have anybody just had surgery to remove the cancer instead of doing the treatment for so long

tete1715

Mollymaude

Tete

No. The most effective treatment is radiation plus chemo. I know, if you are newly diagnosed you just want it cut out and to be done with it. There are a lot of statistics showing high cure rate with radiation and chemo. Years ago when they did surgery the rate of the cancer coming back was higher. Learn all you can and ask questions of your doctors. When will you begin treatment?

mp327

tete1715

Surgery is not the standard treatment approach because it will permanently damage the sphincter muscle, leaving a person with no bowel control.  While radiation and chemo is not an easy treatment, most people come through it okay and still maintain bowel control.  It is an effective treatment.

Phoebesnow

Surgery

as i understand it even if you have the surgery you still have to have the chemo and radiation.

tete1715

Mollymaude said:

Tete

No. The most effective treatment is radiation plus chemo. I know, if you are newly diagnosed you just want it cut out and to be done with it. There are a lot of statistics showing high cure rate with radiation and chemo. Years ago when they did surgery the rate of the cancer coming back was higher. Learn all you can and ask questions of your doctors. When will you begin treatment?

I'm not for sure I go to take

I'm not for sure I go to take my pet& MRI tomorrow. 

tete1715

Thanks everyone. 

Thanks everyone. 

TraceyUSA

I had surgery

plus the standard chemo/radiation treatment.  The surgery to remove the tumor (approx. 2 cm) was done prior to treatment & biopsied for diagnosis.  I do not believe I had less bowel control than others who have not had the surgery.

ginatom

Agree with everyone here, 

Agree with everyone here, 

I studied this A LOT.  The surgeries were not as successful as the chemo-radiation route.  And significantly, there were not as successful at CFS.  There are a lot of new terms to learn.  This one means Colostomy Free Survival.  The surgery tends to be harder on the sphincters, so that there were many more permanent colostomies after surgery than there are with this.  I say "this" because it's what everyone is using these days.  I did find a LONG paper comparing studies of trials on different approaches, separating the chemo from the radiation, using different drugs in the chemo, shorter term, etc.  It keeps coming back to this one.  At first I thought that because it's "relatively" rare, that maybe there weren't studies.  But interestingly (!!!!) my med onc explained to me that 5FU (gotta love that name) and MMC (Mitomycin) are OLD and CHEAP, so the pharmaceutical companies are trying like mad to find something that is more profitable that can beat the results of this protocol.  So far they haven't.  So we are stuck with this one. 

BEST of luck to you on your adventure.  Know that you have LOTS of support here.  Read and write often.  We're all here for ourselves and for each other.  My treatment starts in about 9 days.  So sorry you had to join us, but welcome!

Jeana

tanda

Comparison of 5-FU vs capecitabine in combination with mitomycin

Abstract of a study to be presented at ASCO annual meeting June 3.

Comparison of 5-FU vs capecitabine in combination with mitomycin or cisplatin in the treatment of anal cancer.

 

Citation:
J Clin Oncol 35, 2017 (suppl; abstr 3576)

Author(s): Irene Yu, Winson Y. Cheung; British Columbia Cancer Agency, Vancouver, BC, Canada; Tom Baker Cancer Centre, Calgary, AB, Canada

Abstract:

 

Background: The patterns of capecitabine use as an alternative form of fluoropyrimidine to infusional 5-FU in the non-operative management of anal cancer in the real world are poorly described. Our objectives were to determine the frequency of capecitabine use, compare the observed outcomes between oral and intravenous fluoropyrimidines, and examine for variations in treatment-related adverse events between the two agents. Methods: All anal cancer patients who received either capecitabine or infusional 5-FU as part of their chemoradiation treatment from 2004 to 2013 at any 1 of 6 cancer centers in British Columbia were included. Chi-square and Wilcoxon-Mann tests were used to assess for associations between treatment groups and clinical characteristics and outcomes. Results: A total of 486 patients were identified: median age was 59 (IQR 53-67) years, 175 (36%) were men, 418 (86%) had ECOG 0/1, and 30 (6%) were HIV positive. Median total radiation dose was 54 cGy (IQR 50-54) and 47 (10%) underwent a colostomy prior to chemoradiation. Baseline characteristics were balanced between the two groups with respect to age, gender, ECOG, and HIV status (all p > 0.05). Prior to 2010, only 5-FU was utilized. From 2010 to 2013, 155 and 82 patients (65% vs 35%) received capecitabine vs 5-FU, respectively. Overall (68% vs 67%, p = 0.831) and disease-free survival rates (59% vs 59%, p = 0.926) at 3 years were similar in the capecitabine vs 5-FU groups. Rates of subsequent abdomino-perineal resection were also similar (10% vs 14%, p = 0.164). Patients who received 5-FU were more likely to report adverse effects (76% vs 57%, p < 0.01). The capecitabine group had a lower incidence of stomatitis (7% vs 43%, p < 0.01) whereas the 5-FU cohort reported less frequent hand-foot syndrome (1% vs 7%, p < 0.01). The rates of myelosuppression, nausea/vomiting, diarrhea, and rash were similar between the two groups (all p > 0.05).  Conclusions: This represents one of the largest population-based studies to demonstrate a preference for capecitabine in place of 5-FU in the management of anal cancer. Survival outcomes were similar between the two treatment groups, but capecitabine may be better tolerated in the real world.

 

 

mp327

tanda said:

Comparison of 5-FU vs capecitabine in combination with mitomycin

Abstract of a study to be presented at ASCO annual meeting June 3.

Comparison of 5-FU vs capecitabine in combination with mitomycin or cisplatin in the treatment of anal cancer.

 

Citation:
J Clin Oncol 35, 2017 (suppl; abstr 3576)

Author(s): Irene Yu, Winson Y. Cheung; British Columbia Cancer Agency, Vancouver, BC, Canada; Tom Baker Cancer Centre, Calgary, AB, Canada

Abstract:

 

Background: The patterns of capecitabine use as an alternative form of fluoropyrimidine to infusional 5-FU in the non-operative management of anal cancer in the real world are poorly described. Our objectives were to determine the frequency of capecitabine use, compare the observed outcomes between oral and intravenous fluoropyrimidines, and examine for variations in treatment-related adverse events between the two agents. Methods: All anal cancer patients who received either capecitabine or infusional 5-FU as part of their chemoradiation treatment from 2004 to 2013 at any 1 of 6 cancer centers in British Columbia were included. Chi-square and Wilcoxon-Mann tests were used to assess for associations between treatment groups and clinical characteristics and outcomes. Results: A total of 486 patients were identified: median age was 59 (IQR 53-67) years, 175 (36%) were men, 418 (86%) had ECOG 0/1, and 30 (6%) were HIV positive. Median total radiation dose was 54 cGy (IQR 50-54) and 47 (10%) underwent a colostomy prior to chemoradiation. Baseline characteristics were balanced between the two groups with respect to age, gender, ECOG, and HIV status (all p > 0.05). Prior to 2010, only 5-FU was utilized. From 2010 to 2013, 155 and 82 patients (65% vs 35%) received capecitabine vs 5-FU, respectively. Overall (68% vs 67%, p = 0.831) and disease-free survival rates (59% vs 59%, p = 0.926) at 3 years were similar in the capecitabine vs 5-FU groups. Rates of subsequent abdomino-perineal resection were also similar (10% vs 14%, p = 0.164). Patients who received 5-FU were more likely to report adverse effects (76% vs 57%, p < 0.01). The capecitabine group had a lower incidence of stomatitis (7% vs 43%, p < 0.01) whereas the 5-FU cohort reported less frequent hand-foot syndrome (1% vs 7%, p < 0.01). The rates of myelosuppression, nausea/vomiting, diarrhea, and rash were similar between the two groups (all p > 0.05).  Conclusions: This represents one of the largest population-based studies to demonstrate a preference for capecitabine in place of 5-FU in the management of anal cancer. Survival outcomes were similar between the two treatment groups, but capecitabine may be better tolerated in the real world.

 

 

tanda

Thanks for posting this.  I was treated with 5FU and had numerous side effects.  I'd like to hear from others who were treated with capecitabine.