Kai Liao, Wen-Sy Tsai, Hsin-Yuan Hung, Pao-Shiu Hsieh, Chien-Yuh Yeh, Jy-Ming Chiang, Yen-Lin Yu, Jeng-Fu You
{"title":"Usefulness of close surveillance for rectal cancer patients after neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy.","authors":"Yu-Jen Hsu,&nbsp;Yih-Jong Chern,&nbsp;I-Li Lai,&nbsp;Sum-Fu Chiang,&nbsp;Chun-Kai Liao,&nbsp;Wen-Sy Tsai,&nbsp;Hsin-Yuan Hung,&nbsp;Pao-Shiu Hsieh,&nbsp;Chien-Yuh Yeh,&nbsp;Jy-Ming Chiang,&nbsp;Yen-Lin Yu,&nbsp;Jeng-Fu You","doi":"10.1515/med-2022-0555","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>It is controversial whether patients who achieve clinical complete remission (cCR) of rectal cancer should be treated with the \"watch and wait\" (W&W) or radical resection (RR) strategy. Our study aimed to compare the survival outcomes and ostomy rate of the W&W and RR strategies. Between January 2008 and December 2015, we investigated 26 patients who achieved pathologic complete remission after undergoing RR and 36 patients who adopted the W&W strategy because of cCR. The tumor regrowth, salvage surgery, recurrence, disease-free, and overall survival (OS) rates were assessed. In our study, recurrences occurred in nine and two patients from the W&W and RR groups, respectively. Each patient in the RR group had a temporary or permanent ostomy, but only three (8.3%) had an ostomy in the W&W group. The 5-year recurrence rate was 25.0% in the W&W group and 7.7% in the RR group. Six patients (16.7%) had tumor regrowth in the W&W group, and all were resectable when regrowth. The 5-year OS rates between the two groups were nonsignificant. There is no specific risk factor for recurrence and OS. Under close surveillance, the W&W group achieved similar OS to the RR group and benefited from a lower ostomy rate.</p>","PeriodicalId":520729,"journal":{"name":"Open medicine (Warsaw, Poland)","volume":" ","pages":"1438-1448"},"PeriodicalIF":1.6000,"publicationDate":"2022-09-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9449684/pdf/","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Open medicine (Warsaw, Poland)","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1515/med-2022-0555","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2022/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

Abstract

It is controversial whether patients who achieve clinical complete remission (cCR) of rectal cancer should be treated with the "watch and wait" (W&W) or radical resection (RR) strategy. Our study aimed to compare the survival outcomes and ostomy rate of the W&W and RR strategies. Between January 2008 and December 2015, we investigated 26 patients who achieved pathologic complete remission after undergoing RR and 36 patients who adopted the W&W strategy because of cCR. The tumor regrowth, salvage surgery, recurrence, disease-free, and overall survival (OS) rates were assessed. In our study, recurrences occurred in nine and two patients from the W&W and RR groups, respectively. Each patient in the RR group had a temporary or permanent ostomy, but only three (8.3%) had an ostomy in the W&W group. The 5-year recurrence rate was 25.0% in the W&W group and 7.7% in the RR group. Six patients (16.7%) had tumor regrowth in the W&W group, and all were resectable when regrowth. The 5-year OS rates between the two groups were nonsignificant. There is no specific risk factor for recurrence and OS. Under close surveillance, the W&W group achieved similar OS to the RR group and benefited from a lower ostomy rate.

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

直肠癌患者新辅助放化疗后密切监测的意义。
达到临床完全缓解(cCR)的直肠癌患者是否应采取“观察等待”(W&W)或根治性切除(RR)策略,目前存在争议。我们的研究旨在比较W&W和RR策略的生存结局和造口率。2008年1月至2015年12月,我们调查了26例接受RR后病理完全缓解的患者和36例因cCR而采用W&W策略的患者。评估肿瘤再生、补救性手术、复发、无病和总生存率(OS)。在我们的研究中,W&W组和RR组分别有9例和2例患者复发。RR组每例患者均行暂时性或永久性造口术,而W&W组只有3例(8.3%)患者行造口术。W&W组5年复发率为25.0%,RR组为7.7%。W&W组肿瘤再生6例(16.7%),再生后均可切除。两组间5年OS率差异无统计学意义。复发和OS没有特定的危险因素。在严密的监测下,W&W组获得了与RR组相似的OS,并且受益于较低的造口率。
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
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
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:604180095
Book学术官方微信
小红书