4.6 Article

The use of neo-adjuvant chemotherapy in patients with resectable colorectal liver metastases: Clinical risk score as possible discriminator

Journal

EJSO
Volume 41, Issue 7, Pages 859-867

Publisher

ELSEVIER SCI LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.ejso.2015.04.012

Keywords

Surgery; Chemotherapy; Liver metastases; Clinical risk score

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Aim: The combination of surgery and chemotherapy (CTx) is increasingly accepted as an effective treatment for patients with colorectal liver metastases (CRLM). However, controversy exists whether all patients with resectable CRLM benefit from perioperative CTx. We investigated the impact on overall survival (OS) by neo-adjuvant CTx in patients with resectable CRLM, stratified by the clinical risk score (CRS) described by Fong et al. Methods: Patients who underwent surgery for CRLM between January 2000 and December 2009 were included. We compared OS of patients with and without neo-adjuvant CTx stratified by the CRS. The CRS includes five prognosticators and defines two risk groups: low CRS (0-2) and high CRS (3-5). Results: 363 patients (64% male) were included, median age 63 years (IQR 57-70). Prior to resection, 219 patients had a low CRS (neo-adjuvant CTx: N = 65) and 144 patients had a high CRS (neo-adjuvant CTx: N = 88). Median follow-up was 47 months (IQR 25-82). In the low CRS group, there was no significant difference in median OS between patients with and without CTx (65 months (95% CI 39-91) vs. 54 months (95% CI 44-64), P = 0.31). In the high CRS group, there was a significant difference in OS between patients with and without CTx (46 months (95% CI 24-68) vs. 33 month (95% CI 29-37), P = 0.004). Conclusion: In our series, patients with a high CRS benefit from neo-adjuvant CTx. In patients with a low risk profile, neo-adjuvant CTx might not be beneficial. (C) 2015 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available