Journal of clinical oncology : official journal of the American Society of Clinical Oncology · 2014
No Increased Risk of Second Cancer After Radiotherapy in Patients Treated for Rectal or Endometrial Cancer in the Randomized TME, PORTEC-1, and PORTEC-2 Trials.
СтатьяМетаанализПоддержка 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, Fiocco Marta, Meershoek-Klein Kranenbarg Elma, Jürgenliemk-Schulz Ina M, Jobsen Jan J, Nagtegaal Iris D, Rutten Harm J T, van de Velde Cornelis J H, Creutzberg Carien L, Marijnen Corrie A M
Аннотация
PURPOSE: This study investigated the long-term probability of developing a second cancer in a large pooled cohort of patients treated with surgery with or without radiotherapy (RT).
PATIENTS AND METHODS: All second cancers diagnosed in patients included in the TME, PORTEC-1, and PORTEC-2 trials were analyzed. In the TME trial, patients with rectal cancer (n = 1,530) were randomly allocated to preoperative external-beam RT (EBRT; 25 Gy in five fractions) or no RT. In the PORTEC trials, patients with endometrial cancer were randomly assigned to postoperative EBRT (46 Gy in 2-Gy fractions) versus no RT (PORTEC-1; n = 714) or EBRT versus vaginal brachytherapy (VBT; PORTEC-2; n = 427).
RESULTS: A total of 2,554 patients were analyzed (median follow-up, 13.0 years; range 1.8 to 21.2 years). No differences were found in second cancer probability between patients who were treated without RT (10- and 15-year rates, 15.8% and 26.5%, respectively) and those treated with EBRT (10- and 15-year rates, 15.4% and 25.6%, respectively) or VBT (10-year rate, 14.9%). In the individual trials, no significant differences were found between treatment arms. All cancer survivors had a higher risk of developing a second cancer compared with an age- and sex-matched general population. The standardized incidence ratio for any second cancer was 2.98 (95% CI, 2.82 to 3.14).
CONCLUSION: In this pooled trial cohort of > 2,500 patients with pelvic cancers, those who underwent EBRT or VBT had no higher probability of developing a second cancer than patients who were treated with surgery alone. However, patients with rectal or endometrial cancer had an increased probability of developing a second cancer compared with the general population.
PATIENTS AND METHODS: All second cancers diagnosed in patients included in the TME, PORTEC-1, and PORTEC-2 trials were analyzed. In the TME trial, patients with rectal cancer (n = 1,530) were randomly allocated to preoperative external-beam RT (EBRT; 25 Gy in five fractions) or no RT. In the PORTEC trials, patients with endometrial cancer were randomly assigned to postoperative EBRT (46 Gy in 2-Gy fractions) versus no RT (PORTEC-1; n = 714) or EBRT versus vaginal brachytherapy (VBT; PORTEC-2; n = 427).
RESULTS: A total of 2,554 patients were analyzed (median follow-up, 13.0 years; range 1.8 to 21.2 years). No differences were found in second cancer probability between patients who were treated without RT (10- and 15-year rates, 15.8% and 26.5%, respectively) and those treated with EBRT (10- and 15-year rates, 15.4% and 25.6%, respectively) or VBT (10-year rate, 14.9%). In the individual trials, no significant differences were found between treatment arms. All cancer survivors had a higher risk of developing a second cancer compared with an age- and sex-matched general population. The standardized incidence ratio for any second cancer was 2.98 (95% CI, 2.82 to 3.14).
CONCLUSION: In this pooled trial cohort of > 2,500 patients with pelvic cancers, those who underwent EBRT or VBT had no higher probability of developing a second cancer than patients who were treated with surgery alone. However, patients with rectal or endometrial cancer had an increased probability of developing a second cancer compared with the general population.