Prognostic implications of margin status in association with systemic treatment in a cohort study of patients with resection of colorectal liver metastases.

IF 2 3区 医学 Q3 ONCOLOGY Journal of Surgical Oncology Pub Date : 2024-08-25 DOI:10.1002/jso.27846
Omeed Moaven, Bigyan B Mainali, Cristian D Valenzuela, Gregory Russell, Tanto Cheung, Carlos U Corvera, Andrew D Wisneski, Charles H Cha, John A Stauffer, Perry Shen
{"title":"Prognostic implications of margin status in association with systemic treatment in a cohort study of patients with resection of colorectal liver metastases.","authors":"Omeed Moaven, Bigyan B Mainali, Cristian D Valenzuela, Gregory Russell, Tanto Cheung, Carlos U Corvera, Andrew D Wisneski, Charles H Cha, John A Stauffer, Perry Shen","doi":"10.1002/jso.27846","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>This study investigates the impact of margin status after colorectal liver metastasis (CLM) resection on outcomes of patients after neoadjuvant treatment versus those who underwent upfront resection.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>An international collaborative database of CLM patients who underwent surgical resection was used. Proportional hazard regression models were created for single and multivariable models to assess the relationship between independent measures and median overall survival (mOS).</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>R1 was associated with worse OS in the neoadjuvant group (mOS: 51.8 m for R0 vs. 26.0 m for R1; HR: 2.18). In the patients who underwent upfront surgery, R1 was not associated with OS. (mOS: 46.7 m for R0 vs. 42.6 m for R1). When patients with R1 in each group were stratified by adjuvant treatment, there was no significant difference in the neoadjuvant group, while in the upfront surgery group with R1, adjuvant treatment was associated with significant improvement in OS (mOS: 42.6 m for adjuvant vs. 25.0 m for no adjuvant treatment; HR: 0.21).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>R1 is associated with worse outcomes in the patients who receive neoadjuvant treatment with no significant improvement with the addition of adjuvant therapy, likely representing an aggressive tumor biology. R1 did not impact OS in patients with upfront surgery who received postoperative chemotherapy.</p>","PeriodicalId":17111,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Surgical Oncology","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-08-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Surgical Oncology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1002/jso.27846","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"ONCOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: This study investigates the impact of margin status after colorectal liver metastasis (CLM) resection on outcomes of patients after neoadjuvant treatment versus those who underwent upfront resection.

Methods: An international collaborative database of CLM patients who underwent surgical resection was used. Proportional hazard regression models were created for single and multivariable models to assess the relationship between independent measures and median overall survival (mOS).

Results: R1 was associated with worse OS in the neoadjuvant group (mOS: 51.8 m for R0 vs. 26.0 m for R1; HR: 2.18). In the patients who underwent upfront surgery, R1 was not associated with OS. (mOS: 46.7 m for R0 vs. 42.6 m for R1). When patients with R1 in each group were stratified by adjuvant treatment, there was no significant difference in the neoadjuvant group, while in the upfront surgery group with R1, adjuvant treatment was associated with significant improvement in OS (mOS: 42.6 m for adjuvant vs. 25.0 m for no adjuvant treatment; HR: 0.21).

Conclusion: R1 is associated with worse outcomes in the patients who receive neoadjuvant treatment with no significant improvement with the addition of adjuvant therapy, likely representing an aggressive tumor biology. R1 did not impact OS in patients with upfront surgery who received postoperative chemotherapy.

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
在一项针对结直肠肝转移灶切除术患者的队列研究中,边缘状态与系统治疗相关的预后影响。
背景:本研究探讨了结直肠肝转移(CLM)切除术后的边缘状态对新辅助治疗与前期切除术患者预后的影响:本研究探讨了结直肠肝转移(CLM)切除术后的边缘状态对接受新辅助治疗的患者与接受前期切除术的患者预后的影响:方法:使用了一个国际合作数据库,该数据库收录了接受手术切除的 CLM 患者。建立了单变量和多变量比例危险回归模型,以评估独立指标与中位总生存期(mOS)之间的关系:结果:在新辅助治疗组中,R1与较差的OS相关(mOS:R0为51.8 m,R1为26.0 m;HR:2.18)。在接受前期手术的患者中,R1与OS无关。(mOS:R0为46.7 m,R1为42.6 m)。当对各组R1患者进行辅助治疗分层时,新辅助治疗组没有显著差异,而在接受前期手术的R1组中,辅助治疗与OS的显著改善相关(mOS:辅助治疗为42.6 m vs. 无辅助治疗为25.0 m;HR:0.21):结论:R1与接受新辅助治疗的患者预后较差有关,辅助治疗后预后无明显改善,这可能代表肿瘤生物学具有侵袭性。R1对接受术前手术和术后化疗的患者的预后没有影响。
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
4.70
自引率
4.00%
发文量
367
审稿时长
2 months
期刊介绍: The Journal of Surgical Oncology offers peer-reviewed, original papers in the field of surgical oncology and broadly related surgical sciences, including reports on experimental and laboratory studies. As an international journal, the editors encourage participation from leading surgeons around the world. The JSO is the representative journal for the World Federation of Surgical Oncology Societies. Publishing 16 issues in 2 volumes each year, the journal accepts Research Articles, in-depth Reviews of timely interest, Letters to the Editor, and invited Editorials. Guest Editors from the JSO Editorial Board oversee multiple special Seminars issues each year. These Seminars include multifaceted Reviews on a particular topic or current issue in surgical oncology, which are invited from experts in the field.
期刊最新文献
Issue Information The Impact of Intraoperative Anesthesiology Provider Handovers on Postoperative Complications After Hepatopancreatobiliary (HPB) Surgery. Comment On: "Factors Influencing Prophylactic Surgical Intervention in Women With Genetic Predisposition for Breast Cancer". Impact of Preoperative Counseling and Education on Decreasing Anxiety in Patients With Gynecologic Tumors: A Randomized Clinical Trial. Care Patterns and Outcomes for Intrahepatic Cholangiocarcinoma by Rurality of Patient Residence in a Midwestern State.
×
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