Clinical colorectal cancer · 2016
Long-Term Health-Related Quality of Life in Patients With Rectal Cancer After Preoperative Short-Course and Long-Course (Chemo) Radiotherapy.
СтатьяПоддержка исследования: вне правительства СШАНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Wiltink Lisette M, Nout Remi A, van der Voort van Zyp Jochem R N, Ceha Heleen M, Fiocco Marta, Meershoek-Klein Kranenbarg Elma, Marinelli Andreas W K S, van de Velde Cornelis J H, Marijnen Corrie A M
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: Both preoperative short-course radiotherapy (SC-PRT) and preoperative long-course chemo radiotherapy (CRT) have shown to reduce local recurrence rates after total mesorectal excision (TME), but neither resulted in improved survival. This study compared the long-term health-related quality of life (HRQL) and symptoms between CRT and SC-PRT.
METHODS: Patients who were preoperatively treated with a total dose of 50.0 to 50.4 Gy for locally advanced rectal cancers were identified from 2 hospital registries. Starting from 2011, all patients who were disease-free in the study population (n = 105) were sent a HRQL-questionnaire composed of the European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) QLQ-C30 and questions on bowel and urinary function. Patients who underwent SC-PRT in the TME trial were used as a reference group.
RESULTS: HRQL results from 85 patients receiving CRT (81.0%), with a median follow-up time of 58 months, were compared with the results of patients who underwent SC-PRT (n = 306). Apart from more nausea and vomiting reported by patients receiving CRT (mean score for CRT 5.9 vs. 1.3 for SC-PRT; P < .01; not clinically relevant) and less satisfaction with urinary function indicated by patients who received CRT (mean score for CRT 71.2 vs. 81.2 for SC-PRT; P < .01), no significant differences were found in HRQL and symptoms between patients who received CRT and SC-PRT.
CONCLUSIONS: This analysis of HRQL in patients who received CRT shows no clinically relevant differences in long-term HRQL and symptoms between patients who received CRT and SC-PRT, apart from less satisfaction with urinary function reported by patients who received CRT. These results indicate that both approaches have a comparable impact on long-term HRQL.
METHODS: Patients who were preoperatively treated with a total dose of 50.0 to 50.4 Gy for locally advanced rectal cancers were identified from 2 hospital registries. Starting from 2011, all patients who were disease-free in the study population (n = 105) were sent a HRQL-questionnaire composed of the European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) QLQ-C30 and questions on bowel and urinary function. Patients who underwent SC-PRT in the TME trial were used as a reference group.
RESULTS: HRQL results from 85 patients receiving CRT (81.0%), with a median follow-up time of 58 months, were compared with the results of patients who underwent SC-PRT (n = 306). Apart from more nausea and vomiting reported by patients receiving CRT (mean score for CRT 5.9 vs. 1.3 for SC-PRT; P < .01; not clinically relevant) and less satisfaction with urinary function indicated by patients who received CRT (mean score for CRT 71.2 vs. 81.2 for SC-PRT; P < .01), no significant differences were found in HRQL and symptoms between patients who received CRT and SC-PRT.
CONCLUSIONS: This analysis of HRQL in patients who received CRT shows no clinically relevant differences in long-term HRQL and symptoms between patients who received CRT and SC-PRT, apart from less satisfaction with urinary function reported by patients who received CRT. These results indicate that both approaches have a comparable impact on long-term HRQL.