{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.02600250626566416, 'fraction_numerical': 0.008771929824561403, 'mean_word_length': 5.398797595190381, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
[Standards, options and recommendations: concomitant radiochemotherapy for cancer of the cervix: a critical analysis of the literature and update of SOR].

INTRODUCTION
The "Standards, Options and Recommendations" (SOR) project, started in 1993, is a collaboration between the National Federation of the French Cancer Centres (FNCLCC), the 20 French Cancer Centres (CRLCC) and specialists from French public universities, general hospitals and private clinics. The main objective is the development of clinical practice guidelines to improve the quality of health care and outcome for cancer patients. The methodology is based on literature review and critical appraisal by a multidisciplinary group of experts, with feedback from specialists in cancer care delivery.


OBJECTIVES
To update, according to the methodology of SOR, the Standards, Options and Recommendations for the management of patients with cancer of the cervix, and in particular, the place of concomitant radiochemotherapy.


METHODS
Data have been identified by a literature search using Medline (to April 1999) and the personal reference lists of experts. Once the guidelines were defined, the document was submitted for review to independent national and international reviewers and to the medical committees of the CRLCC.


RESULTS
The principle recommendations concerning the place of radiochemotherapy in the treatment of cancer of the cervix are: 1) the available data shows a significant increase in local control (level of evidence A) and of overall survival (level of evidence B1) following concomitant radiochemotherapy as compared to radiotherapy alone or the combination of radiotherapy-hydroxyurea. For stages IB, IIA, proximal IIB with bad prognostic factors (tumour size greater than 4 cm and/or invasion of pelvic nodes and/or microscopic invasion of the parametrium) and without lumbo-aortic nodal invasion, concomitant radiochemotherapy can be considered as standard treatment. This benefit is less clear for stages distal IIB, III et IVA without para-aortic nodal invasion (level of evidence C) and must be confirmed (expert agreement); 2) the toxicity of radiochemotherapy is essentially haematologic and gastrointestinal (level of evidence B1) and is greater than that of radiotherapy alone (level of evidence B1); 3) these results have been obtained by the combination of chemotherapy based on cisplatin alone, or in combination with 5FU. Although of equal benefit, the toxicity of the cisplatin/5FU/hydroxyurea combination was greater than that of cisplatin alone in a trial comparing the two protocols. A significantly longer survival have also been obtained by the combination of chemoradiation and adjuvant chemotherapy with epirubicin (level of evidence C). These results must be confirmed; 4) the exact means of delivering the chemotherapy has not been clearly established. In fact, in these trials, some protocols use cisplatin weekly at a dose of 40 mg/m2 and others every three or four weeks at doses ranging from 50 to 75 mg/m2. Subsequent randomised studies are likely to establish optimal schema for the delivery of chemotherapy when combined with external radiotherapy and brachytherapy.