Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Mostrar: 20 | 50 | 100
Resultados 1 - 2 de 2
Filtrar
Más filtros

Bases de datos
Tipo del documento
País de afiliación
Intervalo de año de publicación
1.
Eur J Surg Oncol ; 41(6): 713-23, 2015 Jun.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-25911110

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: There is no consensus on the role of postoperative chemotherapy in patients with rectal cancer who have received preoperative radio(chemo)therapy. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A systematic review and meta-analysis were performed of trials that used preoperative radio(chemo)therapy and randomized patients either between postoperative chemotherapy and observation or between a fluoropyrimidine only (FU-only) and a fluoropyrimidine with oxaliplatin (FU-OXA) as postoperative chemotherapy. RESULTS: Five randomized studies compared postoperative chemotherapy with observation in a total of 2398 patients. None of these trials demonstrated a statistically significant benefit of chemotherapy for OS and DFS. The pooled differences in OS and DFS did not differ statistically significantly between the chemotherapy group and the observation group. The hazard ratios (HRs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were 0.95 (CI: 0.82-1.10), P = 0.49 and 0.92 (CI: 0.80-1.04), P = 0.19, respectively. In the subgroup of trials in which randomization was performed after surgery (n = 753), a statistically significant positive pooled chemotherapy effect was observed for DFS (HR = 0.79, 95% CI: 0.62-1.00, P = 0.047), but not for OS (P = 0.39). Four randomized trials compared adjuvant FU-OXA with adjuvant FU-only in 2710 patients. In two trials, the difference in DFS between groups was statistically significant in favour of FU-OXA, and in the other two trials, the difference was not significant. The pooled difference in DFS between the FU-OXA group and the FU-only group was not statistically significant: HR = 0.84 (CI: 0.66-1.06), P = 0.15. CONCLUSION: The use of postoperative chemotherapy in patients with rectal cancer receiving preoperative radio(chemo)therapy is not based on strong scientific evidence.


Asunto(s)
Protocolos de Quimioterapia Combinada Antineoplásica/uso terapéutico , Quimioradioterapia , Neoplasias del Recto/terapia , Espera Vigilante , Capecitabina , Terapia Combinada/métodos , Desoxicitidina/administración & dosificación , Desoxicitidina/análogos & derivados , Supervivencia sin Enfermedad , Fluorouracilo/administración & dosificación , Fluorouracilo/análogos & derivados , Humanos , Compuestos Organoplatinos/administración & dosificación , Oxaliplatino , Cuidados Preoperatorios/métodos , Ensayos Clínicos Controlados Aleatorios como Asunto , Neoplasias del Recto/mortalidad , Tasa de Supervivencia
2.
J Eur Acad Dermatol Venereol ; 29(2): 197-202, 2015 Feb.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-25174551

RESUMEN

Radiation-induced morphea (RIM) is a rare and under-recognized skin complication of radiotherapy. It is commonly wrongly diagnosed as other dermatological conditions or malignancy because of similar clinical characteristics. This literature review analyses 66 cases that have been reported in the literature since 1989. The clinical appearance often includes pain and disfiguration of affected area, which may influence the patient's quality of life. There is no clear connection between the radiotherapy dose, the fractionation scheme, the use of a boost, age, the presence of other dermatological conditions or other connective tissue diseases and the occurrence of RIM. Its pathogenesis is still unclear, but several theories are proposed to explain this phenomenon. The available data suggest that the abnormally high secretion of some cytokines (interleukin 4, interleukin 5, transforming growth factor) induced by radiation causes an extensive fibrosis after an activation of fibroblasts. Histological confirmation is crucial in distinguishing RIM from similar-looking diseases, such as chronic radiation dermatitis, cancer recurrence, radiation, recall dermatitis, new carcinoma or cellulitis. There is no clear treatment regimen for this condition. Clinical outcome after therapy is often unsatisfactory. The commonly used methods and agents include: topical and systemic steroids, calcineurin inhibitors, systemic immunosuppressants including methotrexate, tacrolimus, heparin, hyaluronidase, phototherapy (UVA, UVA1, UVB, PUVA), systemic antibiotics, imiquimod, mycophenolate mofetil, photophoresis. The differential diagnosis is challenging and requires a multidisciplinary approach to avoid misdiagnosis and to plan appropriate treatment.


Asunto(s)
Neoplasias/radioterapia , Neumonitis por Radiación/patología , Radioterapia/efectos adversos , Esclerodermia Localizada , Enfermedades de la Piel/patología , Femenino , Humanos , Masculino , Neumonitis por Radiación/complicaciones , Neumonitis por Radiación/terapia , Esclerodermia Localizada/complicaciones , Esclerodermia Localizada/diagnóstico , Esclerodermia Localizada/terapia , Enfermedades de la Piel/complicaciones , Enfermedades de la Piel/terapia
SELECCIÓN DE REFERENCIAS
DETALLE DE LA BÚSQUEDA