Detailed Information

Cited 0 time in webofscience Cited 0 time in scopus
Metadata Downloads

Wait and see approach for rectal cancer with a clinically complete response after neoadjuvant concurrent chemoradiotherapy

Authors
Kim, Hyun JungSong, Jin HoAhn, Hyeong SikChoi, Bong-HoiJeong, HojinChoi, Hoon SikLee, Yun HeeKang, Ki MunJeong, Bae Kwon
Issue Date
5월-2017
Publisher
SPRINGER
Keywords
Rectal cancer; Mesorectal excision; Wait and see; Chemoradiotherapy; Overall survival; Salvage therapy
Citation
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF COLORECTAL DISEASE, v.32, no.5, pp.723 - 727
Indexed
SCIE
SCOPUS
Journal Title
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF COLORECTAL DISEASE
Volume
32
Number
5
Start Page
723
End Page
727
URI
https://scholar.korea.ac.kr/handle/2021.sw.korea/83679
DOI
10.1007/s00384-016-2709-0
ISSN
0179-1958
Abstract
Rectal cancer patients with a pathological complete response (pCR) after neoadjuvant concurrent chemoradiotherapy (CCRT) have a better prognosis compared to those without a pCR. Therefore, the "Wait and See" (W&S) approach in those who achieved clinically complete response (cCR) after CCRT was introduced as an alternative modality to the total mesorectal excision (TME). The aim of this study was to compare the oncological outcomes between W&S and TME via meta-analysis. We performed a comprehensive literature search on January 14, 2016, using MEDLINE, EMBASE, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Web of Science, and Scopus. In addition, the references of all articles obtained were searched manually. The qualities of each study were assessed using the Newcastle-Ottawa quality assessment scale. The main outcomes were recurrence, disease-free survival (DFS), and overall survival (OS). We calculated the risk ratio (RR) and hazard ratio (HR) for the recurrence and survival rates, respectively. The RR of patients whose initial recurrences was local recurrence (LR), distant metastasis (DM), LR + DM, or overall recurrences were 0.18, 1.00, 0.61, and 0.49, respectively. There was no heterogeneity in the results. The HR of DFS was 0.59 and indicated that DFS in the TME group was superior compared with that in the W&S group. The OS has no significant difference between the studies. Although the W&S approach seemed feasible for rectal cancer patients with a cCR after neoadjuvant CCRT, concrete evidence obtained in well-controlled randomized trials with a long-term follow-up is required to validate potential treatment options.
Files in This Item
There are no files associated with this item.
Appears in
Collections
Graduate School > Department of Biomedical Sciences > 1. Journal Articles

qrcode

Items in ScholarWorks are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.

Altmetrics

Total Views & Downloads

BROWSE