Intensive follow-up strategies after radical surgery for nonmetastatic colorectal cancer: A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.

<h4>Background</h4>Intensive follow-up after surgery for colorectal cancers is common in clinical practice, but evidence of a survival benefit is limited.<h4>Objective</h4>To conduct a systematic review and meta-analysis on the effects of follow-up strategies for nonmetastatic colorectal cancer.<h4>Data sources</h4>We searched Medline, Embase, and CENTRAL databases through May 30, 2018.<h4>Study selection</h4>We included randomized clinical trials evaluating intensive follow-up versus less follow-up in patients with nonmetastatic colorectal cancer.<h4>Interventions</h4>Intensive follow-up.<h4>Main outcomes measures</h4>Overall survival.<h4>Results</h4>The analyses included 17 trials with a total of 8039 patients. Compared with less follow-up, intensive follow-up significantly improved overall survival in patients with nonmetastatic colorectal cancer after radical surgery (HR 0.85, 95% CI 0.74-0.97, P = 0.01; I2 = 30%; high quality). Subgroup analyses showed that differences between intensive-frequency and intensive-test follow-up (P = 0.04) and between short interval and long interval of follow-up (P = 0.02) in favor of the former one.<h4>Limitations</h4>Clinical heterogeneity of interventions.<h4>Conclusions</h4>For patients with nonmetastatic colorectal cancer after curative resection, intensive follow-up strategy was associated with an improvement in overall survival compared with less follow-up strategy. Intensive-frequency follow-up strategy was associated with a greater reduction in mortality compared with intensive-test follow-up strategy.

Abstract licence: CC BY

A person counts once a day per paper. We keep no cookie and no address: a reader is a hash that changes every day. Any month under five reads shows no number.