Postneoadjuvant surveillance and surgery as needed compared with postneoadjuvant surgery on principle in multimodal treatment for oesophageal cancer: a scoping review protocol
Open Access
- 28 January 2021
- Vol. 11 (1), e044190
- https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2020-044190
Abstract
Introduction In current medical practice of curative treatment for non-metastatic oesophageal cancer, surgery on principle is carried out by oesophagectomy after neoadjuvant treatment. However, oesophagectomy is often associated with postoperative morbidity and mortality. Taking into account that modern neoadjuvant therapy is effective and many of patients show no vital tumour cells in the operative specimens, we aim to perform a scoping review as part of the development phase for a prospectively planned multicentre randomised controlled trial investigating ‘surgery as needed vs surgery on principle in patients with postneoadjuvant complete response of oesophageal cancer’ (Prospective trial registration number DRKS00022801). This scoping approach will allow us to finally define and/or adapt the research question including the design and methodology of the randomised controlled trial taking into account the findings for example, research gaps and/or pitfalls in the currently available study pool addressing this or very similar questions. Methods and analysis To identify relevant research, we will conduct searches in the electronic databases Medline, Web of Science Core Collection, Cochrane Library and Science Direct. We will also check references of relevant studies and perform a cited reference research (forward citation tracking). Titles and abstracts of the records identified by the searches will be screened and full texts of all potentially relevant articles will be obtained. We will consider randomised trials and non-randomised controlled studies. Data extraction tables will be set up, including study and patients’ characteristics, aim of study and reported outcomes. We will summarise the data using tables and figures (eg, bubble plots) to present the research landscape and to describe potential clusters and/or gaps to support the planning of a randomised trial in this patient population. Ethics and dissemination Ethical approval is not required for this scoping review. Study findings will be shared by publication in a peer-reviewed journal and by presentation to key stakeholders on scientific meetings.Keywords
Funding Information
- Bundesministerium für Bildung und Forschung (01KD1908)
- Baden-Wuerttemberg Ministry of Science, Research and Art (Funding programme Open Access (w/o spec. number))
This publication has 15 references indexed in Scilit:
- Histopathological regression after neoadjuvant docetaxel, oxaliplatin, fluorouracil, and leucovorin versus epirubicin, cisplatin, and fluorouracil or capecitabine in patients with resectable gastric or gastro-oesophageal junction adenocarcinoma (FLOT4-AIO): results from the phase 2 part of a multicentre, open-label, randomised phase 2/3 trialThe Lancet Oncology, 2016
- PRESS Peer Review of Electronic Search Strategies: 2015 Guideline StatementJournal of Clinical Epidemiology, 2016
- Ítems de referencia para publicar Protocolos de Revisiones Sistemáticas y Metaanálisis: Declaración PRISMA-P 2015Revista Española de Nutrición Humana y Dietética, 2016
- Multimodal treatment of locally advanced esophageal adenocarcinoma: Which regimen should we choose? Outcome analysis of perioperative chemotherapy versus neoadjuvant chemoradiation in 105 patientsJournal of Surgical Oncology, 2013
- Propensity-Based Matching between Esophagogastric Cancer Patients Who Had Surgery and Who Declined Surgery after Preoperative ChemoradiationOncology, 2013
- Preoperative Chemoradiotherapy for Esophageal or Junctional CancerThe New England Journal of Medicine, 2012
- Pathological complete remission in patients with oesophagogastric cancer receiving preoperative 5‐fluorouracil, oxaliplatin and docetaxelInternational Journal of Cancer, 2011
- Scoping studies: advancing the methodologyImplementation Science, 2010
- A typology of reviews: an analysis of 14 review types and associated methodologiesHealth Information and Libraries Journal, 2009
- Scoping studies: towards a methodological frameworkInternational Journal of Social Research Methodology, 2005