Abstract
BackgroundWhether colorectal cancer patients who undergo radical resection can benefit from intraoperative chemotherapy is still under debate. Therefore, we aimed to compare the results of intraoperative chemotherapy combined with radical surgical resection with surgical resection alone in colorectal cancer patients. MethodsThis is a multicenter, open-label, randomized, non-inferiority, phase 3 trial. All patients who had been histologically confirmed and could receive radical resection with no sign of distance metastasis, were enrolled. The patients were randomized to receive intraoperative chemotherapy with radical surgical resection, or radical surgery resection alone (1:1). Intraoperative chemotherapy included portal vein chemotherapy (200mg/m2 5-FU), intraluminal chemotherapy (1000mg/m2 5-FU), and intraperitoneal chemotherapy (300mg/m2 5-FU). The primary endpoint was 3-year disease-free survival (DFS) analyzed on an intention-to-treat basis with an α of 0.05 and a power of 80%. ResultsFrom January 2011 to January 2016, 685 colorectal cancer patients were enrolled and randomly assigned to intraoperative chemotherapy with radical surgical resection (n=341), or surgical resection alone (control group, n=344). After a median follow-up of 65.1 months, 21 patients in the intraoperative chemotherapy group and 26 patients in the control group had died. 39 patients in the intraoperative chemotherapy group and 47 patients in the control group experienced distance metastasis or local recurrence. Intraoperative chemotherapy showed no significant benefit for colorectal cancer patients who underwent radical resection (p=0.334). Subgroup analyses showed that patients with pre-treatment abnormal CEA level (> 5ng/ml) could benefit from intraoperative chemotherapy (p=0.026, HR:0.516). The patients with pre-treatment normal CEA level (< 5ng/ml) still did not benefit from intraoperative chemotherapy (p=0.298). ConclusionsIntraoperative chemotherapy could improve 3-years DFS of colorectal cancer patients whose pre-treatment serum CEA level was higher than 5ng/ml. Clinical trial identificationNCT01465451. Legal entity responsible for the studyZhizhong Pan. FundingSun Yat-sen University 5010 funding. DisclosureAll authors have declared no conflicts of interest.
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.