TY - JOUR
T1 - Less is more
T2 - A systematic review and meta-analysis of the outcomes of radical versus conservative primary resection in anorectal melanoma
AU - Smith, Henry G
AU - Glen, Jessica
AU - Turnbull, Nancy
AU - Peach, Howard
AU - Board, Ruth
AU - Payne, Miranda
AU - Gore, Martin
AU - Nugent, Karen
AU - Smith, Myles J F
N1 - Copyright © 2020 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
PY - 2020/8
Y1 - 2020/8
N2 - INTRODUCTION: Anorectal melanoma (ARM) is a rare disease with a poor prognosis. There is no consensus as to the optimal primary surgical treatment for ARM, with advocates for both radical (abdominoperineal resection [APR]) and conservative strategies (wide local excision [WLE]). Here, we report a systematic review of studies comparing outcomes between these strategies.METHODS: Studies comparing APR with WLE in patients with ARM were included, and a systematic review using the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation methodology was performed. Outcomes deemed critical included overall survival, disease-free survival, local recurrence and quality of life.RESULTS: Forty studies were identified, of which 27 were suitable for inclusion. Twenty-three studies compared overall survival between WLE and APR, with no difference in outcomes noted (risk ratio [RR]: 0.80, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.60-1.07, p = 0.13). Seven studies compared disease-free survival, with no difference in outcomes noted (RR: 1.08, 95% CI: 0.61-1.91, p = 0.79). A total of 19 studies compared local recurrence rates, with again no significant difference in outcomes noted (RR: 0.71, 95% CI: 0.44-1.14, p = 0.16). None of the studies identified reported quality of life-related outcomes.CONCLUSION: There is no evidence to suggest that a radical primary surgical strategy improves outcomes in ARM. Therefore, given the well-documented morbidity associated with APR, WLE with regular surveillance for local recurrence should be the primary strategy in most patients.
AB - INTRODUCTION: Anorectal melanoma (ARM) is a rare disease with a poor prognosis. There is no consensus as to the optimal primary surgical treatment for ARM, with advocates for both radical (abdominoperineal resection [APR]) and conservative strategies (wide local excision [WLE]). Here, we report a systematic review of studies comparing outcomes between these strategies.METHODS: Studies comparing APR with WLE in patients with ARM were included, and a systematic review using the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation methodology was performed. Outcomes deemed critical included overall survival, disease-free survival, local recurrence and quality of life.RESULTS: Forty studies were identified, of which 27 were suitable for inclusion. Twenty-three studies compared overall survival between WLE and APR, with no difference in outcomes noted (risk ratio [RR]: 0.80, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.60-1.07, p = 0.13). Seven studies compared disease-free survival, with no difference in outcomes noted (RR: 1.08, 95% CI: 0.61-1.91, p = 0.79). A total of 19 studies compared local recurrence rates, with again no significant difference in outcomes noted (RR: 0.71, 95% CI: 0.44-1.14, p = 0.16). None of the studies identified reported quality of life-related outcomes.CONCLUSION: There is no evidence to suggest that a radical primary surgical strategy improves outcomes in ARM. Therefore, given the well-documented morbidity associated with APR, WLE with regular surveillance for local recurrence should be the primary strategy in most patients.
KW - Anus Neoplasms/mortality
KW - Digestive System Surgical Procedures/adverse effects
KW - Disease Progression
KW - Disease-Free Survival
KW - Humans
KW - Melanoma/mortality
KW - Neoplasm Recurrence, Local
KW - Quality of Life
KW - Risk Assessment
KW - Risk Factors
KW - Time Factors
U2 - 10.1016/j.ejca.2020.04.041
DO - 10.1016/j.ejca.2020.04.041
M3 - Review
C2 - 32563895
SN - 0959-8049
VL - 135
SP - 113
EP - 120
JO - European Journal of Cancer
JF - European Journal of Cancer
ER -