Literature DB >> 23624873

Large variation between hospitals in follow-up for colorectal cancer in southern Netherlands.

L N van Steenbergen1, I H J T de Hingh, H J T Rutten, M C M Rijk, R G Orsini, J W W Coebergh, V E P P Lemmens.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: The aims of the study were to describe the follow-up of colorectal cancer (CRC) patients in southern Netherlands and examine their overall and disease-free survival.
METHODS: Patients newly diagnosed with CRC in 2003-2005 and 2008 with a survival of at least 1 year after diagnosis and recorded in the retrospective Eindhoven Cancer Registry were included (n = 579). Follow-up was defined as at least one liver imaging and at least two carcinoembryonic antigen (CEA) measurements. Logistic regression analyses were conducted to assess determinants of follow-up. Proportions of patients undergoing colonoscopy, CEA measurements and liver and chest imaging were calculated. Overall and disease-free survival were calculated.
RESULTS: Patients ≥75 years (odds ratio (OR) 0.5 (95% confidence interval (CI) 0.3-0.7)) were less likely to receive follow-up, contrasting patients <50 years (OR 3.1 (95% CI 1.3-7.4)). In 2008, follow-up intensity increased (OR 2.3 (95% CI 1.2-4.3)), especially for liver imaging and CEA measurements. There were large differences in follow-up intensity and activities between hospitals, which were unaffected by comorbidity: ranges for colonoscopy 15-73 %, CEA measurement 46-91 % and imaging of the liver 22-70 % between hospitals. No effect of follow-up intensity was found on 5-year disease-free survival for patients aged <75 years (64 vs. 68 %; p = 0.6). Similarly, no effect of follow-up intensity on 5-year overall survival was found in these patients (77 vs. 82 %; p = 0.07).
CONCLUSION: Large variation in follow-up was found for patients with CRC, mainly declining with age and hospital of follow-up. Over time, follow-up became more intensive, especially with respect to liver imaging and CEA measurements. However, follow-up consisting of at least one liver imaging and at least two CEA measurements did not improve overall and disease-free survival.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2013        PMID: 23624873     DOI: 10.1007/s00384-013-1693-x

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Int J Colorectal Dis        ISSN: 0179-1958            Impact factor:   2.571


  18 in total

Review 1.  Overcoming challenges associated with chemotherapy treatment in the senior adult population.

Authors:  Jean-Pierre Droz; Matti Aapro; Lodovico Balducci
Journal:  Crit Rev Oncol Hematol       Date:  2008-08-26       Impact factor: 6.312

2.  Incidence and patterns of recurrence after resection for cure of colonic cancer in a well defined population.

Authors:  S Manfredi; A M Bouvier; C Lepage; C Hatem; V Dancourt; J Faivre
Journal:  Br J Surg       Date:  2006-09       Impact factor: 6.939

3.  Colorectal cancer follow-up: a reassessment of empirical evidence on effectiveness.

Authors:  J Kievit
Journal:  Eur J Surg Oncol       Date:  2000-06       Impact factor: 4.424

4.  Geographic and patient variation among Medicare beneficiaries in the use of follow-up testing after surgery for nonmetastatic colorectal carcinoma.

Authors:  G S Cooper; Z Yuan; A Chak; A A Rimm
Journal:  Cancer       Date:  1999-05-15       Impact factor: 6.860

Review 5.  Follow-up of patients with colorectal cancer: numbers needed to test and treat.

Authors:  J Kievit
Journal:  Eur J Cancer       Date:  2002-05       Impact factor: 9.162

6.  Completeness of cancer registration in Limburg, The Netherlands.

Authors:  L J Schouten; P Höppener; P A van den Brandt; J A Knottnerus; J J Jager
Journal:  Int J Epidemiol       Date:  1993-06       Impact factor: 7.196

7.  Follow-up of patients with colorectal cancer. A meta-analysis.

Authors:  D J Bruinvels; A M Stiggelbout; J Kievit; H C van Houwelingen; J D Habbema; C J van de Velde
Journal:  Ann Surg       Date:  1994-02       Impact factor: 12.969

8.  Increasing incidence and decreasing mortality of colorectal cancer due to marked cohort effects in southern Netherlands.

Authors:  Liza N van Steenbergen; Valery E P P Lemmens; Marieke J Louwman; Jan Willem A Straathof; Jan-Willem W Coebergh
Journal:  Eur J Cancer Prev       Date:  2009-04       Impact factor: 2.497

9.  Results of a national survey among Dutch surgeons treating patients with colorectal carcinoma. Current opinion about follow-up, treatment of metastasis, and reasons to revise follow-up practice.

Authors:  I Grossmann; G H de Bock; C J H van de Velde; J Kievit; T Wiggers
Journal:  Colorectal Dis       Date:  2007-06-30       Impact factor: 3.788

Review 10.  Follow-up of patients with curatively resected colorectal cancer: a practice guideline.

Authors:  Alvaro Figueredo; R Bryan Rumble; Jean Maroun; Craig C Earle; Bernard Cummings; Robin McLeod; Lisa Zuraw; Caroline Zwaal
Journal:  BMC Cancer       Date:  2003-10-06       Impact factor: 4.430

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.