Adjuvant chemoradiotherapy versus chemotherapy for resectable gastric cancer: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

2013 ◽  
Vol 31 (15_suppl) ◽  
pp. 4066-4066
Author(s):  
Yu Yang Soon ◽  
Cheng Nang Leong ◽  
Jeremy Chee Seong Tey ◽  
Ivan Weng Keong Tham ◽  
Jiade Jay Lu

4066 Background: The benefits of adjuvant chemo-radiotherapy (ChRT) over chemotherapy (Ch) for resectable gastric cancer are currently unclear. We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis (direct and indirect) of published randomized controlled trials (RCT) to compare the effects of adjuvant chemo-radiotherapy with chemotherapy on overall and disease-free survival for patients with resectable gastric cancer. Methods: We searched MEDLINE and CENTRAL from the date of inception and annual meeting proceedings of ASCO and ASTRO from 1999 to November 2012 for RCTs comparing adjuvant ChRT with Ch, adjuvant ChRT with surgery alone and adjuvant Ch with surgery alone. The primary outcome was overall survival (OS); secondary outcomes included disease-free survival (DFS) and toxicity. Hazard ratios (HR), confidence intervals (CI) and p values (p) were estimated with fixed effects models using Revman 5.1. Results: We found five trials comparing adjuvant ChRT with Ch (n = 1110), three trials comparing adjuvant ChRT with surgery alone (n = 651) and 31 trials comparing adjuvant Ch with surgery alone (n = 8273). Meta-analysis of direct comparison trials showed that adjuvant ChRT significantly improved both OS (HR 0.79, 95% CI 0.64-0.98, p = 0.03) and DFS (HR 0.76, 95% CI 0.64-0.92, p = 0.004) when compared with Ch. Subgroup analyses showed that the effects on OS and DFS were similar regardless of use of D2 nodal dissection, intensity modulated radiotherapy techniques, fluorouracil or platinum-based chemotherapy. There were no significant differences in toxicity between the two groups. The results for the direct and indirect comparisons were statistically consistent. Conclusions: There was a significant survival benefit of adjuvant chemo-radiotherapy over chemotherapy, with no increase in toxicity for patients with resected gastric cancer. Future efforts should also focus on predictive markers, and toxicity or quality-of-life assessments, to individualize adjuvant therapy and optimize the therapeutic ratio.

2018 ◽  
Vol 97 (7) ◽  
pp. 759-766 ◽  
Author(s):  
G. Troiano ◽  
F. Mastrangelo ◽  
V.C.A. Caponio ◽  
L. Laino ◽  
N. Cirillo ◽  
...  

Oral squamous cell carcinoma (OSCC) is a common type of cancer characterized by a low survival rate, mostly due to local recurrence and metastasis. In view of the importance of predicting tumor behavior in the choice of treatment strategies for OSCC, several studies have attempted to investigate the prognostic value of tissue biomarkers, including microRNA (miRNA). The purpose of this study was to perform a systematic review and meta-analysis to evaluate the relationship between miRNA expression and survival of OSCC patients. Studies were identified by searching on MEDLINE/PubMed, SCOPUS, Web of Science, and Google Scholar. Quality assessment of studies was performed with the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale. Data were collected from cohort studies comparing disease-free survival and overall survival in patients with high miRNA expression compared to those with low expression. A total of 15 studies featuring 1,200 OSCC samples, predominantly from Asia, met the inclusion criteria and were included in the meta-analysis. Poor prognosis correlated with upregulation of 9 miRNAs (miR-21, miR-455-5p, miiR-155-5p, miR-372, miR-373, miR-29b, miR-1246, miR-196a, and miR-181) and downregulation of 7 miRNAs (miR-204, miR-101, miR-32, miR-20a, miR-16, miR-17, and miR-125b). The pooled hazard ratio values (95% confidence interval) related to different miRNA expression for overall survival and disease-free survival were 2.65 (2.07–3.39) and 1.95 (1.28–2.98), respectively. The results of this meta-analysis revealed that the expression levels of specific miRNAs can robustly predict prognosis of OSCC patients.


2021 ◽  
Vol 108 (Supplement_7) ◽  
Author(s):  
A R Aspari ◽  
V Ramesh ◽  
G Kumar ◽  
S N Narayanasamy ◽  
A O Gumber ◽  
...  

Abstract Objective To evaluate local recurrence, metastases, and survival outcomes of `wait and watch’ (WW) strategy and local excision (LE) of tumours, in comparison to the present standard practice of total mesorectal excision (TME) for locally advanced rectal cancers. Data Sources MEDLINE, EMBASE, PubMed databases, and sources of Grey literature. Study Selection Randomised and non-randomised prospective studies, retrospective studies with propensity-score-matched analyses. Data Extraction and Synthesis These were carried out independently by two reviewers. A random-effects methodology was used for meta-analyses. Data was presented keeping with the 27-item PRISMA checklist. Main Outcomes The primary outcomes of interest were local recurrence, distant metastases, disease-free-survival and overall-survival, which were assessed in comparison to those associated with radical surgeries (TME). Results 7 of the 16 studies in the systematic review were included for the quantitative synthesis and meta-analysis. Local recurrence rates were comparable amongst patients in WW group and LE group to those undergoing TME. [Risk ratio (RR) 3.07/1.41; 95% Confidence Interval (CI) 0.86-10.95/0.66-3.01; P = 0.08/P=0.89 respectively]. Rates of distant metastases in the WW group and LE group were comparable to those undergoing TME [RR = 0.71/0.94; 95% CI 0.22-2.30/0.55-1.61; P = 0.56/ P = 0.83 respectively]. The median 3-year disease-free survival among patients undergoing WW, LE procedure, and TME were 88%, 80%, and 78.2% respectively; and the median 3-year overall survival among the three groups were 96%, 93%, and 89.5% respectively. Conclusions and Relevance Organ-preservation strategies appear to be a viable treatment option in the management of rectal-cancers. Further research is warranted to provide stronger levels of evidence on organ-preservation strategies.


2004 ◽  
Vol 22 (16) ◽  
pp. 3395-3407 ◽  
Author(s):  
Alvaro Figueredo ◽  
Manya L. Charette ◽  
Jean Maroun ◽  
Melissa C. Brouwers ◽  
Lisa Zuraw

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.


2021 ◽  
Vol 108 (Supplement_6) ◽  
Author(s):  
R Varley ◽  
M Tarazi ◽  
M Davé ◽  
S Mobarak ◽  
M Stott ◽  
...  

Abstract Introduction Colorectal liver metastases were historically considered a contraindication to liver transplantation, but dismal outcomes for those with metastatic colorectal cancer and advancements in liver transplantation (LT) have led to a renewed interest in the topic. We aim to compare the current evidence for liver transplantation for non-resectable colorectal liver metastases (NRCLM) with the current standard treatment of palliative chemotherapy reported in literature – 5-year survival rate <10%. Method A systematic review and meta-analysis of proportions was conducted following screening of MEDLINE, EMBASE, SCOPUS and CENTRAL for studies reporting liver transplantation for colorectal liver metastases. Post-operative outcomes measured included 1-, 3- and 5-year survival, overall survival, disease-free survival, and complication rates. Results Three non-randomised studies met the inclusion criteria, reporting a total of 48 patients receiving LT for NRCLM. Survival at 1-, 3- and 5-years was 83.3-100%, 58.3-80% and 50-80% respectively with no significant difference detected (p = 0.22, p = 0.48, p = 0.26). Disease free survival was 35-56% with the most common site of recurrence being lung. Thirteen out of fourteen deaths were due to disease recurrence. Conclusions Although current evidence suggests a survival benefit conferred by LT in NRCLM compared to palliative chemotherapy, the ethical implications of organ availability and allocation demand rigorous justification. Eight registered clinical trials will report on 300 more patients undergoing LT for NRCLM over the next 10 years: concomitant improvements in the management of patients following liver resection and of palliative chemotherapy regimens is paramount.


Cancers ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 13 (19) ◽  
pp. 4971
Author(s):  
Shion Wei Chai ◽  
Suo-Hsien Wang ◽  
Chih-Yuan Wang ◽  
Yi-Chan Chen ◽  
Ruey-Shyang Soong ◽  
...  

Background: Surgical treatment is the key to cure localized gastric cancer. There is no strong evidence that supports the value of omentectomy. Thus, a meta-analysis was conducted to compare the safety and efficiency of partial and total omentectomy in patients with gastric cancer. Methods: PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane Library databases were searched. All studies that compared total and partial omentectomy as treatments for gastric cancer were included. The primary outcomes were patients’ overall survival and disease-free survival, while the secondary outcomes were perioperative outcome and postoperative complications. Results: A total of nine studies were examined, wherein 1043 patients were included in the partial omentectomy group, and 1995 in the total omentectomy group. The partial omentectomy group was associated with better overall survival (hazard ratio: 0.80, 95% CI: 0.66 to 0.98, p = 0.04, I2 = 0%), shorter operative time, and lesser blood loss than the total omentectomy group. In addition, no statistically significant difference was observed in the number of dissected lymph nodes, length of hospital stays, complication rate, and disease-free survival. Conclusions: Our results show that, compared with total omentectomy in gastric cancer surgery, partial omentectomy had non-inferior oncological outcomes and comparable safety outcomes.


2019 ◽  
Vol 29 (1) ◽  
pp. 35-41
Author(s):  
Jiahao Zhu ◽  
Shengjun Ji ◽  
Qunchao Hu ◽  
Qingqing Chen ◽  
Zhengcao Liu ◽  
...  

BackgroundRecently, several studies observed that locally advanced cervical carcinoma with negative excision repair crross-complementation group one enzyme expression has better outcomes in cisplatin-based chemotherapy or chemoradiotherapy than carcinoma with positive excission repair cross-complementation group one enzyme expression. In this meta-analysis, we quantitatively evaluated the prognostic value of excission repair cross-complementation group one enzyme expression in locally advanced cervical carcinoma patients receiving platinum-based chemotherapy or chemoradiotherapy.MaterialsA systematic search for relevant studies was conducted in the PubMed, Cochrane Library, EMBASE and Medline databases. Fixed- or random-effects models were used for pooled analysis. The endpoints were overall survival and disease-free survival () reported as ORs and 95% CIs. The effects of excission repair cross-complementation group one enzyme expression on the clinicopathological parameters were measured by the pooled ORs and their 95% CIs.ResultsEight studies (612 patients in total) satisfied the inclusion criteria. Negative/low excission repair cross-complementation group one enzyme expression was significantly associated with better overall survival (OR, 1.92; 95% CI, 1.22 to 3.05; P = 0.005) and disease-free survival (OR, 5.77; 95% CI, 1.90 to 17.54; P = 0.002). Additionally, there were significant associations between excission repair cross-complementation group one enzyme expression and lymph node metastasis (OR, 2.57; 95% CI, 1.28 to 5.16; P = 0.008).ConclusionsThis meta-analysis suggested that pretreatment excission repair cross-complementation group one enzyme expression might be a useful biomarker to predict prognoses for locally advanced cervical carcinoma patients receiving platinum-based chemotherapy or chemoradiotherapy.


2021 ◽  
Vol 11 ◽  
Author(s):  
Guang Zhu ◽  
Ying Liu ◽  
Lei Zhao ◽  
Zhenhua Lin ◽  
Yingshi Piao

Sine Oculis Homeobox Homolog 1 (SIX1) is reported to promote cancer initiation and progression in many preclinical models and is demonstrated in human cancer tissues. However, the correlation between SIX1 and cancer patients’ prognosis has not yet been systematically evaluated. Therefore, we performed a systematic review and meta-analysis in various human cancer types and extracted some data from TCGA datasets for further verification and perfection. We constructed 27 studies and estimated the association between SIX1 expression in various cancer patients’ overall survival and verified with TCGA datasets. Twenty-seven studies with 4899 patients are include in the analysis of overall, and disease-free survival, most of them were retrospective. The pooled hazard ratios (HRs) for overall and disease-free survival in high SIX1 expression patients were 1.54 (95% CI: 1.32-1.80, P<0.00001) and 1.83 (95% CI: 1.31-2.55, P=0.0004) respectively. On subgroup analysis classified in cancer type, high SIX1 expression was associated with poor overall survival in patients with hepatocellular carcinoma (HR 1.50; 95% CI: 1.17-1.93, P =0.001), breast cancer (HR 1.31; 95% CI: 1.10-1.55, P =0.002) and esophageal squamous cell carcinoma (HR 1.89; 95% CI: 1.42-2.52, P<0.0001). Next, we utilized TCGA online datasets, and the consistent results were verified in various cancer types. SIX1 expression indicated its potential to serve as a cancer biomarker and deliver prognostic information in various cancer patients. More works still need to improve the understandings of SIX1 expression and prognosis in different cancer types.


2019 ◽  
Vol 37 (15_suppl) ◽  
pp. 4579-4579
Author(s):  
Daniel Vargas Almeida ◽  
Cleyton Z. Oliveira ◽  
Andrey Soares ◽  
RODRIGO COUTINHO MARIANO ◽  
Denis L Jardim ◽  
...  

4579 Background: Although surgery is the cornerstone in the treatment of most cases of localized kidney cancer, up to 30% of patients will experience disease recurrence at three years of follow-up. Three RCTs with VEGFR TKIs (ASSURE, PROTECT and ATLAS) failed to demonstrate improvement in disease-free survival (DFS). Only S-TRAC trial showed a significant improvement in DFS, and was approved by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA). However, the matter remains controversial among genitourinary oncologists. Therefore, we performed a meta-analysis to better evaluate the potential benefit of adjuvant VEGFR TKIs after curative intent nephrectomy. Methods: Eligible studies were searched in PubMed databases and limited to phase 3 RCT published from January 1996 to December 2018 of US FDA-approved VEGFR TKIs reporting on patients with RCC treated in the adjuvant setting. A summary hazard-ratio (HR) of disease-free survival (DFS) was calculated using 95% CIs by random-effects or fixed-effects models on the basis of the heterogeneity of included studies. Results: Four RCT (ASSURE, S-TRAC, PROTECT and ATLAS trials) were selected for analysis, including a total of 4,820 patients. A VEGFR TKI (sunitinib, sorafenib, pazopanib or axitinib) was administered in 2,737 patients, and 2,083 received placebo. The summary DFS HR for the overall population was 0.89 (95% CI 0.79-1.00; p = 0.06). When including the report of the ASSURE with the sub-group analysis with high-risk patient population (n = 3,946), the summary HR for DFS was 0.84 (95% CI 0.75-0.95, p = 0,0044). No evidence of publication bias was found. Conclusions: This is the first meta-analysis including the four RCTs in RCC adjuvant setting. This meta-analysis failed to demonstrate improvement in DFS for patients receiving a VEGFR TKI after curative intent nephrectomy. A modest benefit in DFS was observed in a selected sub-group of patients with higher risk for recurrence. There is no data regarding overall survival.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document