Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 2 de 2
Filter
Add more filters











Database
Language
Publication year range
1.
Dis Colon Rectum ; 62(12): 1448-1457, 2019 12.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-31725581

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: The management of adenocarcinoma of the anus can be challenging because there are few data on outcomes and trends in its treatment to date. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to compare and analyze the patterns of care and survival outcomes of patients with anal squamous cell carcinoma and anal adenocarcinoma. DESIGN: This was a retrospective study. SETTING: This study was performed by utilizing the National Cancer Database. PATIENTS: We selected a total of 19,539 patients between 2004 and 2014 with stage II to III squamous cell carcinoma or adenocarcinoma of the anus. INTERVENTION: The treatment groups analyzed were surgery alone, neoadjuvant chemoradiation followed by surgery, surgery followed by adjuvant chemoradiation, or definitive chemoradiation. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Patient- and clinical-related factors were compared between the 2 groups. Kaplan-Meier and Cox proportional hazards regression models were used to assess overall survival. RESULTS: Of the patients studied, 18,346 (93.9%) had primary squamous cell carcinoma and 1193 (6.1%) had primary adenocarcinoma of the anus. The 5-year overall survival for stage II squamous cell carcinoma was 69.2%, and, for stage II adenocarcinoma, 5-year overall survival was 54.2% (p < 0.001). The 5-year overall survival for stage III squamous cell carcinoma was 55.2%, and, for stage III adenocarcinoma, 5-year overall survival was 32.9% (p < 0.001). On multivariable Cox regression, treatment with chemoradiation alone (HR, 0.67; p = 0.008) was associated with improved survival in squamous cell carcinoma. For the adenocarcinoma group, stage III disease (HR, 2.26; p < 0.001) and high tumor grade (HR, 1.59; p < 0.011) had a negative impact on survival, but there were no differences in survival based on the type of treatment received. LIMITATIONS: The National Cancer Database does not include information on specific chemotherapeutic or immunotherapy agents given to patients, nor does it provide the exact cause of death. CONCLUSIONS: Anal adenocarcinoma in comparison to anal squamous cell carcinoma had a lower 5-year overall survival stage for stage. Anal adenocarcinoma appears to be treated similarly to the rectal cancer paradigm, with frequent use of neoadjuvant chemoradiation. See Video Abstract at http://links.lww.com/DCR/B50. PATRONES DE EL CUIDADO Y COMPARACIÓN DE RESULTADOS ENTRE EL CARCINOMA DE CÉLULAS ESCAMOSAS ANAL PRIMARIO Y EL ADENOCARCINOMA ANAL: El tratamiento del adenocarcinoma del ano puede ser un desafío ya que hasta la fecha, hay pocos datos sobre los resultados y las tendencias en su tratamiento.Comparar y analizar los patrones de el cuidado y resultados de supervivencia de pacientes con carcinoma anal de células escamosas y adenocarcinoma anal.Este fue un estudio retrospectivo.Este estudio se realizó utilizando la Base de Datos Nacional de Cancer (National Cancer Database, NCB).Seleccionamos un total de 19,539 pacientes entre el 2004-2014 con carcinoma de células escamosas en estadio II-III o adenocarcinoma del ano.Los grupos de tratamiento analizados fueron solo cirugía, quimiorradiación neoadyuvante seguida por cirugía, cirugía seguida por quimiorradiación adyuvante o quimiorradiación definitiva.Se compararon los factores clínicos y de pacientes entre los dos grupos. Se utilizaron modelos de regresión de riesgos proporcionales de Kaplan-Meier y Cox para evaluar la supervivencia general.18,346 (93.9%) tenían carcinoma primario de células escamosas y 1,193 (6.1%) tenían adenocarcinoma primario del ano. La supervivencia global a 5 años para el carcinoma de células escamosas en estadio II fue del 69.2% y para el adenocarcinoma en estadio II fue del 54.2% (p < 0.001). La supervivencia global a cinco años para el carcinoma de células escamosas en estadio III fue del 55.2% y para el adenocarcinoma en estadio III fue del 32.9% (p < 0.001). En la regresión de Cox multivariable, el tratamiento con quimiorradiación sola (proporción de riesgo 0.67, p = 0.008) se asoció con una mejor supervivencia en el carcinoma de células escamosas. Para el grupo de adenocarcinoma, la enfermedad en estadio III (proporción de riesgo 2.26, p < 0.001) y el alto grado tumoral (proporción de riesgo 1.59, p < 0.011) tuvieron un impacto negativo en la supervivencia, pero no hubo diferencias en la supervivencia según el tipo de tratamiento recibido.La Base de Datos Nacional de Cancer no incluye información sobre agentes quimioterapéuticos o de inmunoterapia específicos que se administran a los pacientes, ni proporciona la causa exacta de la muerte.El adenocarcinoma anal en comparación con el carcinoma anal de células escamosas tuvo una supervivencia general inferior a 5 años, etapa por etapa. El adenocarcinoma anal parece tratarse de manera similar al paradigma del cáncer rectal, con el uso frecuente de quimiorradiación neoadyuvante. Vea el video del resumen en http://links.lww.com/DCR/B50.


Subject(s)
Adenocarcinoma/therapy , Anus Neoplasms/therapy , Carcinoma, Squamous Cell/therapy , Combined Modality Therapy/methods , Adenocarcinoma/pathology , Anus Neoplasms/pathology , Carcinoma, Squamous Cell/pathology , Chemoradiotherapy , Databases, Factual , Digestive System Surgical Procedures , Female , Humans , Kaplan-Meier Estimate , Male , Neoadjuvant Therapy , Neoplasm Staging , Proportional Hazards Models , Retrospective Studies , Survival Analysis , Treatment Outcome
2.
Blood Rev ; 31(3): 119-128, 2017 05.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-27923516

ABSTRACT

The incidence of therapy-related myelodysplastic syndromes (t-MDS) is increasing as the number of cancer survivors is increasing. While t-MDS is currently defined descriptively by prior receipt of chemotherapy and/or radiotherapy, some forms of MDS that occur post localized radiation monotherapy, biologically and clinically resemble de novo (d)-MDS more than t-MDS, and therefore may not be truly therapy-related. Although patients with t-MDS, as a group, fare worse than patients with d-MDS, a variation in individual outcomes of patients with t-MDS has increasingly been appreciated. As such, accurate risk stratification is important for counseling of patients and for clinical decision making. Most of the current clinical tools used for prognostication in t-MDS were developed for d-MDS and were not specifically validated in patients with t-MDS. The management of patients with t-MDS remains challenging, highlighting the importance of developing effective prevention strategies as well as newer, targeted, and rationally-designed therapeutic interventions.


Subject(s)
Myelodysplastic Syndromes/etiology , Antineoplastic Agents/adverse effects , Antineoplastic Agents/therapeutic use , Antineoplastic Combined Chemotherapy Protocols/adverse effects , Antineoplastic Combined Chemotherapy Protocols/therapeutic use , Chromosome Aberrations , Combined Modality Therapy , DNA Damage , Disease Management , Hematopoietic Stem Cell Transplantation/adverse effects , Hematopoietic Stem Cell Transplantation/methods , Humans , Myelodysplastic Syndromes/diagnosis , Myelodysplastic Syndromes/epidemiology , Myelodysplastic Syndromes/therapy , Prognosis , Radiotherapy/adverse effects , Risk Factors , Treatment Outcome
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL