Systematic review of adjuvant therapy for early stage (epithelial) ovarian cancer

2003 ◽  
Vol 13 (4) ◽  
pp. 395-404 ◽  
Author(s):  
B. Winter-Roach ◽  
L. Hooper ◽  
H. Kitchener
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Ovarian Cancer ◽  
Adjuvant Chemotherapy ◽  
Adjuvant Therapy ◽  
Early Stage ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Disease Free Survival ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
Well Differentiated ◽  
Platinum Chemotherapy

A systematic review and meta analysis has been undertaken in order to evaluate the effectiveness of adjuvant therapy following surgery for early ovarian cancer. Trials reported since 1990 have been of a higher quality enabling a meta analysis of adjuvant chemotherapy vs adjuvant radiotherapy and a meta analysis of adjuvant chemotherapy vs observation. There was no significant difference between radiotherapy and chemotherapy, though these comprised studies which demonstrated considerable heterogeneity. Chemotherapy did confer significant benefit over observation in terms of both overall and disease free survival. Except for women in whom adequate surgical staging has revealed well differentiated disease confined to one or both ovaries with intact capsule, platinum chemotherapy should be offered to reduce risk of recurrence.

Comparative clinical efficacy of adjuvant chemotherapy regimens in randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of early-stage colon cancer: Systematic review and meta-analysis.

2011 ◽  
Vol 29 (4_suppl) ◽  
pp. 498-498
Author(s):  
J. Cassidy ◽  
H. Schmoll ◽  
E. Chu ◽  
N. Hawkins ◽  
I. Tatt ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Colon Cancer ◽  
Adjuvant Chemotherapy ◽  
Assessment Tool ◽  
Early Stage ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Group Analysis ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
Early Stage Colon Cancer

498 Background: A systematic review was conducted to identify RCTs of adjuvant chemotherapy regimens for early-stage colon cancer and a network meta-analysis performed to compare efficacy of oxaliplatin/fluoropyrimidine regimens. Methods: A systematic review identified RCTs recruiting adult patients with early-stage (adjuvant) stage II/III colon cancer. Outcome measures included hazard ratios for DFS and OS. Only publications in English were considered. Study quality was assessed using the Cochrane Collaboration “risk of bias” assessment tool. A single reviewer screened abstracts/titles using predefined selection criteria, with critical appraisal and data extraction conducted independently by two reviewers. A Bayesian network meta-analysis was used to estimate comparative efficacy of adjuvant chemotherapy across RCTs. Results: 56 articles describing 40 trials were selected, of which six reported data on regimens accepted as current standard of care (capecitabine/X-ACT, XELOX/NO16968, FOLFOX/MOSAIC, FLOX/C-07) or common comparators: bolus 5FU/LV and LV5FU2 (C-96-1, PETACC-2). Statistical assessment of heterogeneity was not possible due to the limited study network. Baseline characteristics were similar across trials with the exception of three trials recruiting only stage III patients; sub-group analysis on these trials was not possible due to lack of common comparators. There was no significant difference in DFS at a median follow-up of 3-years (or closest reported analysis) for XELOX vs. FLOX (HR=0.99, 95% CI 0.80–1.22) or FOLFOX (HR=1.00, 95% CI 0.72–1.41). There was also no significant difference in OS at a median follow-up of at least 5 years. Taken as a class, oxaliplatin-containing regimens (XELOX, FOLFOX, FLOX) improved DFS vs. non-oxaliplatin-containing regimens (HR=0.80, 95% CI 0.73–0.87). This result was confirmed for OS. Conclusions: Despite the limited number of available trials, the results of these analyses demonstrate a clear benefit of incorporating oxaliplatin into combination regimens for early-stage colon cancer. XELOX, FOLFOX and FLOX appear to be equivalent in terms of efficacy in this setting. [Table: see text]

Adjuvant chemotherapy and outcome in patients (pts) with nodal (N-) and resection margin negative (R0) pancreatic adenocarcinoma (PC): A systematic review and meta-analysis.

2017 ◽  
Vol 35 (15_suppl) ◽  
pp. 4114-4114
Author(s):  
Nicola Flaum ◽  
Richard Hubner ◽  
Juan W. Valle ◽  
Eitan Amir ◽  
Mairead G McNamara
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Adjuvant Chemotherapy ◽  
Adjuvant Therapy ◽  
Absolute Risk ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Performance Status ◽  
Disease Free Survival ◽  
Tumor Location ◽  
Phase 2 ◽  
Resection Status

4114 Background: Adjuvant chemotherapy following PC resection improves overall survival (OS). It is uncertain whether benefit is influenced by nodal and resection status or other factors. Methods: A systematic review of electronic databases identified published phase 2/3 studies investigating use of adjuvant chemotherapy in pts with resected PC. Efficacy (disease-free survival [DFS], OS, 5 yr OS) was explored using meta-analysis. Subgroup analysis explored effects based on nodal/resection status. Meta-regression also explored influence of age, gender, performance status [PS] and proportion of pts with head of pancreas (HOP) tumors on benefit of adjuvant chemotherapy. Results: Ten studies comprising 3644 pts were included. Two prospective phase 2 studies; 8 phase 3 trials. Median age was 63 yrs (range 24-84), 46% male. In 2268 pts with PS reported; 42% were PS 0, 51% PS 1. Tumor location was reported in 719 pts; 82% had HOP tumors. Of 3524 pts with available data; 33% N- and 67% R0. Overall, in studies of experimental vs control, adjuvant therapy significantly improved DFS (HR 0.67, CI 0.48-0.93, P = 0.02), OS (HR 0.77, 95% CI 0.68-0.87, P < 0.001) and odds of death risk at 5 yrs (OR 0.53, 95% CI 0.41-0.70, P < 0.001). In studies comparing chemotherapy to surgery only, adjuvant therapy also significantly improved DFS (HR 0.57, 95% CI 0.49-0.76, P < 0.001) and OS (HR 0.74, 95% CI 0.64-0.87, P < 0.001). There was a numerical but non-significant greater effect of adjuvant therapy in N- vs N+ pts (HR 0.58 vs 0.71, P for difference = 0.29). There was no difference in effect between pts with R0 or R1 disease (HR 0.70 vs 0.69, P for difference = 0.95). There was greater OS benefit from adjuvant therapy in pts with PS 0 (P = 0.04) and significantly less benefit on 5 yr OS in pts with HOP tumors (P = 0.04). Conclusions: The relative benefit of adjuvant chemotherapy seems similar in N-/N+ and in R0/R1 pts. This will translate into greater absolute benefit in the N+ and R1 pts due to their greater absolute risk of recurrence/death. Adjuvant chemotherapy is recommended for all pts with resected PC, where clinically appropriate, and greater benefit was seen in pts with PS 0 and body/tail tumors.

scholarly journals Postoperative adjuvant chemotherapy combined with intracavitary brachytherapy achieved the equivalent survival compared with concurrent chemoradiotherapy in cervical cancer patients with intermediate-risk

2019 ◽  
Vol 49 (8) ◽  
pp. 714-718
Author(s):  
Hao Yu ◽  
Linlin Zhang ◽  
Dapeng Li ◽  
Naifu Liu ◽  
Yueju Yin ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Cervical Cancer ◽  
Adjuvant Chemotherapy ◽  
Cancer Patients ◽  
Early Stage ◽  
Disease Free Survival ◽  
Intracavitary Brachytherapy ◽  
Intermediate Risk ◽  
Postoperative Adjuvant Chemotherapy ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
Grade Iii

Abstract Objectives The current study was aimed to evaluate the efficacy and toxicity of postoperative adjuvant chemotherapy (CT) combined with intracavitary brachytherapy (ICRT) in cervical cancer patients with intermediate-risk. Methods We analyzed the medical records of 558 patients who were submitted to radical surgery for Stage IB-IIA cervical cancer. A total of 172 of those 558 patients were considered intermediate-risk according to the GOG criteria. Among those 172 patients, 102 were subjected to CT combined with ICRT (CT+ICRT) and the remaining 70 patients were treated with concurrent chemoradiation (CCRT). The 3-year disease free survival (DFS), overall survival (OS), and complications of each group were evaluated and analyzed. Results No significant difference was observed in 3-year DFS or OS of the patients submitted to CT+ICRT and CCRT. Importantly, the frequencies of grade III to IV acute complications were significantly higher in patients submitted to CCRT than in those treated with CT+ICRT (Hematologic, P = 0.016; Gastrointestinal, P = 0.041; Genitourinary, P = 0.019). Moreover, the frequencies of grade III–IV late complications in patients treated with CCRT were significantly higher compared with CT+ICRT-treated patients (Gastrointestinal, P = 0.026; Genitourinary, P = 0.026; Lower extremity edema, P = 0.008). Conclusions Postoperative adjuvant CT+ICRT treatment achieved equivalent 3-year DFS and OS but low complication rate compared to CCRT treatment in early stage cervical cancer patients with intermediate-risk.

scholarly journals A Smartphone-Based App to Improve Adjuvant Treatment Adherence to Multidisciplinary Decisions in Patients With Early-Stage Breast Cancer: Observational Study

10.2196/27576 ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 23 (9) ◽  
pp. e27576
Author(s):  
Jing Yu ◽  
Jiayi Wu ◽  
Ou Huang ◽  
Xiaosong Chen ◽  
Kunwei Shen
Keyword(s):  
Breast Cancer ◽  
Adjuvant Chemotherapy ◽  
Adjuvant Therapy ◽  
Endocrine Therapy ◽  
Adjuvant Treatment ◽  
Early Stage ◽  
Compliance Rate ◽  
Multidisciplinary Treatment ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
Noncompliance Rate

Background Multidisciplinary treatment (MDT) and adjuvant therapy are associated with improved survival rates in breast cancer. However, nonadherence to MDT decisions is common in patients. We developed a smartphone-based app that can facilitate the full-course management of patients after surgery. Objective This study aims to investigate the influence factors of treatment nonadherence and to determine whether this smartphone-based app can improve the compliance rate with MDTs. Methods Patients who had received a diagnosis of invasive breast cancer and had undergone MDT between March 2013 and May 2019 were included. Patients were classified into 3 groups: Pre-App cohort (November 2017, before the launch of the app); App nonused, cohort (after November 2017 but not using the app); and App used cohort (after November 2017 and using the app). Univariate and multivariate analyses were performed to identify the factors related to MDT adherence. Compliance with specific adjuvant treatments, including chemotherapy, radiotherapy, endocrine therapy, and targeted therapy, was also evaluated. Results A total of 4475 patients were included, with Pre-App, App nonused, and App used cohorts comprising 2966 (66.28%), 861 (19.24%), and 648 (14.48%) patients, respectively. Overall, 15.53% (695/4475) patients did not receive MDT recommendations; the noncompliance rate ranged from 27.4% (75/273) in 2013 to 8.8% (44/500) in 2019. Multivariate analysis demonstrated that app use was independently associated with adherence to adjuvant treatment. Compared with the patients in the Pre-App cohort, patients in the App used cohort were less likely to deviate from MDT recommendations (odds ratio [OR] 0.61, 95% CI 0.43-0.87; P=.007); no significant difference was found in the App nonused cohort (P=.77). Moreover, app use decreased the noncompliance rate for adjuvant chemotherapy (OR 0.41, 95% CI 0.27-0.65; P<.001) and radiotherapy (OR 0.49, 95% CI 0.25-0.96; P=.04), but not for anti-HER2 therapy (P=.76) or endocrine therapy (P=.39). Conclusions This smartphone-based app can increase MDT adherence in patients undergoing adjuvant therapy; this was more obvious for adjuvant chemotherapy and radiotherapy.

Survival outcomes in primary angiosarcoma of the head and neck: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

2021 ◽  
Vol 39 (15_suppl) ◽  
pp. e18039-e18039
Author(s):  
Sondos Zayed ◽  
Cindy Lin ◽  
Gabriel Boldt ◽  
Pencilla Lang ◽  
Nancy Read ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Head And Neck ◽  
Treatment Approach ◽  
Early Stage ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Cochrane Library ◽  
Size Analysis ◽  
Survival Outcomes ◽  
Curative Intent ◽  
Significant Difference

e18039 Background: Angiosarcoma of the head and neck (ASHN) is a rare entity and confers substantial morbidity and mortality. Yet, the optimal management of ASHN remains unclear. This study aimed to describe the epidemiology of ASHN and to identify the most favorable treatment approach. Methods: We performed a systematic review based on the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis (PRISMA) guidelines, using the PubMed (Medline), EMBASE, and Cochrane Library databases, queried from 1990 until present. Articles in the English language reporting on survival outcomes of adult primary ASHN treated with curative-intent, were included. All estimates were weighted based on sample size. Analysis of variance (ANOVA) and two-sample t-tests were used as appropriate. This study was registered with PROSPERO, CRD42021220970. Results: A total of 3652 studies were identified, with 14 articles reporting on 2265 ASHN patients, meeting inclusion criteria. Mean ± SD age was 70.6 ± 7.7 years with 1621 (66.6%) men and 812 (33.4%) women. ASHN involved the scalp (n = 176, 57.9%) and the face (n = 128, 42.1%). 249 patients had early stage I-II disease (39.6%) whereas 379 had late stage III-IV disease (60.4%). Most (n = 529, 45.6%) received surgery and radiotherapy (RT), 305 (26.3%) received surgery alone, 210 (18.1%) received definitive RT/chemoradiotherapy (CRT), 75 (6.5%) received surgery and CRT, and 33 (2.8%) received surgery and chemotherapy. Negative margins were achieved in 471 (55.9%) whereas 371 (44.1%) had positive margins. Mean ± SD follow-up was 41.7 ± 15.4 months. Weighted mean, 1-, 5-, and 10-year overall survival (OS) were 26.9 months, 67.3%, 30.6%, and 20.8% respectively. Mean and 5-year disease-specific survival (DSS) were 72.9 months and 50.3% respectively. Mean ± SD local recurrence rate (LRR) was 32.1 ± 11.7%. Median RT dose delivered was 60 Gy (interquartile range: 60-70). Patients who received surgery had a significantly higher mean OS (34.9 vs. 18.7 months, P = 0.04) and 5-year OS (30.1 vs. 14.2%, P = 0.01) compared with those who did not receive surgery. There was no significant difference in mean OS for receiving adjuvant chemotherapy (P = 0.99) or RT (P = 0.51). Conclusions: In the largest ASHN study to date, definitive surgical resection was associated with an improvement in OS. Multimodality treatment did not confer an OS benefit. Randomized trials are needed to establish the optimal treatment approach for ASHN.

Survival Impact of Ovarian Preservation on Women With Early-Stage Endometrial Cancer: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

2016 ◽  
Vol 27 (1) ◽  
pp. 77-84 ◽  
Author(s):  
Haifeng Gu ◽  
Jundong Li ◽  
Yangkui Gu ◽  
Hua Tu ◽  
Yun Zhou ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Endometrial Cancer ◽  
Early Stage ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Grey Literature ◽  
Disease Free Survival ◽  
Premenopausal Women ◽  
Cochrane Library ◽  
Ovarian Preservation ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
Early Stage Endometrial Cancer

ObjectiveThe aim of this article was to investigate the survival impact of ovarian preservation in surgically treated patients with early-stage endometrial cancer using a meta-analysis.MethodsMajor online databases, including PubMed, EMBASE, Web of Science, the Cochrane Library, as well as Grey Literature database, were searched to collect studies on the effects of ovarian preservation compared with bilateral salpingo-oophorectomy (BSO) for surgical treatment in endometrial cancer patients. The literature search was performed up to April 2016. The results were analyzed using RevMan 5.0 software and Stata/SE 12.0 software.ResultsTotally, 7 retrospective cohort studies including 1419 patients in ovarian preservation group and 15,826 patients in BSO group were enrolled. Meta-analysis showed that there was no significant difference in overall survival between the patients treated with ovarian preservation and BSO (hazards ratio [HR], 1.00; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.72–1.39; P = 1.00). Similar result was achieved in the young and premenopausal women (HR, 0.99; 95% CI, 0.70–1.39; P = 0.39). Furthermore, the disease-free survival of patients whose ovaries were preserved was slightly compromised but with no statistical significance (HR, 1.49; 95% CI, 0.56–3.93; P = 0.42).ConclusionsOvarian preservation may be safe in patients with early-stage endometrial cancer, and it could be cautiously considered in treating young and premenopausal women because it is not associated with an adverse impact on the patients’ survival. Given the inherent limitations of the included studies, further well-designed randomized controlled trial are needed to confirm and update this analysis.

A Systematic Review Evaluating the Addition of Radiation Therapy to Chemotherapy for Localized Aggressive Non-Hodgkin’s Lymphoma: What Is the Role for Radiotherapy?.

Blood ◽  
2004 ◽  
Vol 104 (11) ◽  
pp. 3155-3155
Author(s):  
Daniel B. Fried ◽  
David E. Morris ◽  
Thomas C. Shea ◽  
Robert Z. Orlowski ◽  
Hendrik W. Van Deventer ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Radiation Therapy ◽  
Hodgkin’S Lymphoma ◽  
Randomized Trials ◽  
Early Stage ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Disease Free Survival ◽  
Hodgkin's Lymphoma ◽  
Non Hodgkin’S Lymphoma ◽  
Non Hodgkin's Lymphoma

Abstract Purpose/Objective: We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis of chemotherapy alone compared to chemotherapy plus radiation in the management of adult early stage aggressive non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma (NHL). Overall survival (OS) and disease-free survival (DFS) at 5 years were evaluated. Materials/Methods: Randomized trials published after 1990 comparing chemotherapy alone to chemotherapy plus radiation therapy in the management of adult aggressive NHL were identified through searches of MEDLINE and CANCERLIT databases. In addition, a search of ASTRO, ASCO, and ASH Proceedings from 1999 to the present was performed to identify updates of published articles and abstracts. Studies that were limited to GI sites only were excluded. Only studies employing CHOP or CHOP-like regimens and radiation therapy to a minimum dose of 30 Gy were deemed acceptable. Chemotherapy alone regimens had to consist of a minimum of 4 cycles of therapy. All trials reported OS and DFS at 5 years. A meta-analysis was performed using STATA statistical software, including tests for homogeneity and publication bias. Trials were analyzed by risk ratio (RR) method. Results: Five randomized trials (n = 1933, range for individual studies 215 to 647) were identified that met all inclusion criteria. The 5-yr OS and DFS RRs for the addition of radiation therapy to chemotherapy are presented in Figures 1 and 2, respectively. Three studies suggested an OS and DFS benefit with the addition of radiation to chemotherapy and two suggested an improved OS and DFS among patients treated with chemotherapy alone. Only two of the studies reported patterns of relapse (Aviles et al and Horning et al). These studies showed improved local control with combined modality therapy (16 – 23% vs. 4 – 5%). Risk ratios for OS ranged from 0.90 to 1.56. DFS estimates range from 0.89 to 1.82. A meta-analysis was conducted to estimate the overall treatment effects for this group of studies for both OS and DFS. Due to the high degree of heterogeneity among these trials (p-value for heterogeneity &lt;0.001 for both OS and DFS), summarizing these results with a pooled estimate of effect would be inappropriate. Heterogeneity was decreased only marginally with the exclusion of any individual study from the pooled estimate. Conclusions: It remains unclear whether early stage aggressive NHL patients benefit from the addition of radiation to CHOP-based chemotherapy. However, at this time we are not able to delineate those patients who will benefit from radiotherapy from those who will not. Currently CHOP-based chemotherapy plus radiation remains a standard of care in the US for early stage aggressive NHL. However, controversy remains regarding the role of radiation in light of conflicting results. Our ability to draw firm conclusions based on this review is limited due to the study heterogeneity. Differences among study populations may largely account for this heterogeneity.

The impact of time to adjuvant chemotherapy (AC) on survival in colorectal cancer (CRC): A systematic review and meta-analysis.

2011 ◽  
Vol 29 (4_suppl) ◽  
pp. 364-364 ◽  
Author(s):  
J. J. Biagi ◽  
M. Raphael ◽  
W. D. King ◽  
W. Kong ◽  
W. J. Mackillop ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Prognostic Factors ◽  
Adjuvant Chemotherapy ◽  
Publication Bias ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Disease Free Survival ◽  
Significant Heterogeneity ◽  
Risk Of Death ◽  
The Impact ◽  
The Relationship

364 Background: The optimal timing from CRC surgery to initiation of AC is unknown. We report a systematic review and meta-analysis to determine the relationship between time to adjuvant chemotherapy (TTAC) and survival. Methods: A systematic review of literature was done to identify studies that described the relationship between TTAC and survival. Studies were only included if the distribution of relevant prognostic factors was adequately described, and either comparative groups were balanced or results adjusted for the prognostic factors. Hazard ratio (HR) and TTAC for overall survival (OS) and disease free survival (DFS) from each study were converted to a regression coefficient (β) and standard error (SE) corresponding to a continuous representation per 4 weeks of TTAC. The adjusted β from individual studies were combined using a fixed-effect model. Inverse-variance (1/SE2) was used to weight individual studies. The possible effect of publication bias was investigated using the trim and fill approach. Results: We identified 9 eligible studies involving 14,357 patients (4 published articles, 5 abstracts). Two studies were randomized trials and 7 were cohort studies. Six studies reported TTAC as a binary variable and 3 reported TTAC as ≥3 categories. An estimate of HR for OS was derived from all 9 studies and estimate for DFS was derived from 5 studies. Meta-analysis demonstrated that a 4-week increase in TTAC was associated with a significant decrease in both OS (HR = 1.12, 95% CI 1.09-1.15), and DFS (HR = 1.15, 95% CI 1.11-1.20). The analysis showed no significant heterogeneity among studies. These TTAC associations remained significant after analysis for potential publication bias, and when the analysis was repeated excluding the two studies of largest weight. Conclusions: This study demonstrates a 12% increase in the risk of death for each 4 week of delay in the start of AC for CRC. These findings indicate the need for clinicians and health systems managers to take the steps necessary to keep TTAC as short as reasonably achievable. In addition, our results suggest there may be some benefit to AC after a 3-month TTAC delay. No significant financial relationships to disclose.

Adjuvant Therapy for Stage II Colon Cancer: A Systematic Review From the Cancer Care Ontario Program in Evidence-Based Care’s Gastrointestinal Cancer Disease Site Group

2004 ◽  
Vol 22 (16) ◽  
pp. 3395-3407 ◽  
Author(s):  
Alvaro Figueredo ◽  
Manya L. Charette ◽  
Jean Maroun ◽  
Melissa C. Brouwers ◽  
Lisa Zuraw
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Colon Cancer ◽  
Overall Survival ◽  
Adjuvant Therapy ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Disease Free Survival ◽  
Stage Ii ◽  
Free Survival ◽  
Stage Ii Colon Cancer ◽  
Disease Free

Purpose To develop a systematic review that would address the following question: Should patients with stage II colon cancer receive adjuvant therapy? Methods A systematic review was undertaken to locate randomized controlled trials comparing adjuvant therapy to observation. Results Thirty-seven trials and 11 meta-analyses were included. The evidence for stage II colon cancer comes primarily from a trial of fluorouracil plus levamisole and a meta-analysis of 1,016 patients comparing fluorouracil plus folinic acid versus observation. Neither detected an improvement in disease-free or overall survival for adjuvant therapy. A recent pooled analysis of data from seven trials observed a benefit for adjuvant therapy in a multivariate analysis for both disease-free and overall survival. The disease-free survival benefits appeared to extend to stage II patients; however, no P values were provided. A meta-analysis of chemotherapy by portal vein infusion has also shown a benefit in disease-free and overall survival for stage II patients. A meta-analysis was conducted using data on stage II patients where data were available (n = 4,187). The mortality risk ratio was 0.87 (95% CI, 0.75 to 1.01; P = .07). Conclusion There is preliminary evidence indicating that adjuvant therapy is associated with a disease-free survival benefit for patients with stage II colon cancer. These benefits are small and not necessarily associated with improved overall survival. Patients should be made aware of these results and encouraged to participate in active clinical trials. Additional investigation of newer therapies and more mature data from the presently available trials should be pursued.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document