 |
|
Clinical Trials Are Mandatory for Improving Surgical Cancer Care
Nicholas J. Petrelli, MD
JAMA. 2002;287:377-378.
|
|
| Since this article does not have an abstract, we have provided the first 150 words of the full text and any section headings. |
|
|
|
In this issue of THE JOURNAL, Weeks and colleagues for the Clinical Outcomes of Surgical Therapy (COST) Study Group1 present the results of a multicenter randomized trial comparing quality-of-life (QOL) outcomes for patients with colon cancer who had open colectomy vs laparoscopic-assisted colectomy (LAC). While the findings that LAC provided only modest advantages compared with open colectomy are important for surgeons treating patients with colon cancer, the study also emphasizes the need for high-quality, rigorous randomized trials for improving surgical cancer care and underscores the importance of physicians to increase their efforts to enroll patients in such studies.
The COST study was designed to compare the safety, efficacy, QOL outcomes, and cost of LAC vs standard open colectomy in patients with primary colon adenocarcinoma. The primary objective of the COST study is to determine whether disease-free survival and overall survival following LAC and open colectomy are . . . [Full Text of this Article]
Author Affiliation: Helen F. Graham Cancer Center, Christiana Care, Newark, Del.
RELATED ARTICLE
Short-term Quality-of-Life Outcomes Following Laparoscopic-Assisted Colectomy vs Open Colectomy for Colon Cancer: A Randomized Trial
Jane C. Weeks, Heidi Nelson, Shari Gelber, Daniel Sargent, Georgene Schroeder, and for the Clinical Outcomes of Surgical Therapy Study Group
JAMA. 2002;287(3):321-328.
ABSTRACT
| FULL TEXT
|
