Severity: Warning
Message: file_get_contents(https://...@pubfacts.com&api_key=b8daa3ad693db53b1410957c26c9a51b4908&a=1): Failed to open stream: HTTP request failed! HTTP/1.1 429 Too Many Requests
Filename: helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line Number: 176
Backtrace:
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 176
Function: file_get_contents
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 250
Function: simplexml_load_file_from_url
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 3122
Function: getPubMedXML
File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 575
Function: pubMedSearch_Global
File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 489
Function: pubMedGetRelatedKeyword
File: /var/www/html/index.php
Line: 316
Function: require_once
Purpose: Preoperative chemoradiation has been established as standard of care for T3/T4 node-positive rectal cancer. Recent work, however, has called into question the overall benefit of radiation for tumors with lower risk characteristics, particularly T3N0 rectal cancers. We retrospectively analyzed T3N0 rectal cancer patients and examined how outcomes differed according to the sequence of treatment received.
Methods: The Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) database was used to analyze T3N0 rectal cancer cases diagnosed between 1998 and 2008. Treatment consisted of surgery alone (No RT), preoperative radiation followed by surgery (Neo-Adjuvant RT), or surgery followed by postoperative radiation (Adjuvant RT). Demographic and tumor characteristics of the three groups were compared using t-tests for the comparison of means. Survival information from the SEER database was utilized to estimate cause-specific survival (CSS) and to generate Kaplan-Meier survival curves. Multivariate analysis (MVA) of features associated with outcomes was conducted using Cox proportional hazards regression models with Adjuvant RT, Neo-Adjuvant RT, No RT, histological grade, tumor size, year of diagnosis, and demographic characteristics as covariates.
Results: 10-Year CSS estimates were 66.1% (95% CI 62.3-69.6%; P=0.02), 73.5% (95% CI 68.9-77.5%; P=0.02), and 76.1% (95% CI 72.4-79.4%; P=0.02), for No RT, Neo-Adjuvant RT, and Adjuvant RT, respectively. On MVA, Adjuvant RT (HR=0.688; 95% CI, 0.578-0.819; P<0.001) was associated with significantly decreased risk for cancer death. By contrast, Neo-Adjuvant RT was not significantly associated with improved cancer survival (HR=0.863; 95% CI, 0.715-1.043; P=0.127).
Conclusion: Adjuvant RT was associated with significantly higher CSS when compared with surgery alone, while the benefit of Neo-Adjuvant RT was not significant. This indicates that surgery followed by Adjuvant RT may still be an important treatment plan for T3N0 rectal cancer with potentially significant survival advantages over other treatment sequences.
Download full-text PDF |
Source |
---|---|
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.canep.2013.12.008 | DOI Listing |
Enter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!