Literature DB >> 17154185

Effect of routine follow-up after treatment for laryngeal cancer on life expectancy and mortality: results of a Markov model analysis.

Savitri C Ritoe1, Femmie de Vegt, Inger M Scheike, Paul F M Krabbe, Johannes H A M Kaanders, Frank J A van den Hoogen, André L M Verbeek, Henri A M Marres.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Routine follow-up is offered to all patients with laryngeal cancer who are treated with curative intent. Although time and resources are devoted to surveillance, the effect of asymptomatic recurrence detection is not well understood. For this study, the authors evaluated the effect that routine follow-up may have on life expectancy and disease-specific mortality rate for patients with laryngeal cancer.
METHODS: Using a Markov model, a cohort simulation was performed on 4 hypothetical age groups of patients with laryngeal cancer. Three different follow-up strategies were compared-the current schedule, no follow-up, and the perfect follow-up-in which all recurrences were detected asymptomatically. Sensitivity analyses were performed to study the impact of variations in the transition rates on life expectancy.
RESULTS: Compared with no follow-up, the current schedule showed a gain in life expectancy with a range from 0.3 years to 1.5 years that decreased with advancing age. Abolishing the current follow-up schedule raised the disease-specific mortality rate; the increase ranged from 2.8% to 5.9%. Variations of +/-25% in the transition rates produced only a modest effect on life expectancy.
CONCLUSIONS: A small reduction in life expectancy was observed when follow-up was withheld from the majority of patients. Disease-specific mortality rates rose when no follow-up was provided. These rates probably were overestimated. A simplified version of the current follow-up protocol may be implemented.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2007        PMID: 17154185     DOI: 10.1002/cncr.22401

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Cancer        ISSN: 0008-543X            Impact factor:   6.860


  5 in total

1.  Posttreatment Imaging in Patients with Head and Neck Cancer without Clinical Evidence of Recurrence: Should Surveillance Imaging Extend Beyond 6 Months?

Authors:  A Gore; K Baugnon; J Beitler; N F Saba; M R Patel; X Wu; B J Boyce; A H Aiken
Journal:  AJNR Am J Neuroradiol       Date:  2020-06-18       Impact factor: 3.825

2.  Factors associated with loss to follow-up after radiation therapy for head and neck cancer.

Authors:  John M Hoyle; Tanya A Correya; Kelly Kenzik; Liton Francisco; Sharon A Spencer; Christopher D Willey; James A Bonner; James W Snider; Drexell Hunter Boggs; William R Carroll; Smita Bhatia; Andrew M McDonald
Journal:  Head Neck       Date:  2022-01-25       Impact factor: 3.147

3.  Long-term prognosis and risk factors among patients with HPV-associated oropharyngeal squamous cell carcinoma.

Authors:  Brian M Lin; Hao Wang; Gypsyamber D'Souza; Zhe Zhang; Carole Fakhry; Andrew W Joseph; Virginia E Drake; Giuseppe Sanguineti; William H Westra; Sara I Pai
Journal:  Cancer       Date:  2013-07-16       Impact factor: 6.860

Review 4.  Follow-up in Head and Neck Cancer: Do More Does It Mean Do Better? A Systematic Review and Our Proposal Based on Our Experience.

Authors:  Nerina Denaro; Marco Carlo Merlano; Elvio Grazioso Russi
Journal:  Clin Exp Otorhinolaryngol       Date:  2016-06-25       Impact factor: 3.372

5.  Subpopulations of natural killer-T-like cells before and after surgical treatment of laryngeal cancer.

Authors:  Janusz Klatka; Ewelina Grywalska; Anna Hymos; Ewelina Krasowska; Michał Mielnik; Dorota Siwicka-Gieroba; Justyna Markowicz; Piotr Trojanowski; Witold Olszański; Jacek Roliński
Journal:  Cent Eur J Immunol       Date:  2017-10-30       Impact factor: 2.085

  5 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.