早期肛门癌的放射治疗

目的 分析早期肛门癌的放射治疗结果。方法 ２７例Ｔ１－２Ｎ０Ｍ０期肛门癌患者接受了单纯放射治疗，其中７例盆腔野加局部野，２０例局部野照射。结果 总的５年生存率为７９．１％，１８例患者保留了肛门功能。７例局部复发，１例腹肌麻巴结复发，５例经补救治疗后获控制。结论 早期肛门癌放射治疗可以达到与根治术相同的治愈率，能使大约２／３的患者保存肛门功能。     

T1～4N0M0期非小细胞肺癌根治术后是否需要辅助治疗

目的　探讨非小细胞肺癌（ Ｎ Ｓ Ｃ Ｌ Ｃ） Ｎ０ Ｍ０ 期根治术后不同病理及不同 Ｔ 分期的转归及治疗。方法　行根治术后病理为 Ｎ Ｓ Ｃ Ｌ Ｃ 的 Ｔ１ ～４ Ｎ０ Ｍ０ 期３５４ 例。男性２８５ 例,女性６９ 例。鳞癌１９１例,腺癌１６３ 例。鳞癌中 Ｔ１ Ｎ０ Ｍ０ 期２７ 例, Ｔ２ Ｎ０ Ｍ０ 期１３４ 例, Ｔ３ Ｎ０ Ｍ０ 期２８ 例, Ｔ４ Ｎ０ Ｍ０ 期２ 例。腺癌中 Ｔ１ Ｎ０ Ｍ０ 期４２ 例, Ｔ２ Ｎ０ Ｍ０ 期１０８ 例, Ｔ３ Ｎ０ Ｍ０ 期１０ 例, Ｔ４ Ｎ０ Ｍ０ 期３ 例。结果　全组５ 年生存率为５３ ．７ ％ ,鳞癌为５９ ．７ ％ ,腺癌为４６ ．６ ％ 。鳞癌中 Ｔ１ Ｎ０ Ｍ０ ～ Ｔ４ Ｎ０ Ｍ０ 期５ 年生存率分别为７０ ．４ ％ ,６４ ．９ ％ ,２８ ．６ ％ 及０／２（ Ｐ＜ ０ ．０５） ;局部复发率分别为１４ ．８ ％ ,９ ．７ ％ ,２１ ．４ ％ 及０／２（ Ｐ＞ ０ ．０５） ;远地转移率分别为１１ ．１ ％ ,２３ ．９ ％ ,５０ ．０ ％ 及２／２（ Ｐ＜ ０ ．０５） 。腺癌中 Ｔ１ Ｎ０ Ｍ０ ～ Ｔ４ Ｎ０ Ｍ０ 期５ 年生存率分别为６１ ．９ ％ ,４４ ．４ ％ ,２０ ．０ ％ 及０／３（ Ｐ＜ ０ ．０５） ;局部复发率     

鼻咽癌外照射联合高剂量率后装腔内治疗

采用高剂量率后装腔内放射联合体外放射治疗７６例鼻咽癌。其中，Ｔ１～２４９例，Ｔ３～４２７例。体外放射剂量Ｔ１～２ＤＴ５０Ｇｙ／５周，Ｔ３～４ＤＴ５６Ｇｙ／５．５周；对有茎突区或／和颅骨破坏者补量ＤＴ１０～２０Ｇｙ／１～２周。后装剂量Ｔ１～２ＤＴ２４Ｇｙ／４次／２周，Ｔ３～４ＤＴ１８Ｇｙ／３次／２周。全组４、５年无癌生存率分别为６７．１％，５６．０％。４年局部控制率为９２．８％。主要后遗症为张口困难（９．２％），软腭损伤（５．７％）等。随访结果提示联合治疗鼻咽癌局部控制率令人鼓舞，尤以Ｔ１～２为佳。但治疗后软腭损伤应引起重视     

23例原发气管癌的放射治疗

目的　评价原发气管癌放射治疗的意义及加腔内放射治疗后能否提高肿瘤局部控制率。方法　原发气管癌２３ 例,其中单纯放射治疗１３ 例,术后复发或残留行放射治疗１０ 例。结果　（１） 全组１ ,５ ,１０ 年生存率分别为６５ ．２ ％ ,２６ ．１ ％ ,５ ．９ ％ ,中位生存时间为２５ 个月。术后复发或肿瘤残留再放射治疗与单纯放射治疗的中位生存时间分别为５２ 个月与２３ 个月。根治放射治疗组与姑息放射治疗组的１ ,３ ,５ 年生存率分别为７６ ．９ ％ ,４６ ．２ ％ ,４６ ．２ ％ 与３０ ．０ ％ ,２０ ．０ ％ ,１０ ．０ ％ 。肿瘤局部控制率为３０ ．４ ％ （７／２３） ,其中单纯外照射１ 例,加腔内放射治疗４ 例,术后＋ 放射治疗２ 例。（２） 病理类型对生存率无明显影响。（３） 第１ 程放射治疗后局部未控复发再放射治疗７ 例,未治７ 例,其１ ,３ ,５年生存情况前者分别为６／７ ,３／７ ,１／７ ,后者１ 年为２／７ ,无２ 年以上生存者。结论　（１） 对不能手术、术后复发或肿瘤残留的患者,放射治疗是主要的、有效的治疗手段之一。（２） 加用腔内放射治疗可提高肿瘤局部控制率。（３） 复发后再程放射治疗仍可缓解症状延长部分患者寿命。     

N—CWS膀胱灌注预防膀胱癌术后复发的远期疗效观察

目的评估膀胱灌注红色诺卡氏菌细胞壁骨架（Ｎ－ＣＷＳ）预防膀胱癌术后复发的远期疗效。方法应用Ｎ－ＣＷＳ膀胱灌注预防膀胱癌术后复发并与ＭＭＣ进行随机对照观察。结果Ｎ－ＣＷＳ组治疗４５例,随访３９例,随访期１２～６０个月,复发１３例,未复发２６例,１年无癌生存率为８７．２％,复发率为１２．８％;５年无癌生存率为６６．７％,复发率为３３．３％。而ＭＭＣ组治疗３０例,随访２５例,随访期１２～６０个月,复发１２例,未复发１３例,１年无癌生存率为８４．０％,复发率为１６．０％;５年无癌生存率为５２．０％,复发率为４８．０％。结论提示Ｎ－ＣＷＳ的疗效高于ＭＭＣ而副作用却明显减少,认为Ｎ－ＣＷＳ是目前预防膀胱癌术后复发较理想的药物之一。     

90例皮肤癌放射治疗临床分析

目的 回顾性分析单纯放射治疗的皮肤癌病例,探讨其临床疗效,美容效果及影响因素。方法 对１９８６年１月－１９９２年１２月经病理证实,单纯放射治疗的皮肤癌共９０例进行了回顾性分析。结果 总的５年生存率为６８．９％,其中：Ｔ１期９３．３％,Ｔ２期７５％,Ｔ３期５５．６％,Ｔ４期３７．５％。Ｔ分型越早,５年生存率越高。其底细胞癌５年生存率８１．１％,鳞状细胞癌５年生存率６０．４％,基底细胞癌５年生存率高地     

早期下咽癌手术手（或）放射治疗的临床研究

目的 比较１３２例Ｔ１、Ｔ２期下咽癌患者手术＋放射治疗与单纯放射治疗的疗效。方法 １３２例Ｔ１、Ｔ２期下咽癌患者,５１．５％肿瘤直径在２～４ｃｍ范围内,８３．３％来源于梨太窝,颈部淋巴结阴性（Ｎ０）者占总数的５０％,治疗分为３个组,即部分咽喉切除术＋术后放射治疗（ＰＰＬ＋ＲＸ）组（４４例）,全咽喉切除术＋术后放射治疗（ＴＰＬ＋ＲＸ）组（４０例）,单纯放射治疗（ＲＸ）组（４８例）。术后放射治疗原发灶区和（或）颈淋巴引流区的放射剂量为４５～５５Ｇｙ。单纯放射治疗的照射剂量原发灶区为７５Ｇｙ,颈淋巴引流区为４５～５５Ｇｙ,颈转移淋巴结处总量达７５Ｇｙ生存率计算采用Ｋａｐｌａｎ－Ｍｅｉｅｒ法,显著性检验采用Ｌｏｇｒａｎｋ法。结果 总１、３、５年生存率分别为７１％、４５％、３４％。单纯放射治疗组与术后放射治疗组间的１、３     

不同化疗方案加放射治疗鼻咽癌的远期疗效

目的 探讨在鼻咽癌治疗中采用不同化疗方案配合常规放射治疗对肿瘤局部控制及远期生存的影响。方法 ３００例病理证实的鼻咽癌病例随机分为单纯放射治疗组１１４例，放射治疗＋新辅助化疗组９３例，放射治疗＋同步化疗组９３例。常规放射治疗：鼻咽原发灶ＤＴ７０Ｇｙ，颈部预防照射ＤＴ５０Ｇｙ，转移灶ＤＴ６５～７０Ｇｙ。新辅助化疗：氟尿嘧啶１０００ｍｇ／ｄ，３次／周，顺铂１００ｍｇ／周，交替各用２周，同步化疗：顺铂２０ｍｇ／ｄ，２次／周，氟尿嘧啶５００ｍｇ／ｄ，２次／周，交替各用３周。结果 ５年总生存率（ＯＳ）为５７．１％，５年无瘤生存率（ＤＦＳ）为５２．９％，５年无远地转移生存率（ＤＭＦ）为６１．０％，５年局部区域无复发生存率（ＬＲＦ）为８３．３％；各治疗组间５年ＯＳ、ＤＦＳ、ＤＭＦ和ＬＲＦ差异无显著性意义（Ｘ＾２值分别为２．９     

乳腺癌根治术后胸壁和／或区域淋巴结复发放疗110例分析

目的探讨影响乳腺癌根治术后胸壁和／或区域淋巴结复发放疗的因素。材料与方法从１９７４年４月至１９８５年１２月共收治１１０例患者，无远地转移，均为女性。照射范围分为局部照射，单区照射，多区照射。照射剂量为５０～７０Ｇｙ／５～７周。结果本组病例的５，１０年生存率分别为２２．７％，１４５％。术后２年内复发和２年以上复发病例的５，１０年生存率分别为１１．１％、８．０％和３８，３％，２３．４％，Ｐ＜０．０５，全胸壁或多区照射的局部控制率较好，但生存率未见提高。结论放射治疗对乳腺癌根治术后复发有一定挽救作用，手术与复发的间隔越长，预后越好。     

非小细胞肺癌根治术后残端复发的放射治疗

目的评价和分析非小细胞肺癌根治术后残端复发的放射治疗疗效及预后因素。材料与方法从１９７０年２月至１９９３年初，３９例肺癌根治术后残端复发的病人入组分析。中位年龄５９岁，术后至复发时间３～５０月，始发复发症状至确诊时间０～２０月。伴有淋巴结转移者１８例，残端复发有组织学诊断２８例。８例加腔内放疗８～３０Ｇｙ／１～３次，２例加化疗，６例单纯腔内放疗１２～３０Ｇｙ／２～３次。单纯外照射剂量为４５～７０Ｇｙ，加腔内放疗者为２０～６０Ｇｙ。结果症状缓解率达９０％左右，５年生存率２３．０±７．５％。单纯残端复发者５年生存率３８．１±１１．０％，而伴有淋巴结转移者无３年存活（Ｐ＜０．００３）。始发复发症状至确诊时间＜２月与≥２月者，５年生存率分别为３３．７±１２．０％与１２．６±８．２％（Ｐ＞０．１０４５）。在６例行单纯腔内放疗中，２例长期生存。Ｃｏｘ回归分析仅残端复发是否伴有淋巴结转移为影响预后的重要因素。结论放射治疗是治疗非小细胞肺癌根治术后残端复发的重要手段，尤其单纯残端复发者可取得满意结果     

Accelerated radiotherapy for advanced laryngeal cancer

The purpose of this study was to evaluate a single institution's outcome for patients with advanced laryngeal cancer treated with accelerated radiotherapy (RT). Fifty-eight patients with advanced laryngeal cancer (T3/T4N0/N + M0) were treated with curative intent with accelerated RT during the period 1990 - 1998. Patients received radiotherapy alone or with induction chemotherapy. The 5-year local control (LC) and loco-regional control (LRC) probabilities were both 49% for T3 and 75% for T4 tumors. The 5-year disease-free survival probability was 46% and 68% and overall survival probability was 30% and 39% for T3 and T4 tumors respectively. No significant statistical difference in outcome was found, either between T3 and T4 tumors, or between patients who received induction chemotherapy and those who did not. The treatment results for advanced laryngeal cancer at this institution were comparable to those reported in the literature. The results for T3 and T4 were similar. T4 classification alone should not be an exclusion criterion for larynx preservation. Overall survival was poor, partly because of a high incidence of deaths from intercurrent diseases.     

鼻咽癌T3N0-1M0期单纯放疗和同期放化疗疗效回顾分析

 目的　回顾分析T3N0~1M0期鼻咽癌患者临床资料,探讨单纯放射治疗与同期放化疗两种治疗方式与预后的关系。方法　中山大学肿瘤防治中心2004年1月至12月收治的经病理学证实的初治鼻咽癌患者781例,均有完整鼻咽和颈部MRI资料,且均无远处转移。按照2008中国鼻咽癌分期标准重新分期,82例行单纯放疗或同期放化疗的T3N0~1M0期患者入组,分为单纯放疗（A组）46例,同时期放化疗（B组）36例。结果　两组患者的临床资料具有可比性,单因素分析显示A组和B组的5年总生存（OS）率分别为93.5 %和100 %（P＝0.046）,5年无瘤生存（DFS）率分别为85.2 %和91.7 %（P＝0.498）。N分期是鼻咽癌DFS的影响因素（P＝0.026）。分层分析显示：T3N0M0期患者A组和B组5年OS率分别为94.7 %和100 %（P＝0.432）;T3N1M0期A组和B组5年OS率分别为92.6 %和100 %（P＝0.066）;T3N1M0期A组和B组5年DFS率分别为73.7 %和89.3 %（P＝0.244）。多因素分析显示,同期放化疗不是 T3N0~1M0期鼻咽癌患者OS的独立预后因素（HR＝0.019;95 % CI 0～21.793）,N分期不是影响T3N0~1M0期鼻咽癌患者DFS的独立预后因素（HR＝0.203;95 % CI 0.135～1.231×104）。结论　T3N0M0期患者同期放化疗与单纯放疗疗效无差异, T3N1M0期患者行同期放化疗能否改善生存有待进一步研究。     

External radiotherapy in the treatment of tonsillar carcinomas. Analysis of 183 cases

A retrospective analysis of 183 consecutive patients with tonsillar carcinoma observed from 1970 through 1984 and treated by external radiotherapy was carried out. The data were analyzed retrospectively to determine the factors affecting prognosis. Tumor size (T) and lymph node involvement (N) were found to be predominant prognostic factors. The difference in 5 year survival rate between T2 and T3 tumors was significant, and that between N1 and N3 was highly significant, whereas difference in survival could be found between N0 and N1 groups. The primary tumor was controlled by radiotherapy alone in 90% of cases of T1 lesions, 58% of T2, 37% of T3 and 11% of T4, and lymph node metastases was controlled in 70% of N1 cases, 0 of N2 and 15.5% of N3. Twenty-three patients underwent salvage surgery after radiotherapy had failed and the actuarial 5 year survival rate was 75% for stage I, 40% for stage II, 30% for stage III and 13% for stage IV.     

Radical radiotherapy for bladder cancer: retrospective analysis of a series of 459 patients treated in an Italian institution

AimsTo contribute to the available evidence about the efficacy of exclusive radiotherapy for bladder cancer through a retrospective analysis of a large series of patients consecutively treated in a single institution.Materials and methodsA total of 459 patients with UICC categories T1–T4, N0–Nx and M0 bladder cancer consecutively treated with radiotherapy alone with radical intent formed the clinical basis for this study. Many of them (and particularly the T1 cases) had poor medical conditions or were unfit for surgery. About half of the cases (54%) had a T2 tumour, and about 18% had T3–T4 disease. Eighty per cent of the cases received minimal doses in the target volume in the range 60–70 Gy; pelvic lymph nodes were treated in 34%. Simple radiotherapy techniques were used in most cases. Average follow-up for living patients was 4.4 years. Results were analysed according to number and type of relapses: overall survival, disease-specific survival, failure-free survival probability, acute and late toxicity (RTOG scale).ResultsActuarial 5-year overall survival, disease-specific survival and failure-free survival rates at 5 years for the entire series were 36%, 56%, 33%, respectively. Age, T category (for all the end points) and tumour dose (only for failure-free survival) were significantly related to prognosis at multivariate survival analysis. Late enteric toxicity (6.1% of the cases) was significantly linked with the treated volumes (univariate analysis). Urinary late toxicity (23% of cases) was linked with age and T category (multivariate analysis). In both cases, toxicity was mostly Grade 1 or 2.ConclusionsThe results of radiotherapy in this negatively selected series, accrued over a long period of time in patients treated with unsophisticated techniques, are reasonably good; they add to the evidence available to support the use of modern bladder-sparing programmes, including the association of chemo- and radiotherapy.     

Hyperfractionated-accelerated or conventionally fractionated radiotherapy for early glottic cancer.

PURPOSE: To evaluate the effect of shortening overall treatment time by hyperfractionated-accelerated radiotherapy for T2N(0)M(0) glottic carcinomas. Results for local control and survival were calculated and compared to those for T1N(0)M(0) tumors treated with a once-a-day fractionated schedule. METHODS AND MATERIALS: Between 1990 and 1998, 92 patients with T1N(0)M(0) and 45 patients with T2N(0)M(0) glottic cancers were treated with radical radiotherapy. The T1N(0)M(0) tumors were treated with a once-a-day fractionated schedule lasting 6.5 weeks to a total dose of 62.4 Gy. The T2N(0)M(0) tumors received a split-course hyperfractionated-accelerated treatment over a total of 4.5 weeks to a total dose of 64.6 Gy.Results: The 5-year local control was 85% for T1N(0)M(0) and 88% for T2N(0)M(0), whereas the 5-year locoregional control was 85% for both groups. The 5-year overall survival was 70% and 53% for T1N(0)M(0) and T2N(0)M(0), respectively. No significant statistical difference was found between the two groups for the parameters analyzed. The number of serious late complications was few and comparable for the two groups. CONCLUSIONS: Hyperfractionated-accelerated radiotherapy proved beneficial for T2N(0)M(0) glottic cancer, giving local control rates comparable to those for T1N(0)M(0) tumors.     

精确放疗时代T1期鼻咽癌不同N/M分期的预后分析

目的 探讨精确放疗时代T1期伴不同颈淋巴结转移状态的鼻咽癌患者生存预后,为优化治疗方案提供参考。方法 回顾性分析复旦大学附属眼耳鼻喉科医院放疗科2014—2019年间进行单纯放疗或放化疗的413例局部早期鼻咽癌患者(T1N0-3M0-1期)资料。Kaplan-Meier法生存分析并log-rank法检验。结果 全部病例中男291例、女122例,中位年龄51岁(9~78岁)。病理类型均为鼻咽非角化性癌、未分化型。T1N0M0期(Ⅰ期)48例(11.6%),T1N1M0期(Ⅱ期)158例(38.3%),T1N2M0期(Ⅲ期)162例(39.2%),T1N3M0/T1NxM1期(ⅣA-ⅣB期)45例(10.9%);初治发生转移的ⅣB期患者8例(1.9%)。所有患者总体淋巴结转移率高达88.1%。接受三维适形放疗7例,调强放疗371例,容积调强弧形治疗35例。5年总生存率为(95.9±1.2)%,其中T1N0M0期为100%,T1N1M0期为(99.2±0.8)%,T1N2M0期为(95.1±2.2)%,T1N3M0期为(87.9±6.6)%;初治转移及N3期与患者远期预后显著相关(P<0.05)。放疗远期不良反应中口干不适最常见,发生率为18.6%,其中17.9%为1级不良反应;其次为听觉损伤及牙齿不适等;仅2例发生3级不良反应,表现为听力完全丧失。结论 T1期鼻咽癌患者虽颈淋巴结转移率高,但放疗效果好,精确放疗技术下远期放疗不良反应并未对患者的生存质量产生严重影响。     

Ⅰ—Ⅱ期乳腺癌保乳术后放疗的临床疗效及预后分析

目的 分析Ⅰ—Ⅱ期乳腺癌保乳术后放疗的临床疗效和预后因素。方法 回顾分析1999—2013年1376例Ⅰ、Ⅱ期(T1-2N0-1/T3N0)单侧乳腺癌保乳术后放疗的疗效。930例(67.6%)同时接受化疗,先放疗后化疗 517例,先化疗后放疗 413例。1055例(76.7%)患者接受内分泌治疗,86例(39.6%) HER-2阳性患者接受靶向治疗。用Kaplan-Meier计算生存率并Logrank法单因素分析,Cox法多因素分析。结果 中位随访55个月,10年样本量 90例。全组5、10年OS率分别为98.6%和91.5%,DFS率分别为94.6%和82.8%。多因素分析显示年龄(P=0.016)、T分期(P=0.006)、N分期(P=0.004)、脉管癌栓(P=0.038)和放疗距手术时间(P=0.048)是DFS独立预后因素。保乳术后单纯放疗组多因素分析显示,N分期(P=0.044)和ER水平(P=0.026)是DFS独立预后因素。结论 Ⅰ—Ⅱ期乳腺癌保乳术后以放疗为主的综合治疗模式临床疗效满意。影响DFS率的因素包括年龄、T分期、N分期、脉管癌栓和放疗距手术时间。保乳术后单纯放疗组的DFS率和N分期与ER水平有关。     

Results of definitive irradiation in a series of 305 epidermoid carcinomas of the anal canal

PURPOSE: To evaluate our data concerning the prognostic factors for locoregional control, survival, late complications, and sphincter conservation in a series of epidermoid cancers of the anal canal without clinical evidence of metastasis. METHODS AND MATERIALS: Between June 1972 and January 1997, 305 patients were treated with curative-intent radiotherapy (RT). The T stage according to the 1987 International Union Against Cancer classification was T1 in 26, T2 in 141, T3 in 104, and T4 in 34. Forty-nine patients had nodal involvement at presentation. The pretreatment anal function score, according to our in-house system, was 0 for 22 patients, 1 for 182, 2 for 74, 3 for 7, and 4 for 11 patients; for 9 patients, scores were unavailable. The treatment started with external beam radiotherapy (EBRT) in 303 patients (median dose 45 Gy). After a rest period of 4-6 weeks, a boost of 20 Gy was delivered by EBRT in 279 patients and by interstitial (192)Ir brachytherapy in 17 patients. Seven patients received only one course of EBRT (mean dose 49.5 Gy), and 2 patients were treated with interstitial (192)Ir brachytherapy alone (55 Gy and 60 Gy). Concomitant chemotherapy (5-fluorouracil and either mitomycin C or cisplatin) was delivered to 19 patients. The mean follow-up was 103 months (median 84). RESULTS: At the end of RT, the local tumor clinical complete response rate was 96% for T1, 87% for T2, 79% for T3, and 44% for T4. Of the 61 locally progressive tumors, 27 (44%) were salvaged with abdominoperineal resection. The rate of local tumor relapse was 12%. Among 37 local tumor relapses, 20 (54%) were salvaged with abdominoperineal resection and one with interstitial (192)Ir brachytherapy. The overall local control rate (with or without salvage local therapy) was 84%. The local control rate with good anal function (score 0 or 1) was 56.5%. Of 181 available patients with their anus preserved, 94% had good anal function. For a subgroup of 15 patients with a tumor length of <2 cm and without nodal involvement, the clinical complete response rate after RT completion was 100%, the local control rate with or without local salvage treatment was 100%, and among 13 available patients with their anus preserved, the anal function score was good in 12 patients (92%). The 10-year disease-free survival rate was 74%. After multivariate analysis, three independent predictive factors significantly influenced disease-free survival: the interval between the two courses of RT (>38 days vs. < or =38 days, p = 0.0025), pretreatment anal function score (0 vs. 1 vs. 2 vs. 3 vs. 4, p = 4.4.10(-6)), and clinical complete response after RT completion (no complete response vs. complete response, p = 2.5.10(-14)). CONCLUSION: We confirm the excellent results with RT in T1 and T2 lesions. However, to improve survival without colostomy with good anal sphincter function, chemoradiotherapy should be preferred for tumors > or =2 cm in length and for locally advanced tumors.     

Epidermoid anal cancer: a review of a population-based series of 308 consecutive patients treated according to prospective protocols

PURPOSE: The primary therapy in epidermoid anal cancer is radiotherapy, generally with chemotherapy. The use of neoadjuvant chemotherapy has been infrequently reported in the literature. This study presents results from a large population-based series and provides comparisons between different treatments. METHODS AND MATERIALS: Between 1985 and 2000, 308 patients with invasive epidermoid anal cancer were diagnosed in the Stockholm Health Care Region. Treatment was given according to defined protocols. External beam radiotherapy alone or with concomitant bleomycin and neoadjuvant chemotherapy followed by radiotherapy alone were the primary treatments. Radical surgery was reserved for poor responders or recurrences. Data were reviewed with regard to treatment, outcome, and prognostic factors. RESULTS: Among the 276 patients (90%) treated with curative intent, 264 (96%) received treatment in accordance with the protocols. The overall 5-year survival rate was 68%. Among the 142 patients with locally advanced tumors (T > or =4 cm or N+), patients treated with neoadjuvant platinum-based chemotherapy (n = 91) had significantly better complete response rates compared with patients treated with radiotherapy with or without bleomycin (n = 51) (92% vs. 76%, p < 0.01). A significantly increased overall 5-year survival rate was also found among patients receiving neoadjuvant therapy (63% vs. 44%, p < 0.05). CONCLUSION: Structured treatment protocols result in favorable outcome on a population level. The results further suggest a significant therapeutic gain from including neoadjuvant chemotherapy in the treatment of locally advanced anal cancer.