首页> 外文期刊>Journal of gastrointestinal surgery: official journal of the Society for Surgery of the Alimentary Tract >Non-Operative Management Versus Total Mesorectal Excision for Locally Advanced Rectal Cancer with Clinical Complete Response After Neoadjuvant Chemoradiotherapy: a GRADE Approach by the Rectal Cancer Guidelines Writing Group of the Italian Association of Medical Oncology (AIOM)
【24h】

Non-Operative Management Versus Total Mesorectal Excision for Locally Advanced Rectal Cancer with Clinical Complete Response After Neoadjuvant Chemoradiotherapy: a GRADE Approach by the Rectal Cancer Guidelines Writing Group of the Italian Association of Medical Oncology (AIOM)

机译:新辅助放化疗后临床完全缓解的局部晚期直肠癌的非手术管理与全直肠系膜切除术:意大利肿瘤内科协会 (AIOM) 直肠癌指南编写小组的 GRADE 方法

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例

摘要

Background The standard approach for locally advanced rectal cancer (LARC) is neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy (nCRT) followed by total mesorectal excision (TME). After nCRT 20 of patients achieve a clinical complete response (pCR) and could be treated with a non-operative management (NOM). Methods The panel of the Italian Association of Medical Oncology (AIOM) Guidelines on rectal cancer applied the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) approach addressing the following question: Should NOM vs. TME be used for patients with rectal cancer with clinical complete response after nCRT? Five outcomes were identified: disease-free survival (DFS), mortality, local recurrence, colostomy rate, and functional outcomes. Results Nine studies were included in the analysis. A higher risk of disease recurrence was observed in the NOM group compared to the TME group (RR = 1.69, 95 CI 1.08, 2.64) on the other hand, we observed a slightly positive but not significant effect on mortality of NOM (RR = 0.82, 95 CI 0.46, 1.45). Patients in the NOM group were more likely to experience local recurrence (RR = 5.37, 95 CI 2.56, 11.27) and patients in the TME group were more likely to have a permanent colostomy (RR = 0.15, 95 CI 0.08, 0.29). Only one study evaluated functional outcomes. The overall certainty of evidence was rated as very low. Conclusions NOM was found to correlate with a higher risk of local recurrence which did not translate in worse OS and a lower colostomy rate. Due to the paucity of evidences, no recommendations are possible. NOM remains an experimental treatment; thus, patients managed with NOM should be enrolled in clinical trials with a dedicated follow-up schedule.
机译:背景 局部晚期直肠癌 (LARC) 的标准方法是新辅助放化疗 (nCRT),然后是全直肠系膜切除术 (TME)。在 nCRT 后,20% 的患者达到临床完全缓解 (pCR),并可采用非手术管理 (NOM) 进行治疗。方法 意大利肿瘤内科协会 (AIOM) 直肠癌指南小组采用建议分级、评估、开发和评估 (GRADE) 方法解决以下问题:对于 nCRT 后临床完全缓解的直肠癌患者,是否应使用 NOM 与 TME?确定了五种结局:无病生存率(DFS)、死亡率、局部复发率、结肠造口术率和功能结局。结果 共纳入9项研究。与TME组相比,NOM组观察到疾病复发风险更高(RR=1.69,95%CI 1.08,2.64),另一方面,我们观察到对NOM死亡率的轻微积极影响,但无显著影响(RR=0.82,95%CI 0.46,1.45)。NOM组患者更易发生局部复发(RR=5.37,95%CI 2.56,11.27),TME组患者更可能进行永久性结肠造口术(RR=0.15,95%CI 0.08,0.29)。只有一项研究评估了功能结局。证据的总体质量被评为极低。结论 发现NOM与较高的局部复发风险相关,但并未转化为较差的OS和较低的结肠造口率。由于缺乏证据,不可能提出任何建议。NOM 仍然是一种实验性治疗;因此,使用 NOM 管理的患者应参加临床试验,并制定专门的随访计划。

著录项

获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号