Format

Send to

Choose Destination
BMC Cancer. 2017 Sep 2;17(1):615. doi: 10.1186/s12885-017-3624-7.

Role of adjuvant chemotherapy in locally advanced rectal cancer with ypT0-3N0 after preoperative chemoradiation therapy and surgery.

Author information

1
Division of Medical Oncology, Department of Internal Medicine, Yonsei Cancer Center, 50-1 Yonsei-ro, Seodaemun-gu, Seoul, 120-752, South Korea.
2
Graduate School of Medical Science and Engineering, KAIST, Daejeon, South Korea.
3
Department of Radiation Oncology, Yonsei Cancer Center, Seoul, South Korea.
4
Department of Surgery, Yonsei Cancer Center, Seoul, South Korea.
5
Department of Pathology, Yonsei Cancer Center, Seoul, South Korea.
6
Division of Medical Oncology, Department of Internal Medicine, CHA Bundang Medical Center, Seongnam, South Korea.
7
Department of Biostatistics and Medical Informatics, Yonsei University College of Medicine, 50-1 Yonsei-ro, Seodaemun-gu, Seoul, 120-752, South Korea. IJUNG@yuhs.ac.
8
Division of Medical Oncology, Department of Internal Medicine, Yonsei Cancer Center, 50-1 Yonsei-ro, Seodaemun-gu, Seoul, 120-752, South Korea. MINKJUNG@yuhs.ac.

Abstract

BACKGROUND:

We aimed to explore the clinical benefit of adjuvant chemotherapy (AC) with fluoropyrimidine in patients with ypT0-3N0 rectal cancer after preoperative chemoradiation therapy (CRT) followed by total mesorectal excision (TME).

METHODS:

Patients with ypT0-3N0 rectal cancer after preoperative CRT and TME were included using prospectively collected tumor registry cohort between January 2001 and December 2013. Patients were categorized into two groups according to the receipt of AC. Disease-free survival (DFS) and overall survival (OS) were compared between the adjuvant and observation groups. To control for potential confounding factors, we also calculated propensity scores and performed propensity score-matched analysis for DFS and OS.

RESULTS:

Of the 339 evaluated patients, 87 patients (25.7%) did not receive AC. There were no differences in DFS (hazard ratio [HR], 0.921; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.562-1.507; P = 0.742) and OS (HR, 0.835; 95% CI, 0.423-1.648; P = 0.603) between the adjuvant and observation groups. After propensity score matching, DFS (HR, 1.129; 95% CI, 0.626-2.035; P = 0.688) and OS (HR, 1.200; 95% CI, 0.539-2.669; P = 0.655) did not differ between the adjuvant and observation groups. Advanced T stage and positive resection margin were independently associated with inferior DFS and OS on multivariate analysis.

CONCLUSIONS:

AC did not improve DFS and OS for patients with ypT0-3N0 rectal cancer after preoperative CRT followed by TME in this cohort study. The confirmative role of AC in locally advanced rectal cancer should be evaluated in prospective randomized trials with a larger sample size.

KEYWORDS:

Adjuvant chemotherapy; Disease-free survival; Overall survival; Rectal cancer

PMID:
28865435
PMCID:
PMC5581409
DOI:
10.1186/s12885-017-3624-7
[Indexed for MEDLINE]
Free PMC Article

Supplemental Content

Full text links

Icon for BioMed Central Icon for PubMed Central
Loading ...
Support Center