Search PubMed⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search PubMed

Results for “Neoadjuvant Therapy”

Search indexed PubMed citations on genomics, clinical trials, systematic reviews and public health. Explore titles, authors and supplied subject terms, then open the PubMed record.

Quote a phrase for an exact phrase match. Source license links do not imply unrestricted reuse.

At least 19 recordsLinked to original sources
PubMed1999

Immediate breast reconstruction with the TRAM flap after neoadjuvant therapy.

Neoadjuvant therapy is a relatively new weapon in the chemotherapeutic arsenal against breast carcinoma. However, there has been concern that preoperative chemotherapy might lead to an increased incidence of complications and delays in postoperative treatment. A retrospective study was performed at M.D. Anderson Cancer Center of all patients with locally advanced breast cancer who had undergone neoadjuvant therapy followed by mastectomy and immediate reconstruction with the transverse rectus abdominis musculocutaneous (TRAM) flap. Patients were evaluated for the incidence of complications and any delays in resumption of postoperative chemotherapy. Thirty-one patients underwent immediate reconstruction with the TRAM flap. Twenty-two patients were reconstructed with free TRAM flaps whereas 9 patients were reconstructed with pedicled TRAM flaps. Seventeen patients (55%) had complications postoperatively, but only 2 patients (6%) had a delay in the resumption of chemotherapy. Seven patients were smokers, five (71%) of whom had complications, which was not a significant difference from the rate in nonsmokers (50%). Although delays in postoperative chemotherapy occurred in smokers (29%, vs. 0% in nonsmokers), the number of patients was too small to attain statistical significance. Based on this study it is felt that immediate reconstruction with the TRAM flap can be performed safely in patients on a neoadjuvant protocol. Although not contraindicated, immediate reconstruction with the TRAM flap in smokers in this setting may be associated with higher morbidity.

Breast Neoplasms↗
PubMed2003

[Pancreatic cancer. The relative importance of neoadjuvant therapy].

Neoadjuvant radiochemotherapy in patients suffering from pancreatic cancer is presently not well established. Neoadjuvant radiochemotherapy is recommended to be applied in 5-8 weeks. The full dose of radiotherapy is between 50 and 54 Gy with 5FU used as radiosensitator. In patients with resectable pancreatic cancer, particularly in UICC-stage II neoadjuvant radiochemotherapy, this results in an improvement in survival: the median survival is between 15 and 30 months. In about 15% of the patients with resectable pancreatic cancer (UICC I-III), neoadjuvant radiochemotherapy results in downstaging. In combination with a R0-resection,neoadjuvant radiochemotherapy effects a reduction of local recurrence. Results from controlled clinical trials are necessary to objectify the benefits of neoadjuvant radiochemotherapy.

Adult↗
PubMed1990

[Surgical adjuvant therapy, especially neoadjuvant therapy of lung cancer].

The recent 5-year survival rate of patients with lung cancer who underwent resection is significantly higher than that in the previous decade. The main reason for the improved survival rate seems to be due to more accurate staging, however, we cannot detect micrometastases so that distant relapses in many patients occur after operation. In order to control micrometastases, various kinds of surgical adjuvant therapy have been studied. In an attempt to improve resectability rate and survival in patients with locally advanced disease of non-small cell lung cancer, we initiated a pilot study of neoadjuvant (preoperative) therapy. Most of the 31 patients who were entered into the study clinically showed enlarged mediastinal lymph nodes, with or without direct invasion of the primary tumors to mediastinal organs. The response rate of the treatment was 64.5%. Complete resection of the tumor was performed in 14 of 31 (45%) patients and exploratory thoracotomy was done in one patient. Postoperative complications occurred in 6 of those 15 patients who underwent thoracotomy. Three patients suffered from severe complications such as empyema, pulmonary edema or respiratory failure, but recovered eventually. At present, of 15 patients who underwent operation, 9 are alive and free from disease, 2 are alive with relapse and 4 died of relapses. The median survival time was 11.5 and 19 months in non-resected cases and all cases, respectively. Although we cannot draw a conclusion because of the short observation time, we consider that neoadjuvant therapy is worthy of studying.

Antineoplastic Combined Chemotherapy Protocols↗
PubMed1991

[Neoadjuvant therapy of stage III non-small cell lung cancer].

Locally advanced stage III disease constitutes 30 to 40% of the entire group of non-small cell lung cancer. Surgery is the only curable modality in this stage disease, but resection rate is less than 40%. Even in completely resected patients 5-year survival is only 30%. Several reports have evaluated postoperative chemotherapy and radiotherapy. Prospective randomized studies, however, have failed to demonstrate a survival advantage from adjuvant therapy. Neoadjuvant therapy is under investigation in attempt to improve survival of stage III patients. Preliminary data show that neoadjuvant therapy could increase resection rate and improve survival with moderate toxicities. However, there are many problems in study design such as the use of single-arm studies with short duration of follow-up, lack of accurate staging of selected patients and no precise definitions of resectability for stage III disease. Therefore, there is an urgent need for well designed randomized trial to confirm whether neoadjuvant therapy offers a survival advantage on locally advanced stage III disease.

Antineoplastic Combined Chemotherapy Protocols↗
PubMed1993

Improved survival with neoadjuvant therapy and resection for adenocarcinoma of the esophagus.

OBJECTIVE: This study sought to determine the impact of preoperative chemotherapy and radiation therapy (neoadjuvant therapy) followed by resection in patients with adenocarcinoma of the esophagus. SUMMARY BACKGROUND DATA: Long-term survival in patients with carcinoma of the esophagus has been poor. An increase in the incidence of adenocarcinoma of the esophagus has been reported recently. METHODS: Fifty-eight patients with biopsy-proven adenocarcinoma of the esophagus treated at this institution from January 1951 through February 1993 were studied. Since 1989, 24 patients were entered prospectively into a multimodality treatment protocol consisting of preoperative cisplatin, 5-fluorouracil (5-FU), and leucovorin with or without etoposide, and concomitant mediastinal radiation (30 Gy). Patients were re-evaluated and offered resection. RESULTS: There were no deaths related to neoadjuvant therapy and toxicity was minimal. Before multimodality therapy was used, the operative mortality rate was 19% (3 of 16 patients). With multimodality therapy, there have been no operative deaths (0 of 23 patients). The median survival time in patients treated before multimodality therapy was 8 months and has yet to be reached for those treated with the neoadjuvant regimen (> 26 months, p < 0.0001). The actuarial survival rate at 24 months was 15% before multimodality therapy and 76% with multimodality therapy. No difference in survival was noted in neoadjuvant protocols with or without etoposide (p = 0.827). CONCLUSIONS: Multimodality therapy with preoperative chemotherapy and radiation therapy followed by resection appears to offer a survival advantage to patients with adenocarcinoma of the esophagus.

Actuarial Analysis↗
PubMedDate not supplied

Neoadjuvant therapy before radical prostatectomy in high-risk localized prostate cancer: defining appropriate endpoints.

High-risk localized prostate cancer remains a vexing problem for clinicians. Definitive local treatments such as surgery and radiation therapy cure only a minority of these patients. As a result, efforts are being made to reduce the risk of recurrence by using chemotherapy and new agents before, during or after definitive local therapy. Neoadjuvant androgen deprivation therapy has yielded disappointing results when combined with surgery. Chemotherapy in the management of localized disease is evolving, and preliminary studies are just now being completed. Although these agents have established activity and acceptable toxicity in the hormone-refractory setting, more extensive use of them in patients with androgen-dependent disease will require data from randomized studies to determine overall efficacy. New molecular-targeted therapies are promising and hold the greatest hope that outcomes in early disease may be improved with early use of systemic therapy. The neoadjuvant surgical model also has promise in assessing the activity of new drugs, because it provides a means to determine molecular effects of specific agents, along with standard pathologic and clinical parameters of efficacy.

Adenocarcinoma↗
PubMedDate not supplied

Accurate prediction of the amount of in situ tumor in palpable breast cancers by core needle biopsy: implications for neoadjuvant therapy.

BACKGROUND: Neoadjuvant chemotherapy facilitates breast conservation in stage II breast cancer patients, whose primary tumors are assumed to be invasive because they are palpable. However, chemotherapy may not be indicated in the minority of patients whose clinically T2 tumors are completely or predominantly in situ. Almost all previous studies of core needle biopsy in breast cancer have been concerned with nonpalpable, mammographically detected tumors, and none have evaluated its ability to quantitatively determine the amounts of in situ and invasive disease. METHODS: From September, 1992 to December, 1997, core needle biopsy was performed on all patients presenting to the Kings County Hospital Breast Clinic with palpable breast masses. Carcinoma was present in both core needle biopsy samples and surgical specimens subsequently obtained from 95 of 99 patients. Each specimen was evaluated for tumor type, histologic grade, and the amounts of in situ and invasive carcinoma it contained, and the results from surgical and core needle biopsy specimens from the same patients were then compared. RESULTS: The surgical specimens of 14 patients had completely or predominantly in situ disease. Completely or predominantly invasive disease was present in 67 specimens, and the remaining 14 had significant amounts of both. The high level of agreement between the amounts of in situ and invasive disease in core needle biopsy and surgical specimens is indicated by Pearson and intraclass correlation coefficients of 0.91 (P < .001 and < .00001, respectively). Tumor type was correctly predicted by core needle biopsy in each case. Variables among these patients, including primary tumor size, interval between biopsy and surgery, or administration of neoadjuvant systemic therapy, did not alter agreement between core needle biopsy and surgical specimens. CONCLUSIONS: Core needle biopsy can identify palpable breast tumors that are predominantly or completely in situ, and, thus, avoid unnecessary neoadjuvant chemotherapy. It also can demonstrate that a tumor is predominantly invasive, but cannot rule out small invasive foci. For that purpose, complete surgical excision of the tumor is required.

Biopsy, Needle↗
PubMed2006

Significance and problems in evaluations of pathological responses to neoadjuvant therapy for breast cancer.

Neoadjuvant therapy consists of systemic drug treatments before surgery for a primary cancer. Currently, several neoadjuvant therapy regimens for breast cancer that use various cytotoxic as well as endocrine-therapeutic and molecular-targeting agents have been performed in clinical practice and/or studies. In neoadjuvant therapy, pre-treatment pathological examination using materials obtained by a core needle biopsy (CNB) is necessary, and pathological diagnosis and evaluation of the biological status, such as hormone receptors and HER-2 over-expression are confirmed. In addition, CNB in the inter-phase of chemotherapy is also thought to be useful for assessment of therapeutic effects before regimens have been completed. After surgery, the therapeutic effects of neoadjuvant therapy have been mainly evaluated on the basis of pathological findings and a pathological complete response (pCR) is considered to be the main target of neoadjuvant therapy. Results of most of clinical studies including NSABP protocol B-18 and B-27 have confirmed the prognostic significance of pCR in neoadjuvant therapy and indicated the significance of pathological evaluation. However, universally accepted pathological response criteria have not been established, but evaluations of the main invasive tumor, intraductal components and regional lymph nodes are thought to be necessary. Additionally, evaluation of the effects below pCR also need examining in a study using a mild anti-cancer drug, such as hormone-therapeutic agent, and the survival outcomes of patients below pCR need to be examined and compared between each grade.

Breast Neoplasms↗
PubMed2004

[Significance of neoadjuvant therapy before radical prostatectomy].

Neoadjuvant therapy before radical prostatectomy should increase survival in patients. This is necessary especially in patients with adverse prognostic factors for locally advanced disease, because in this stage radical prostatectomy as the only treatment results in a significantly reduced rate of progression-free survival. The aim of neoadjuvant therapy protocols is to increase local tumor control because of possible downstaging effects of the tumor and to improve systemic control because of elimination of circulating tumor cells and possible micrometastases. This review discusses the present and future aspects of neoadjuvant therapies in detail. The neoadjuvant hormonal therapy prior to radical prostatectomy results in a significant downstaging that does not translate into prolonged disease-free survival. This observation was made for short-term (3 months) and long-term (8 months) hormonal therapy. Therefore, neoadjuvant hormonal therapy has only a cosmetic effect on the pathological results and should not be advocated any more. Newer protocols have shown that neoadjuvant chemotherapy or hormone chemotherapy is feasible. The results obtained in non-randomized trials with small numbers of patients do not allow analyzing the efficacy of these protocols. Theoretically, neoadjuvant chemotherapy, especially a taxane-based protocol, which has shown efficacy in hormone-refractory disease, could improve disease outcome. Clinical trials are underway to prove this hypothesis. In the future, new therapeutic strategies could also be used in the neoadjuvant setting. It can only be speculated if antibody protocols or gene therapy will be used in this respect. In conclusion, there is no standard neoadjuvant protocol prior to radical prostatectomy. Whether chemotherapy will set a new standard for care has to be elucidated by the ongoing clinical trials.

Androgen Antagonists↗
PubMed1993

[Neoadjuvant therapy for prostatic cancer].

Neoadjuvant therapy for prostatic cancer might be important to increase cure rates of the disease and preservability of the organs. There were 43 cases in a period of 1975-1990 in which total prostatectomy were performed after neoadjuvant therapy. According to the clinical stage, there were 14 cases in B, 23 in C, 4 in D1 and 2 in D2. The median duration of neoadjuvant therapy was 4 months. Clinical response of the prostate in 37 evaluable cases was as follows; 6 cases were PR (16%), 12 cases were MR (32%) and 19 cases were NC (52%). Histopathological effect was as follows; 5 cases were grade 0a (12%), 12 cases were grade 0b (28%), 16 cases were grade 1 (37%), 8 cases were grade 2 (19%) and 2 cases were grade 3 (5%). In 2 cases with histopathological effect of grade 3, lymph node metastases were thought to have obviously disappeared. Histopathological effect seemed related to clinical response. In cases given neoadjuvant therapy for less than 2 months, no adequate clinicopathological effect was obtained. Cases that could achieve downstaging were 8; 1 in grade 0a, 2 in grade 1, 3 in grade 2 and 2 in grade 3. These results suggest that neoadjuvant therapy plays an important role in advanced prostatic cancer.

Aged↗
PubMed2002

[Non-randomized clinical study comparing chemotherapy plus radiotherapy with radiotherapy alone in neoadjuvant therapy for oral cancer].

Neoadjuvant therapy plays an important role for organ preservation and survival rate in the treatment of oral cancer. We clinically compared the effect of neoadjuvant radiotherapy and chemoradiotherapy in patients with oral cancer. We retrospectively examined 47 patients diagnosed with oral squamous cell carcinoma who underwent neoadjuvant therapy followed by curative surgery in the oral and maxillofacial surgery department of Ehime University Hospital. We divided them into two groups: radiotherapy alone (24 cases) and chemoradiotherapy (23 cases). The patients in the radiotherapy group underwent irradiation of 32.6 +/- 5.0 Gy (mean +/- SD). The patients in the chemoradiotherapy group received a low-dose fraction of cisplatin (8 mg/mm2/day, 5 days a week; total dose: 139.4 +/- 67.1 mg) and 5-fluorouracil (300 mg/mm2/day, 5 days a week; total dose: 5,900 +/- 1,839.8 mg) combined with simultaneous irradiation of 31.0 +/- 3.2 Gy. None of the 24 patients had a complete response to radiotherapy alone and 12 (50%) had a partial response. Six (26%) of the 23 patients had a complete response to chemoradiotherapy and 12 (52%) had a partial response. The primary control rate (82.6%) to chemoradiotherapy was higher than that (67.5%) to radiotherapy alone although no significant difference was found. The 5-year survival rate was 64.3% in the radiotherapy group and 62.8% in the chemoradiotherapy group. The findings of the present study suggest that while the combination of radiation and cisplatin/5-fluorouracil in neoadjuvant therapy for oral cancer may not bring a significant benefit to improve survival rate, the primary local control rate is improved in comparison with radiotherapy alone.

Antineoplastic Combined Chemotherapy Protocols↗
PubMed1999

[Pancreatic carcinoma. Optimizing therapy by adjuvant and neoadjuvant therapy?].

Increasing resection rates for pancreatic tumors and decreasing postoperative mortality rates in specialised centres let arise the question of an additional benefit of adjuvant therapy. Despite of extended and radical surgery the recurrence rates after resection of pancreatic cancer remain high. Several studies have indicated some chemo- and radiosensitivity of these tumors. Whether a (combination-)chemotherapy alone or a combined radiochemotherapy should be recommended can actually not be answered yet. However, adjuvant radiotherapy alone seems to be inferior to combined radiochemotherapy. Intraoperative radiotherapy as well as preoperative radiotherapy are not superior to postoperative percutaneous radiotherapy regarding recurrence rate and survival. Preoperative radiotherapy, preferably in combination with chemotherapy, should be considered in patients with non resectable or borderline resectable pancreatic tumors with the aim of downstaging and secondary resection. The preliminary results of regional adjuvant chemotherapy are impressing, but need to be confirmed in further, randomised studies. Overall, the availability of a good or even optimal adjuvant therapy for pancreatic cancer still seems to be far away. Therefore, all surgeons need to be encouraged to include their patients with resected pancreatic carcinoma in a current study protocol of adjuvant treatment, since only tenacious and multicentric research can lead to progress in this severe disease.

Chemotherapy, Adjuvant↗
PubMed1993

Neoadjuvant therapy in cancer treatment.

Neoadjuvant therapy has come to play an increasingly prominent role in the treatment of cancer. Originally defined as systemic therapy given before local treatment, the concept has been extended to include radiation therapy given before surgery. Potential advantages include improved local and distant control, direct evaluation, and organ-sparing treatment. Potential disadvantages include increased toxicity and cost, potential delay in effective treatment, and obscuring of pathologic staging. Neoadjuvant therapy in cancer treatment may be viewed in three categories: tumors in which neoadjuvant treatment has been shown effective, thus becoming standard therapy; tumors in which it has been shown to facilitate organ-sparing, and tumors in which its utility has not been shown. For patients with osteogenic sarcoma, for example, preoperative chemotherapy and limb salvage therapy have become the standard of care. Response to chemotherapy, ascertained by histologic review of the surgical specimen, can be used to tailor postoperative chemotherapy. In patients with advanced laryngeal squamous cell carcinoma, neoadjuvant chemotherapy followed by radiation has permitted laryngeal preservation in a majority of patients without compromising overall survival. Phase II and III studies conducted in women with breast cancer have demonstrated promising results for neoadjuvant chemotherapy given before radiation therapy and/or surgery. Phase III studies to compare neoadjuvant therapy to standard therapy in patients with breast cancer are underway. For neoadjuvant therapy, as with other innovations in cancer treatment, it is crucial that a new strategy must be compared closely to standard therapy in terms of recurrence, survival, and impact on organ sparing, as well as quality of life and treatment costs.

Antineoplastic Agents↗
PubMed2006

[Neoadjuvant therapy in oesophageal cancer surgery].

Neoadjuvant therapy has been implemented to improve the prognosis of patients with oesophageal cancer. Operative therapy remains the therapy of choice for nonmetastatic disease in patients who can tolerate resection. Adjuvant therapy following resection is usually not indicated. For neoadjuvant therapy it seems to be confirmed that preoperative radiotherapy has only very little benefit and therefore, should not be recommended. Data for preoperative chemotherapy are conflicting. Following preoperative combined radio-chemotherapy a complete response of tumour can be expected in 20-25 % of treated patients with a marked advantage for these patients. However, there are still no markers available indicating tumour response before the start of perioperative radio-chemotherapy. Recently published meta-analyses confirm a small overall benefit for perioperative radio-chemotherapy. However, these data so far have not led to a broad agreement on the indication of neoadjuvant therapy in oesophageal cancer.

Adenocarcinoma↗
PubMed2005

Neoadjuvant therapy: an emerging concept in oncology.

Neoadjuvant therapy, an adjunctive therapy given before the main therapy, has become an integral part of modem multidisciplinary cancer management. Organized by the primary organ involved by cancer, this review summarizes the outcomes of neoadjuvant therapy for common malignant solid tumors, based on large, randomized, controlled trials. In locally advanced rectal, laryngeal, and breast cancer, neoadjuvant therapy enables organ preservation; however, it does not improve overall survival when compared with definitive treatment followed by adjuvant therapy. In locally advanced bladder and cervical cancer, patients who undergo neoadjuvant therapy before radical surgery appear to have better survival than those receiving definitive therapy alone; however, it is unclear if the neoadjuvant approach will be superior to definitive therapy followed by adjuvant therapy. To date, the survival benefits of neoadjuvant therapy for resectable non-small cell lung, esophageal, gastric, and prostate cancer remains under investigation.

Female↗
PubMedDate not supplied

Neoadjuvant therapy for esophageal cancer--what can we accept?

BACKGROUND/AIMS: We evaluated neoadjuvant use in managing patients with esophageal carcinoma and its effects on the surgical resection and outcomes. METHODOLOGY: Patients prior to esophageal resection were offered the opportunity to receive a neoadjuvant cytostatic regimen (CDDP + FU, CDDP, or TAX + FU). Retrospective tumor chemoresistance analysis using the MTT test was also performed. RESULTS: Seventy patients were operated from 2001 until May 2004. A total of 55 resections were performed with preoperative neoadjuvant therapy and 15 elected to only undergo surgery without neoadjuvant therapy. No deaths occurred as a result of surgery or neoadjuvant therapy, but complications included fistulas and hemorrhages. CONCLUSIONS: There was no significant difference between the postoperative complications among the neoadjuvant and non-neoadjuvant groups. This therapy therefore does not have any influence on the course or results of surgical resection. MTT testing did not demonstrate any particular usefulness in tailoring neoadjuvant therapy. Chemoresistance could only be retrospectively evaluated and the results may be affected after cytostatic therapy. The long-term outcomes have not been evaluated yet due to the short follow-up time in our patient group.

Antineoplastic Combined Chemotherapy Protocols↗
PubMed2001

[Monitoring of response to neoadjuvant therapy by positron emission tomography (PET)].

Neoadjuvant therapy is frequently hampered by the lack of reliable non-invasive techniques for prediction and assessment of response. Positron emission tomography using the glucose analogue 18F-fluorodeoxyglucose (FDG-PET) provides a unique means of non-invasive assessment of tumor metabolism. Several recent studies have indicated that a reduction of tumor metabolic activity after neoadjuvant therapy is closely correlated with the degree of histopathological tumor regression. The reduction of metabolic activity may also allow one to predict subsequent response early during the course of therapy. Therefore FDG-PET may permit individualized therapy management. However, there is a requirement for larger-scale trials to assess this technique.

Female↗