106 Improved local control with neoadjuvant chemotherapy for locally advanced rectal carcinoma: Long-term analysis

Author(s):  
Bruce M. Nakfoor ◽  
Christopher G. Willett ◽  
S. Donald Kaufman ◽  
Paul C. Shellito ◽  
William J. Daly
2019 ◽  
Vol 23 (1) ◽  
pp. 221-228
Author(s):  
Mohmed Gaber ◽  
Mohamed Alhashemee ◽  
Al Sayed Hassan ◽  
Sahar Hammam

Cancer ◽  
2011 ◽  
Vol 118 (12) ◽  
pp. 3026-3035 ◽  
Author(s):  
Nils D. Arvold ◽  
David P. Ryan ◽  
Andrzej Niemierko ◽  
Lawrence S. Blaszkowsky ◽  
Eunice L. Kwak ◽  
...  

2021 ◽  
pp. 767-781
Author(s):  
Manikandan Dhanushkodi ◽  
Velusamy Sridevi ◽  
Viswanathan Shanta ◽  
Ranganathan Rama ◽  
Rajaraman Swaminathan ◽  
...  

PURPOSE There are sparse data on the outcome of patients with locally advanced breast cancer (LABC). This report is on the prognostic factors and long-term outcome from Cancer Institute, Chennai. METHODS This is an analysis of untreated patients with LABC (stages IIIA-C) who were treated from January 2006 to December 2013. RESULTS Of the 4,577 patients with breast cancer who were treated, 2,137 patients (47%) with LABC were included for analysis. The median follow-up was 75 months (range, 1-170 months), and 2.3% (n = 49) were lost to follow-up at 5 years. The initial treatment was neoadjuvant concurrent chemoradiation (NACR) (77%), neoadjuvant chemotherapy (15%), or others (8%). Patients with triple-negative breast cancer had a pathologic complete response (PCR) of 41%. The 10-year overall survival was for stage IIIA (65.1%), stage IIIB (41.2%), and stage IIIC (26.7%). Recurrence of cancer was observed in 27% of patients (local 13% and distant 87%). Multivariate analysis showed that patients with a tumor size > 10 cm (hazard ratio [HR], 2.19; 95% CI, 1.62 to 2.98; P = .001), hormone receptor negativity (HR, 1.45; 95% CI, 1.22 to 1.72; P = .001), treatment modality (neoadjuvant chemotherapy, HR, 0.56; 95% CI, 0.43 to 0.73; P = .001), lack of PCR (HR, 2.36; 95% CI, 1.85 to 3.02; P = .001), and the presence of lymphovascular invasion (HR, 1.97; 95% CI, 1.60 to 2.44; P = .001) had decreased overall survival. CONCLUSION NACR was feasible in inoperable LABC and gave satisfactory long-term survival. PCR was significantly higher in patients with triple-negative breast cancer. The tumor size > 10 cm was significantly associated with inferior survival. However, this report acknowledges the limitations inherent in experience of management of LABC from a single center.


1998 ◽  
Vol 84 (2) ◽  
pp. 229-237 ◽  
Author(s):  
Alessandro Colombo ◽  
Fabio Landoni ◽  
Andrea Maneo ◽  
Gerardo Zanetta ◽  
Simonetta Nava ◽  
...  

Radiotherapy is the standard treatment for locally advanced cervical cancer; nevertheless it fails to control disease progression within the irradiation fields in more than 40% of cases, particularly in patients with bulky tumor. Distant metastases are not infrequent in more advanced cases. Chemotherapy has been integrated with radiotherapy to improve local control and treat distant subclinical metastases. Schedules of combined treatment more frequently represented by neoadjuvant chemotherapy followed by radiation (NACT) and by concomitant chemotherapy and radiation (CT-RT). A review of the recent literature is presented. The role of NACT is controversial: high response rates are reported but doubtful advantages in terms of survival or local control have been shown. In randomized trials, hydroxyurea concomitant to radiation improves local control and survival, particularly in stage IIIB and IVA. Several randomized trials of concurrent chemoradiation with 5FU, cisplatin and mitomycin C are underway, but few have been published: no significative differences are reported in term of local control or survival. Acute toxicity is higher than in radiation alone, but usually manageable. For the analysis of late morbidity a longer follow-up is required. Large randomized trials of adequate radiotherapy versus concomitant chemoradiation are necessary to refine our understanding of the benefits of this integrated treatment.


1993 ◽  
Vol 27 (4) ◽  
pp. 843-847 ◽  
Author(s):  
Juan J. Valerdi ◽  
Martin Tejedor ◽  
Jose J. Illarramendi ◽  
Miguel A. Dominguez ◽  
Fernando Arias ◽  
...  

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document