在局部晚期直肠腺癌中放弃化疗:全国数据库中的 PROSPECT 评估。

IF 2 3区 医学 Q3 ONCOLOGY
Joanna T Buchheit, Lauren M Janczewski, Amy Wells, Ashley N Hardy, John D Abad, David J Bentrem, Amy L Halverson, Akhil Chawla
{"title":"在局部晚期直肠腺癌中放弃化疗:全国数据库中的 PROSPECT 评估。","authors":"Joanna T Buchheit, Lauren M Janczewski, Amy Wells, Ashley N Hardy, John D Abad, David J Bentrem, Amy L Halverson, Akhil Chawla","doi":"10.1002/jso.27839","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background and objectives: </strong>The PROSPECT trial showed noninferiority of neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NAC) with selective chemoradiation (CRT) versus CRT alone. However, trial results are often difficult to reproduce with real-world data. Pathologic outcomes and overall survival (OS) were evaluated by neoadjuvant strategy in locally advanced rectal adenocarcinoma patients in a national database.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>The 2012-2020 National Cancer Database was queried for clinical T2N1 and T3N0-1 rectal adenocarcinoma patients with definitive resection. Patients were categorized by neoadjuvant treatment with CRT alone, NAC alone, and NAC with CRT. Outcomes included R0 resection, pathologic complete response (PCR), and OS.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Of 18 892 patients, 16 126 (85.4%) received CRT, 1018 (5.4%) NAC, and 1748 (9.3%) NAC with CRT. Patients with NAC alone or NAC with CRT were more likely to have stage-III disease, private insurance, and academic facility treatment (all p < 0.001). NAC alone had lower adjusted odds of an R0 resection (OR 0.72; 95%CI 0.54-0.95) and PCR (OR 0.77; 95%CI 0.64-0.93). NAC with CRT demonstrated improved OS (HR 0.71; 95%CI 0.61-0.82), with no difference between NAC and CRT alone. Among patients who received adjuvant chemotherapy, no differences in OS were seen.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Patients who received NAC alone had worse pathologic outcomes. NAC had similar OS to CRT and NAC with CRT showed improved OS.</p>","PeriodicalId":17111,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Surgical Oncology","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-09-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Omission of Chemoradiation in Locally Advanced Rectal Adenocarcinoma: Evaluation of PROSPECT in a National Database.\",\"authors\":\"Joanna T Buchheit, Lauren M Janczewski, Amy Wells, Ashley N Hardy, John D Abad, David J Bentrem, Amy L Halverson, Akhil Chawla\",\"doi\":\"10.1002/jso.27839\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background and objectives: </strong>The PROSPECT trial showed noninferiority of neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NAC) with selective chemoradiation (CRT) versus CRT alone. However, trial results are often difficult to reproduce with real-world data. Pathologic outcomes and overall survival (OS) were evaluated by neoadjuvant strategy in locally advanced rectal adenocarcinoma patients in a national database.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>The 2012-2020 National Cancer Database was queried for clinical T2N1 and T3N0-1 rectal adenocarcinoma patients with definitive resection. Patients were categorized by neoadjuvant treatment with CRT alone, NAC alone, and NAC with CRT. Outcomes included R0 resection, pathologic complete response (PCR), and OS.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Of 18 892 patients, 16 126 (85.4%) received CRT, 1018 (5.4%) NAC, and 1748 (9.3%) NAC with CRT. Patients with NAC alone or NAC with CRT were more likely to have stage-III disease, private insurance, and academic facility treatment (all p < 0.001). NAC alone had lower adjusted odds of an R0 resection (OR 0.72; 95%CI 0.54-0.95) and PCR (OR 0.77; 95%CI 0.64-0.93). NAC with CRT demonstrated improved OS (HR 0.71; 95%CI 0.61-0.82), with no difference between NAC and CRT alone. Among patients who received adjuvant chemotherapy, no differences in OS were seen.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Patients who received NAC alone had worse pathologic outcomes. NAC had similar OS to CRT and NAC with CRT showed improved OS.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":17111,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Surgical Oncology\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-09-30\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Surgical Oncology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1002/jso.27839\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"ONCOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Surgical Oncology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1002/jso.27839","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"ONCOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景和目的:PROSPECT 试验表明,新辅助化疗(NAC)联合选择性化放疗(CRT)与单纯化放疗相比并无劣势。然而,试验结果往往难以用真实世界的数据重现。我们在全国数据库中对局部晚期直肠腺癌患者的病理结果和总生存率(OS)按新辅助策略进行了评估:对2012-2020年全国癌症数据库中接受明确切除术的临床T2N1和T3N0-1直肠腺癌患者进行查询。患者按单纯CRT新辅助治疗、单纯NAC新辅助治疗和NAC联合CRT新辅助治疗进行分类。结果包括R0切除、病理完全反应(PCR)和OS:在 18 892 例患者中,16 126 例(85.4%)接受了 CRT,1018 例(5.4%)接受了 NAC,1748 例(9.3%)接受了 NAC 联合 CRT。单纯接受 NAC 或 NAC 联合 CRT 的患者更有可能患有 III 期疾病、拥有私人保险和在学术机构接受治疗(均为 p 结论):仅接受 NAC 的患者病理结果较差。NAC的OS与CRT相似,而NAC联合CRT则改善了OS。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Omission of Chemoradiation in Locally Advanced Rectal Adenocarcinoma: Evaluation of PROSPECT in a National Database.

Background and objectives: The PROSPECT trial showed noninferiority of neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NAC) with selective chemoradiation (CRT) versus CRT alone. However, trial results are often difficult to reproduce with real-world data. Pathologic outcomes and overall survival (OS) were evaluated by neoadjuvant strategy in locally advanced rectal adenocarcinoma patients in a national database.

Methods: The 2012-2020 National Cancer Database was queried for clinical T2N1 and T3N0-1 rectal adenocarcinoma patients with definitive resection. Patients were categorized by neoadjuvant treatment with CRT alone, NAC alone, and NAC with CRT. Outcomes included R0 resection, pathologic complete response (PCR), and OS.

Results: Of 18 892 patients, 16 126 (85.4%) received CRT, 1018 (5.4%) NAC, and 1748 (9.3%) NAC with CRT. Patients with NAC alone or NAC with CRT were more likely to have stage-III disease, private insurance, and academic facility treatment (all p < 0.001). NAC alone had lower adjusted odds of an R0 resection (OR 0.72; 95%CI 0.54-0.95) and PCR (OR 0.77; 95%CI 0.64-0.93). NAC with CRT demonstrated improved OS (HR 0.71; 95%CI 0.61-0.82), with no difference between NAC and CRT alone. Among patients who received adjuvant chemotherapy, no differences in OS were seen.

Conclusions: Patients who received NAC alone had worse pathologic outcomes. NAC had similar OS to CRT and NAC with CRT showed improved OS.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
4.70
自引率
4.00%
发文量
367
审稿时长
2 months
期刊介绍: The Journal of Surgical Oncology offers peer-reviewed, original papers in the field of surgical oncology and broadly related surgical sciences, including reports on experimental and laboratory studies. As an international journal, the editors encourage participation from leading surgeons around the world. The JSO is the representative journal for the World Federation of Surgical Oncology Societies. Publishing 16 issues in 2 volumes each year, the journal accepts Research Articles, in-depth Reviews of timely interest, Letters to the Editor, and invited Editorials. Guest Editors from the JSO Editorial Board oversee multiple special Seminars issues each year. These Seminars include multifaceted Reviews on a particular topic or current issue in surgical oncology, which are invited from experts in the field.
×
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