Granulocyte-colony stimulating factor in the prevention of postoperative infectious complications and sub-optimal recovery from operation in patients with colorectal cancer and increased preoperative risk (ASA 3 and 4) -: Protocol of a controlled clinical trial developed by consensus of an international study group -: Part one:: rationale and hypothesis

被引:10
作者
Lorenz, W
Stinner, B
Bauhofer, A [1 ]
Rothmund, M
Celik, I
Fingerhut, A
Koller, M
Lorijn, RHW
Nyström, PO
Sitter, H
Schein, M
Solomkin, JS
Troidl, H
Wyatt, J
Wittmann, DH
机构
[1] Univ Marburg, Inst Theoret Surg, D-35033 Marburg, Germany
[2] Univ Marburg, Dept Gen Surg, D-35033 Marburg, Germany
[3] Ctr Hosp Intercommunal, Surg Unit, Poissy, Paris, France
[4] AMGEN Europe, Luzern, Switzerland
[5] Linkoping Univ, Dept Medicosurg Gastroenterol, S-58183 Linkoping, Sweden
[6] Cornell Univ, Coll Med, New York, NY USA
[7] Univ Cologne, Dept Surg 2, D-5000 Cologne 41, Germany
[8] Univ Cincinnati, Coll Med, Dept Surg, Cincinnati, OH 45221 USA
[9] UCL, Sch Publ Policy, London, England
[10] Med Coll Wisconsin, Dept Surg, Milwaukee, WI 53226 USA
关键词
G-CSF; randomised trial; study protocol; outcome; quality of life;
D O I
10.1007/s000110050734
中图分类号
Q2 [细胞生物学];
学科分类号
071009 ; 090102 ;
摘要
General design. Presentation of a novel study protocol to evalue the effectiveness of an immune modifier (rhG-CSF, filgrastim): prevention of postoperative infectious complications and sub-optimal recovery from operation in patients with colorectal cancer and increased preoperative risk (ASA 3 and 4). The rationale and hypothesis are presented in this part of the protocol of the randomised, placebo controlled, double-blinded, single-centre study performed at an - university hospital (n = 40 patients for each group). Objective: Part one of this protocol describes the concepts of three major sections of the study: - Definition of optimum and sub-optimal recovery after operation. Recovery, as an outcome, is not a simple univariate endpoint, but a complex construction of mechanistic variables (i.e, death, complications and health status assessed by the surgeon), quality of life expressed by the patient, and finally a weighted outcome judgement by both the patient and the surgeon (true end-point). Its conventional early assessment within 14-28 days is artificial: longer periods (such as 6 months) are needed for the patient to state: "I am now as well as I was before". Identification of suitable target patients: - the use of biological response modifiers (immune modulators) in addition to traditional prophylaxes (i. e. antibiotics, heparin, volume substitutes) may improve postoperative outcome in appropriate selected patients with reduced host defence and increased immunological stress response, but these have to be defined. Patients classified as ASA 3 and 4 (American Society for Anaesthesiologists) and with colorectal cancer will be studied to prove this hypothesis. Choice of biological response modifier: - Filgrastim has been chosen as an example of a biological response modifier because it was effective in a new study type, clinic-modelling randomised trials in rodents, and has shown promise in some clinical trials for indications other than preoperative prophylaxis. It has also enhanced host defence and has been anti-inflammatory in basic research. Conclusion: The following hypothesis will be tested in patients with operations for colorectal cancer and increased preoperative risk (ASA 3 and 4): is the outcome as evaluated by the hermeneutic endpoint (quality of life expressed by the patient) and mechanistic endpoints (mortality rate, complication rate, relative hospital stay, assessed by the doctor) improved in the group receiving filgrastim prophylaxis in comparison with the placebo group? Quality of life will be the first primary endpoint in the hierarchical, statistical testing of confirmatory analysis.
引用
收藏
页码:115 / 122
页数:8
相关论文
共 103 条
  • [1] Allen JP, 1996, JAMA-J AM MED ASSOC, V275, P474
  • [2] [Anonymous], SURG RES
  • [3] BARBER GR, 1995, ARCH SURG-CHICAGO, V130, P1042
  • [4] Baue AE, 1996, IMMUNE CONSEQUENCES OF TRAUMA, SHOCK AND SEPSIS - MECHANISMS AND THERAPEUTIC APPROACHES, VOL II, PTS 1 AND 2, P612
  • [5] BAUHOFER A, 1997, LANGENBECKS ARCH CHI, P593
  • [6] BAUHOFER A, 1997, SHOCK S, V7, P78
  • [7] BAUHOFER A, 1999, NAUNYNSCHMIEDEBER S3, V359, pR125
  • [8] BAUHOFER A, 1998, CYTOKINES ABDOMINAL, P117
  • [9] BAUHOFER A, 2001, IN PRESS INFLAMM RES
  • [10] Use of hematopoietic colony-stimulating factors: The American Society of Clinical Oncology survey
    Bennett, CL
    Smith, TJ
    Weeks, JC
    Bredt, AB
    Feinglass, J
    Fetting, JH
    Hillner, BE
    Somerfield, MR
    Winn, RJ
    [J]. JOURNAL OF CLINICAL ONCOLOGY, 1996, 14 (09) : 2511 - 2520