Zhiju Chen1, Shaowei Li2, Yehong Wang1, Zhiming Fu1, Ning Liu1, Hao Wang1, Xin Liu1. 1. The First Department of Gastrointestinal Surgery, Hainan General Hospital, Hainan Affiliated Hospital of Hainan Medical University, Haikou, China. 2. Department of Oncology, Nanfang Hospital, Southern Medical University, Guangzhou, China.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: It is well known that neoadjuvant radiotherapy could reduce local recurrence followed by surgical resection. However, evidence about oncologic efficacy of radiotherapy and survival benefit of adjuvant chemotherapy after neoadjuvant radiotherapy is still lacking. METHODS: This retrospective propensity score-matched cohort study identified patients with pathologically confirmed rectal cancer and receiving surgery with curative intent from the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results database from 2004 through 2014. Overall survival was compared using the stratified log-rank test. Multivariate Cox regression analysis was used for identifying risk factor and developing prediction nomogram. RESULTS: A total of 22,008 (11,004 for each group) propensity-matched patients were identified. In the context of receiving adjuvant chemotherapy after surgical resection, there was no significant difference in terms of overall survival between surgery alone group and neoadjuvant radiotherapy and surgery group, whether for stage I (log-rank test p = 0.467), stage II (log-rank test p = 0.310), or stage III (p = 0.994). In case of receiving a prior combination therapy of neoadjuvant radiotherapy and surgery, the following adjuvant chemotherapy could significantly improve overall survival for patients with stage I (log-rank test p <0.001), stage II (log-rank test p = 0.038), and stage III (log-rank test p = 0.014). Nomogram integrating clinicopathologic factors was developed to predict survival benefit associated with neoadjuvant radiotherapy. Calibration and ROC curves validated promising performance for the nomogram. CONCLUSION: Patients with rectal cancer underwent neoadjuvant radiotherapy yield acceptable outcomes and are more likely to benefit from adjuvant chemotherapy in terms of overall survival. These data would be evidential for advocating consistency in guideline adherence to the use of adjuvant chemotherapy after neoadjuvant radiotherapy.
BACKGROUND: It is well known that neoadjuvant radiotherapy could reduce local recurrence followed by surgical resection. However, evidence about oncologic efficacy of radiotherapy and survival benefit of adjuvant chemotherapy after neoadjuvant radiotherapy is still lacking. METHODS: This retrospective propensity score-matched cohort study identified patients with pathologically confirmed rectal cancer and receiving surgery with curative intent from the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results database from 2004 through 2014. Overall survival was compared using the stratified log-rank test. Multivariate Cox regression analysis was used for identifying risk factor and developing prediction nomogram. RESULTS: A total of 22,008 (11,004 for each group) propensity-matched patients were identified. In the context of receiving adjuvant chemotherapy after surgical resection, there was no significant difference in terms of overall survival between surgery alone group and neoadjuvant radiotherapy and surgery group, whether for stage I (log-rank test p = 0.467), stage II (log-rank test p = 0.310), or stage III (p = 0.994). In case of receiving a prior combination therapy of neoadjuvant radiotherapy and surgery, the following adjuvant chemotherapy could significantly improve overall survival for patients with stage I (log-rank test p <0.001), stage II (log-rank test p = 0.038), and stage III (log-rank test p = 0.014). Nomogram integrating clinicopathologic factors was developed to predict survival benefit associated with neoadjuvant radiotherapy. Calibration and ROC curves validated promising performance for the nomogram. CONCLUSION: Patients with rectal cancer underwent neoadjuvant radiotherapy yield acceptable outcomes and are more likely to benefit from adjuvant chemotherapy in terms of overall survival. These data would be evidential for advocating consistency in guideline adherence to the use of adjuvant chemotherapy after neoadjuvant radiotherapy.
Authors: Daniel Delitto; Thomas J George; Tyler J Loftus; Peihua Qiu; George J Chang; Carmen J Allegra; William A Hall; Steven J Hughes; Sanda A Tan; Christiana M Shaw; Atif Iqbal Journal: J Natl Cancer Inst Date: 2018-05-01 Impact factor: 13.506
Authors: Fabio Maria Vecchio; Vincenzo Valentini; Bruce D Minsky; Gilbert D A Padula; Ennapadam S Venkatraman; Mario Balducci; Francesco Miccichè; Riccardo Ricci; Alessio Giuseppe Morganti; Maria Antonietta Gambacorta; Francesca Maurizi; Claudio Coco Journal: Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys Date: 2005-07-01 Impact factor: 7.038
Authors: Morten Braendengen; Kjell M Tveit; Ake Berglund; Elke Birkemeyer; Gunilla Frykholm; Lars Påhlman; Johan N Wiig; Per Byström; Krzysztof Bujko; Bengt Glimelius Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2008-08-01 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: Samuel Y Ngan; Bryan Burmeister; Richard J Fisher; Michael Solomon; David Goldstein; David Joseph; Stephen P Ackland; David Schache; Bev McClure; Sue-Anne McLachlan; Joseph McKendrick; Trevor Leong; Cris Hartopeanu; John Zalcberg; John Mackay Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2012-09-24 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: Al B Benson; Alan P Venook; Mahmoud M Al-Hawary; Lynette Cederquist; Yi-Jen Chen; Kristen K Ciombor; Stacey Cohen; Harry S Cooper; Dustin Deming; Paul F Engstrom; Jean L Grem; Axel Grothey; Howard S Hochster; Sarah Hoffe; Steven Hunt; Ahmed Kamel; Natalie Kirilcuk; Smitha Krishnamurthi; Wells A Messersmith; Jeffrey Meyerhardt; Mary F Mulcahy; James D Murphy; Steven Nurkin; Leonard Saltz; Sunil Sharma; David Shibata; John M Skibber; Constantinos T Sofocleous; Elena M Stoffel; Eden Stotsky-Himelfarb; Christopher G Willett; Evan Wuthrick; Kristina M Gregory; Lisa Gurski; Deborah A Freedman-Cass Journal: J Natl Compr Canc Netw Date: 2018-07 Impact factor: 11.908