View clinical trials related to Rectal Cancer.
Filter by:This is a single arm phase II study to explore the 3y LRFS and safety for high-risk early rectal cancer after local excision with short-course radiotherapy and chemo-immunotherapy.
The goal of this clinical trial is to learn if neoadjuvant Fruquintinib and Tislelizumab combined with mCapeOX works to treat mid-high pMMR/MSS locally advanced rectal cancer patients compared with CapeOX. It will also learn about the safety of neoadjuvant Fruquintinib and Tislelizumab combined with mCapeOX. The main questions it aims to answer are: - Does neoadjuvant Fruquintinib and Tislelizumab combined with mCapeOX improve the pCR rate of mid-high pMMR/MSS locally advanced rectal cancer patients? - What medical problems do participants have when receiving neoadjuvant Fruquintinib and Tislelizumab combined with mCapeOX? Researchers will compare Fruquintinib and Tislelizumab combined with mCapeOX to CapeOX to see if neoadjuvant Fruquintinib and Tislelizumab combined with mCapeOX works to treat mid-high pMMR/MSS locally advanced rectal cancer patients. Participants will: - Receive Fruquintinib and Tislelizumab combined with mCapeOX or CapeOX before surgery up to 4 cycles - Receive radical operations and three years follow-up - Keep a diary of their postoperative pathology results and survival
The goal of this clinical trial is to test a telehealth-based personalized physical activity intervention in adult patients diagnosed with Stage I-III rectal cancer. The main question it aims to answer are how to better understand the experiences of rectal cancer survivors who are coping with bowel dysfunction and how physical activity can improve their quality of life. Participants will be asked to: 1. Complete surveys to assess bowel function and quality of life 2. Participate in 12 Telehealth Sessions (one session a week) to discuss and review bowel dysfunction 3. Perform daily physical activity
The study aims to recruit 60 Spanish speaking individuals who identify as Latinos, are older than 18 years old and attend the Saint Thomas More (STM) Church in Chapel Hill. Study participants will be asked to attend an educational session at STM Church during which their baseline knowledge on colorectal cancer (CRC) and willingness to participate in cancer clinical trials (CCT) will be assessed through a questionnaire in Spanish. Following this, participants will watch three educational videos on CRC in Spanish. After watching the videos, CRC knowledge and willingness to participate in CCTs will be reassessed. Thirty +/- 7 days after participation in the educational session, participants will be invited back at STM Church in order to complete a follow-up questionnaire assessing CRC knowledge, willingness to participate in CCTs and perceived barriers preventing Latinos from participating in CCTs. Twenty of the 60 recruited participants will be asked to participate in a qualitative one-on-one interview aimed at identifying barriers preventing Latinos from participating in CCTs. It should be noted that cancer is the leading cause of death in the United States (US) Latino community, with CRC accounting for 10% of this overall mortality. Despite this, Latinos suffer from disparities in access to care, cancer screening, treatment, and representation in CCTs. In fact, although Latino individuals are among the largest and fastest growing communities of color in the US, currently comprising 18.7%, their representation in CCTs remains low. This is of concern because: 1) advances arising from trials with limited Latino representation may not be applicable to the Latino population, and 2) decreased Latino participation in CCTs may delay Latino access to novel therapies in a timely fashion. The investigators conducting this study believe that low cancer-specific health knowledge may be impacting Latino representation and willingness to participate in CCTs and can be addressed through culturally and linguistically appropriate community-based educational interventions. Latino CCT underrepresentation is a multifaceted phenomenon and bidirectional barriers at the physician-, healthcare system-, and patient-level are significant contributors. Therefore, understanding the multiple driving forces and barriers is essential to identifying potential targets for improvement.
A retrospective cohort study, conducted nationwide（China） and across multiple centers, aimed to compare the surgical quality and short-term outcomes of R-NOSES （robotic natural orifice specimen extraction surgery）with R-TSES （robotic transabdominal specimen extraction surgery） for early-stage rectal cancer.
Background: Anastomotic stricture significantly impacts patients' quality of life and long-term prognosis. However, current clinical practice lacks accurate tools for predicting anastomotic stricture. This study aimed to develop a nomogram to predict anastomotic stricture in patients with rectal cancer who have undergone anterior resection. Methods: 1542 eligible patients will be recruited for the study. Least absolute shrinkage selection operator (Lasso) analysis will be used to preliminarily select predictors. A prediction model will be constructed using multivariate logistic regression and presented as a nomogram. The performance of the nomogram will be evaluated using receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves, calibration diagrams, and decision curve analysis (DCA). Internal validation will be conducted by assessing the model's performance on a validation cohort.
Our team has previously published articles providing detailed descriptions of the steps involved in both RS and LS. All surgeries adhered to the total mesorectal excision (TME) principle. In RS, a surgeon employed the Da Vinci Xi surgical system featuring a five-port setup, while five physicians conducted LS with a similarly configured five-port approach. Both the RS and LS doctors are experienced. The surgeries were conducted according to standard procedures, and the RS group utilized totally robotic rectal resection.
Numerous comparison studies on the outcomes of robotic and laparoscopic surgery in the treatment of rectal cancer have been undertaken and reported. But there aren't many studies that compare the safety and effectiveness of the two surgery procedures used to treat people with mid and low rectal cancer who have different body mass indexes (BMIs). This study was done to organize the clinical data we had at our hospital so we could compare the perioperative effectiveness of two minimally invasive approaches for people with different BMIs.
Most digestive cancers show (over)expression of the tumour marker carcinoembryonic antigen (CEA). Therefore, interest in CEA-targeting tracers has increased over the past years. CEA-targeting tracers can be used for preoperative, intra-operative and postoperative imaging purposes. This study focusses on both preoperative and intraoperative multimodal imaging and image-guided surgery in patients with rectal cancer or pancreatic cancer.
Objective: To investigate gender-based differences in outcomes following robotic surgery for rectal cancer. Methods: A retrospective study was conducted on 155 patients (82 males, 73 females) who underwent robotic surgery for rectal cancer. Demographic, pre-operative, operative, and post-operative data were collected and analyzed. Pre-operative study: All patients underwent a standardized pre-operative work-up, which included a physical examination, comprehensive colonoscopy with biopsy, rigid rectoscopy, pelvic magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) scan, computed tomography (CT) of the thorax and abdomen, and measurement of carcinoembryonic antigen (CEA) levels. Tumor staging followed the TNM staging criteria (American Joint Committee on Cancer), with the T and N stages determined by the most advanced findings from any imaging modality Data collected: Retrospective evaluation and comparison of demographic characteristics, pre-operative TNM stage, distance from anal verge, tumor size, tumor grade, American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) score, and body mass index (BMI) were conducted among both patient groups. Peri-operative and post-operative data, including morbidity and mortality, were assessed, alongside parameters such as distal resection margin (DRM), proximal resection margin (PRM), harvested lymph nodes (HLN), and Clavien-Dindo Classification (CDC) scores. Diagnosis of anastomotic leakage was confirmed by clinical suspicion (e.g., changes in drainage, fever, abdominal pain) and further validated through contrast enema observed during follow-up computed tomography (CT). Hospital stay and readmission rates were monitored for up to 90 days post-surgery. Post-operative follow-up: Post-operative outcomes encompassed operative duration, estimated blood loss, time to first flatus passage, duration of liquid diet, and length of hospital stay following surgery. Operative duration comprised the time from initial skin incision to closure, including the time needed for robotic surgery docking and undocking. Upon experiencing initial flatulence, patients transitioned to a liquid diet. Hospital stay duration was measured from the time of surgery to discharge. The overall cost of surgery, including surgical procedures, anesthesia, medications, and post-operative care, was considered in the total expenditure analysis.