@article{LichthardtWagnerLoebetal.2020,
  author    = {Lichthardt, Sven and Wagner, Johanna and L{\"o}b, Stefan and Matthes, Niels and Kastner, Caroline and Anger, Friedrich and Germer, Christoph-Thomas and Wiegering, Armin},
  title     = {Pathological complete response due to a prolonged time interval between preoperative chemoradiation and surgery in locally advanced rectal cancer: analysis from the German StuDoQ|Rectalcarcinoma registry},
  series = {BMC Cancer},
  volume    = {20},
  journal   = {BMC Cancer},
  number    = {1},
  doi       = {10.1186/s12885-020-6538-8},
  url       = {http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:bvb:20-opus-229334},
  year      = {2020},
  abstract  = {Background Preoperative chemoradiotherapy is the recommended standard of care for patients with local advanced rectal cancer. However, it remains unclear, whether a prolonged time interval to surgery results in an increased perioperative morbidity, reduced TME quality or better pathological response. Aim of this study was to determine the time interval for best pathological response and perioperative outcome compared to current recommended interval of 6 to 8 weeks. Methods This is a retrospective analysis of the German StuDoQ|Rectalcarcinoma registry. Patients were grouped for the time intervals of "less than 6 weeks", "6 to 8 weeks", "8 to 10 weeks" and "more than 10 weeks". Primary endpoint was pathological response, secondary endpoint TME quality and complications according to Clavien-Dindo classification. Results Due to our inclusion criteria (preoperative chemoradiation, surgery in curative intention, M0), 1.809 of 9.560 patients were suitable for analysis. We observed a trend for increased rates of pathological complete response (pCR: ypT0ypN0) and pathological good response (pGR: ypT0-1ypN0) for groups with a prolonged time interval which was not significant. Ultimately, it led to a steady state of pCR (16.5\%) and pGR (22.6\%) in "8 to 10" and "more than 10" weeks. We were not able to observe any differences between the subgroups in perioperative morbidity, proportion of rectal extirpation (for cancer of the lower third) or difference in TME quality. Conclusion A prolonged time interval between neoadjuvant chemoradiation can be performed, as the rate of pCR seems to be increased without influencing perioperative morbidity.},
  language  = {en}
}
@article{LichthardtKerscherDietzetal.2016,
  author    = {Lichthardt, Sven and Kerscher, Alexander and Dietz, Ulrich A. and Jurowich, Christian and Kunzmann, Volker and von Rahden, Burkhard H. A. and Germer, Christoph-Thomas and Wiegering, Armin},
  title     = {Original article: role of adjuvant chemotherapy in a perioperative chemotherapy regimen for gastric cancer},
  series = {BMC Cancer},
  volume    = {16},
  journal   = {BMC Cancer},
  number    = {650},
  doi       = {10.1186/s12885-016-2708-0},
  url       = {http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:bvb:20-opus-147743},
  year      = {2016},
  abstract  = {Background Multimodal treatment strategies - perioperative chemotherapy (CTx) and radical surgery - are currently accepted as treatment standard for locally advanced gastric cancer. However, the role of adjuvant postoperative CTx (postCTx) in addition to neoadjuvant preoperative CTx (preCTx) in this setting remains controversial. Methods Between 4/2006 and 12/2013, 116 patients with locally advanced gastric cancer were treated with preCTx. 72 patients (62 \%), in whom complete tumor resection (R0, subtotal/total gastrectomy with D2-lymphadenectomy) was achieved, were divided into two groups, one of which receiving adjuvant therapy (n = 52) and one without (n = 20). These groups were analyzed with regard to survival and exclusion criteria for adjuvant therapy. Results Postoperative complications, as well as their severity grade, did not correlate with fewer postCTx cycles administered (p = n.s.). Long-term survival was shorter in patients receiving postCTx in comparison to patients without postCTx, but did not show statistical significance. In per protocol analysis by excluding two patients with perioperative death, a shorter 3-year survival rate was observed in patients receiving postCTx compared to patients without postCTx (3-year survival: 71.2 \% postCTx group vs. 90.0 \% non-postCTx group; p = 0.038). Conclusion These results appear contradicting to the anticipated outcome. While speculative, they question the value of post-CTx. Prospectively randomized studies are needed to elucidate the role of postCTx.},
  language  = {en}
}