4.7 Article

Comparison of Adjuvant Systemic Chemotherapy With or Without Hepatic Arterial Infusional Chemotherapy After Hepatic Resection for Metastatic Colorectal Cancer

期刊

ANNALS OF SURGERY
卷 254, 期 6, 页码 851-856

出版社

LIPPINCOTT WILLIAMS & WILKINS
DOI: 10.1097/SLA.0b013e31822f4f88

关键词

-

类别

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Background: The potential benefit of adjuvant hepatic arterial infusional floxuridine (HAI-FUDR) in addition to modern systemic chemotherapy using oxaliplatin or irinotecan remains unknown for patients with resected liver-confined colorectal metastases (CRLM). The principle aim of this study was to compare outcomes in patients receiving modern systemic chemotherapy with or without HAI-FUDR. Methods: Between 2000 and 2005, 125 patients underwent resection of CRLM followed by adjuvant HAI-FUDR plus dexamethasone (Dex) and concurrent systemic chemotherapy including oxaliplatin or irinotecan. These patients were compared retrospectively to 125 consecutive patients who received modern systemic chemotherapy alone after liver resection. Results: The median follow-up for all patients was 43 months. There were no differences in clinical risk score, disease-free interval, size of largest CRLM, number of CRLM, or prehepatectomy CEA level between the 2 groups. Adjuvant HAI-FUDR was associated with an improved overall and liver recurrence-free survival (liver RFS) and disease-specific survival (DSS). For the adjuvant HAI-FUDR group, the 5-year liver RFS, overall RFS, and DSS were 75%, 48%, and 79%, respectively, compared to 55%, 25%, and 55% for the systemic alone group (P < 0.01). On multivariate analysis, adjuvant treatment including HAI-FUDR was independently associated with improved liver RFS (HR = 0.34), overall RFS (HR = 0.65), and DSS (HR = 0.39), P < 0.01. Conclusions: Adjuvant HAI-FUDR combined with modern systemic chemotherapy is independently associated with improved survival compared to adjuvant systemic chemotherapy alone. A randomized clinical trial between these 2 regimens is justified.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据