A PHP Error was encountered

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: 1034
Function: getPubMedXML

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 3152
Function: GetPubMedArticleOutput_2016

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

Short-Term Outcomes and Cost-Effectiveness between Long-Course Chemoradiation and Short-Course Radiotherapy for Locally Advanced Rectal Cancer. | LitMetric

Purpose: Long-course chemoradiotherapy (LCRT) has been widely recommended in a majority of rectal cancer patients. Recently, encouraging data on short-course radiotherapy (SCRT) for rectal cancer has emerged. In this study, we aimed to compare these two methods in terms of short-term outcomes and cost analysis under the Korean medical insurance system.

Materials And Methods: Sixty-two patients with high-risk rectal cancer, who underwent either SCRT or LCRT followed by total mesorectal excision (TME), were classified into two groups. Twenty-seven patients received 5 Gy×5 with two cycles of XELOX (capecitabine 1000 mg/m² and oxaliplatin 130 mg/m² every 3 weeks) followed by TME (SCRT group). Thirty-five patients received capecitabine-based LCRT followed by TME (LCRT group). Short-term outcomes and cost estimation were assessed between the two groups.

Results: Pathological complete response was achieved in 18.5% and 5.7% of patients in the SCRT and LCRT groups, respectively (=0.223). The 2-year recurrence-free survival rate did not show significant difference between the two groups (SCRT vs. LCRT: 91.9% vs. 76.2%, =0.394). The average total cost per patient for SCRT was 18% lower for inpatient treatment (SCRT vs. LCRT: $18787 vs. $22203, <0.001) and 40% lower for outpatient treatment (SCRT vs. LCRT: $11955 vs. $19641, <0.001) compared to LCRT. SCRT was shown to be the dominant treatment option with fewer recurrences and fewer complications at a lower cost.

Conclusion: SCRT was well-tolerated and achieved favorable short-term outcomes. In addition, SCRT showed significant reduction in the total cost of care and distinguished cost-effectiveness compared to LCRT.

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10232996PMC
http://dx.doi.org/10.3349/ymj.2023.0042DOI Listing

Publication Analysis

Top Keywords

rectal cancer
16
scrt lcrt
16
short-term outcomes
12
short-course radiotherapy
8
outcomes cost
8
patients received
8
lcrt
7
scrt
7
patients
5
outcomes cost-effectiveness
4

Similar Publications

Want AI Summaries of new PubMed Abstracts delivered to your In-box?

Enter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!