Salvage surgery in laryngeal cancer after radiotherapy and partial surgery - comparative results.

IF 1.4 4区 医学 Q4 ONCOLOGY Journal of cancer research and therapeutics Pub Date : 2023-04-01 DOI:10.4103/jcrt.jcrt_1548_21
Katarzyna Miśkiewicz-Orczyk, Wojciech Ścierski, Grażyna Lisowska, Wojciech Majewski, Paweł Golusiński, Maciej Misiołek
{"title":"Salvage surgery in laryngeal cancer after radiotherapy and partial surgery - comparative results.","authors":"Katarzyna Miśkiewicz-Orczyk,&nbsp;Wojciech Ścierski,&nbsp;Grażyna Lisowska,&nbsp;Wojciech Majewski,&nbsp;Paweł Golusiński,&nbsp;Maciej Misiołek","doi":"10.4103/jcrt.jcrt_1548_21","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>The study is a retrospective comparison of the usefulness of salvage surgery between a group of previously radiotherapy-treated patients (RTPs) and a group of patients who previously underwent partial surgery with both local and ± nodal recurrence.</p><p><strong>Study design: </strong>Retrospective study.</p><p><strong>Setting: </strong>Multi-center academic hospital.</p><p><strong>Materials and methods: </strong>The former group was comprised 30 previously RTPs, whereas the latter group consisted of 20 patients after partial laryngeal surgery with optional subsequent adjuvant radiotherapy (PSPs). Treatment efficacy was compared in both groups in relation to overall survival (OS) and the locoregional control rate (LCR). Local and ± nodal recurrence was considered primary treatment failure. All patients underwent total laryngectomy.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The updated 5-year OS in the PSPs was 31%, while the percentage of the updated 5-year LCR was 42%. In the RTPs the updated 5-year OS was 21%, and the percentage of 5-year LCR was 38%. No statistically significant differences were found in terms of the comparison of OS or the comparison of LCR results in both groups (P = 0.427, P = 0.704, respectively).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Based on the analysis, it was found that irrespective of the initial treatment, salvage surgery was associated with decreased survival and cure rates (by 50%) compared to the group of patients with advanced laryngeal cancer who underwent primary total laryngectomy.</p>","PeriodicalId":15208,"journal":{"name":"Journal of cancer research and therapeutics","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.4000,"publicationDate":"2023-04-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of cancer research and therapeutics","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.4103/jcrt.jcrt_1548_21","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"ONCOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objective: The study is a retrospective comparison of the usefulness of salvage surgery between a group of previously radiotherapy-treated patients (RTPs) and a group of patients who previously underwent partial surgery with both local and ± nodal recurrence.

Study design: Retrospective study.

Setting: Multi-center academic hospital.

Materials and methods: The former group was comprised 30 previously RTPs, whereas the latter group consisted of 20 patients after partial laryngeal surgery with optional subsequent adjuvant radiotherapy (PSPs). Treatment efficacy was compared in both groups in relation to overall survival (OS) and the locoregional control rate (LCR). Local and ± nodal recurrence was considered primary treatment failure. All patients underwent total laryngectomy.

Results: The updated 5-year OS in the PSPs was 31%, while the percentage of the updated 5-year LCR was 42%. In the RTPs the updated 5-year OS was 21%, and the percentage of 5-year LCR was 38%. No statistically significant differences were found in terms of the comparison of OS or the comparison of LCR results in both groups (P = 0.427, P = 0.704, respectively).

Conclusions: Based on the analysis, it was found that irrespective of the initial treatment, salvage surgery was associated with decreased survival and cure rates (by 50%) compared to the group of patients with advanced laryngeal cancer who underwent primary total laryngectomy.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
癌症放疗后的抢救性手术和部分手术的比较结果。
目的:本研究对一组既往接受放疗的患者(RTPs)和一组既往进行局部和±淋巴结复发部分手术的患者进行了挽救性手术的有用性的回顾性比较。研究设计:回顾性研究。设置:多中心学术医院。材料和方法:前一组由30名既往RTP患者组成,后一组由20名喉部分手术后选择性辅助放疗(PSP)患者组成。比较两组的治疗效果与总生存率(OS)和局部控制率(LCR)的关系。局部和±淋巴结复发被认为是主要治疗失败。所有患者均接受了全喉切除术。结果:PSPs的更新5年OS为31%,而更新5年LCR的百分比为42%。在RTP中,更新的5年OS为21%,5年LCR的百分比为38%。两组的OS比较或LCR结果比较均无统计学显著差异(分别为P=0.427,P=0.704),与接受原发性全喉切除术的晚期癌症患者相比,抢救性手术与生存率和治愈率降低(降低50%)相关。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
1.80
自引率
15.40%
发文量
299
审稿时长
6 months
期刊介绍: The journal will cover technical and clinical studies related to health, ethical and social issues in field of Medical oncology, radiation oncology, medical imaging, radiation protection, non-ionising radiation, radiobiology. Articles with clinical interest and implications will be given preference.
期刊最新文献
Evaluation of response to neoadjuvant chemotherapy in technically unresectable moderately advanced oral cavity cancers Gastrointestinal bleeding due to obstruction of the superior mesenteric vein Microwave ablation combined with percutaneous vertebroplasty for treating painful non-small cell lung cancer with spinal metastases under real-time temperature monitoring Incidence of thromboembolic events in non-small cell lung cancer patients treated with immune checkpoint inhibitors: A systematic review and meta-analysis Intra-fractional dose rate effect in continuous and interrupted irradiation of the MCF-7 cell line: Possible radiobiological implications for breath-hold techniques in breast radiotherapy?
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1