Guo Yue, Guo Zhifeng, Zhang Jiaojiao, Qian Guowu, Ji Wangquan, Song Linlin, Guo Zhe, Han Zhuo
Department of Anorectal Branch, Nanyang Central Hospital, Nanyang, 473005, China.
Nanyang Maternal and Child Health Care Hospital, Nanyang Central Hospital, Nanyang, 473005, China.
BMC Gastroenterol. 2025 Feb 17;25(1):87. doi: 10.1186/s12876-025-03667-8.
BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy (NACRT) is the standard treatment regimen for locally advanced rectal cancer (LARC) but has unavoidable radiation toxicity. With the advent of more optimized chemotherapy regimens, neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NAC) is sometimes offered as an alternative to NACRT. The purpose of this meta-analysis was to compare the short- and long-term outcomes of NAC and NACRT for LARC patients. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Eligible studies through June 15, 2023, were identified in the online databases. Short-term and long-term outcomes were synthesized. A total of 10 studies involving 14,807 patients (1714 vs. 13093) were included in this meta-analysis. RESULTS: There were no significant differences between the two groups in terms of lymphovascular invasion, perineural invasion, R0 resection, local recurrence, overall survival, disease-free survival, or grade 3-4 adverse events. The NAC group had a lower rate of pathological complete response [OR (95% CI) = 0.61 (0.45, 0.82)] and tumor regression grade [OR (95% CI) = 0.42 (0.25, 0.70)] and a greater rate of sphincter preservation [OR (95% CI) = 1.57 (1.14, 2.16)] than did the NACRT group. In the prospective studies, no differences in pathological complete response [OR (95% CI) = 0.62 (0.35, 1.11)], tumor regression grade [OR (95% CI) = 0.72 (0.52, 1.00)], and rate of sphincter preservation [OR (95% CI) = 1.40 (0.94, 2.09)] have been found between the two groups. CONCLUSION: NAC was able to achieve similar short- and long-term outcomes as NACRT. It is worth noting that some prospective studies excluded patients with high-risk features. For those LARC patients with high-risk features, the efficacy of NAC versus NACRT needs to be further explored.
背景与目的:新辅助放化疗(NACRT)是局部晚期直肠癌(LARC)的标准治疗方案,但存在不可避免的放射毒性。随着更优化化疗方案的出现,新辅助化疗(NAC)有时被用作NACRT的替代方案。本荟萃分析的目的是比较NAC和NACRT治疗LARC患者的短期和长期疗效。 材料与方法:在在线数据库中检索截至2023年6月15日符合条件的研究。对短期和长期疗效进行综合分析。本荟萃分析共纳入10项研究,涉及14807例患者(1714例 vs. 13093例)。 结果:两组在淋巴管侵犯、神经周围侵犯、R0切除、局部复发、总生存期、无病生存期或3-4级不良事件方面无显著差异。与NACRT组相比,NAC组的病理完全缓解率[比值比(95%置信区间)=0.61(0.45,0.82)]和肿瘤退缩分级[比值比(95%置信区间)=0.42(0.25,0.70)]较低,而括约肌保留率[比值比(95%置信区间)=1.57(1.14,2.16)]较高。在前瞻性研究中,两组在病理完全缓解率[比值比(95%置信区间)=0.62(0.35,1.11)]、肿瘤退缩分级[比值比(95%置信区间)=0.72(0.52,1.00)]和括约肌保留率[比值比(95%置信区间)=1.40(0.94,2.09)]方面未发现差异。 结论:NAC能够取得与NACRT相似的短期和长期疗效。值得注意的是,一些前瞻性研究排除了具有高危特征的患者。对于那些具有高危特征的LARC患者,NAC与NACRT的疗效还需要进一步探索。
Zhonghua Wei Chang Wai Ke Za Zhi. 2019-4-25
Clin Transl Radiat Oncol. 2023-8-30
J Clin Oncol. 2023-8-20
N Engl J Med. 2023-7-27