Talk to the Veterans Crisis Line now
U.S. flag
An official website of the United States government
Veterans Benefits and Health Care About VA Find a VA Location

VA Health Systems Research

Go to the VA ORD website
Go to the QUERI website

HSR Citation Abstract

Search | Search by Center | Search by Source | Keywords in Title

Treatment of Stages I-III Squamous Cell Anal Cancer: A Comparative Effectiveness Systematic Review.

Troester A, Parikh R, Southwell B, Ester E, Sultan S, Greeno E, Arsoniadis E, Church TR, Wilt T, Butler M, Goffredo P. Treatment of Stages I-III Squamous Cell Anal Cancer: A Comparative Effectiveness Systematic Review. Journal of the National Cancer Institute. 2024 Aug 20.

Dimensions for VA is a web-based tool available to VA staff that enables detailed searches of published research and research projects.

If you have VA-Intranet access, click here for more information vaww.hsrd.research.va.gov/dimensions/

VA staff not currently on the VA network can access Dimensions by registering for an account using their VA email address.    Search Dimensions for VA for this citation
* Don't have VA-internal network access or a VA email address? Try searching the free-to-the-public version of Dimensions


Abstract:

PURPOSE: To assess the effectiveness and harms of initial treatment strategies for stages I-III anal squamous cell cancer (SCC). METHODS: We searched Medline®, Embase®, and CENTRAL®, between January 1, 2000- March 2024, for randomized controlled trials and nonrandomized studies of interventions comparing initial treatment strategies. Individual study risk of bias (RoB) and overall strength of evidence (SOE) were evaluated for a prespecified outcome list using standardized methods. RESULTS: We identified 33 eligible studies and extracted data. Six were deemed low/moderate RoB. Compared with radiotherapy (RT) alone, chemoradiotherapy (CRT) with 5-fluorouracil (FU) and mitomycin C (MMC) probably shows a benefit in locoregional failure (LRF), disease-specific (DSS), and colostomy-free survival (CFS) (moderate SOE) yet may result in greater overall and acute hematologic toxicity, with no difference in late harms (low SOE). CRT with 5FU+MMC may show a benefit in LRF, DSS, and CFS rates compared with 5FU alone (low SOE). CRT with 5FU+cisplatin vs 5FU+MMC probably results in no differences in several effectiveness outcomes or overall acute or late harms, and probably increases hematologic toxicity with MMC (moderate SOE). Compared with CRT using capecitabine+MMC, CRT with capecitabine+MMC+paclitaxel may improve OS, DSS, and CFS, yet cause more acute harms (low SOE). Evidence was insufficient for remaining comparisons. CONCLUSIONS: CRT with 5FU+MMC or 5FU+cisplatin is likely more effective yet incurs greater acute hematologic toxicity than RT alone or single-agent CRT. Adding paclitaxel to capecitabine+MMC may increase treatment efficacy and toxicity. Evidence is insufficient comparing post-treatment surveillance strategies and patient-reported outcomes, highlighting research opportunities.




Questions about the HSR website? Email the Web Team

Any health information on this website is strictly for informational purposes and is not intended as medical advice. It should not be used to diagnose or treat any condition.