4.7 Article

Analysis of Factors Associated with Outcome in Patients Undergoing Isolated Hepatic Perfusion for Unresectable Liver Metastases from Colorectal Center

期刊

ANNALS OF SURGICAL ONCOLOGY
卷 16, 期 7, 页码 1852-1859

出版社

SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1245/s10434-009-0482-9

关键词

-

资金

  1. Center for Cancer Research
  2. NCI, Bethesda
  3. University of Maryland Marlene
  4. Stewart Greenebaum Cancer Center, Baltimore, Maryland

向作者/读者索取更多资源

To define the indications for hyperthermic isolated hepatic perfusion (IHP) in patients with unresectable liver metastases (LM) from colorectal cancer (CRC) with particular focus on IHP's utility as a second-line option for patients whose tumors have progressed following combination systemic chemotherapy treatment. From June 1994 through July 2005, 120 patients with unresectable CRC LM underwent IHP with melphalan (n = 69), tumor necrosis factor (TNF) (n = 10) or both (n = 41). Hepatic arterial infusion (HAI) with floxuridine started 6-8 weeks post IHP in 46 (38%). Patients were followed for toxicity, radiographic response, and overall survival (OS). Wilcoxon rank-sum and Fisher's exact tests were used to compare parameters by response category; survival and hepatic progression-free survival were calculated by the Kaplan-Meier method. Of 79 males and 41 females, 96 (80%) received prior chemotherapy. There were five (4%) operative/treatment mortalities. There were 69 responses in 114 evaluable patients (61%). Total melphalan dose and combination melphalan/TNF were each associated with response; age, preoperative carcinoembryonic antigen (CEA), prior chemotherapy for established LM, tumor burden, and post-IHP HAI therapy were not. Median overall survival was 17.4 months and 2-year survival was 34%. Factors found to be independently related to survival were preoperative CEA < 30 ng/mL and use of post-IHP HAI (P < 0.015). IHP results in marked tumor regression and prolonged survival in patients with CRC LM. Continued development of IHP in this clinical setting is warranted.

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