Carolyn M Rutter1, Eric A Johnson, Eric J Feuer, Amy B Knudsen, Karen M Kuntz, Deborah Schrag. 1. Affiliations of authors: Group Health Research Institute, Seattle, WA (CMR, EAJ); Division of Cancer Control and Population Sciences National Cancer Institute, Bethesda, MD (EJF); Institute for Technology Assessment, Department of Radiology, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston MA (ABK); Division of Health Policy and Management, University of Minnesota School of Public Health, Minneapolis MN (KMK); Division of Medical Oncology, Dana-Farber Cancer Institute, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA (DS).
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Treatment options for colorectal cancer (CRC) have improved substantially over the past 25 years. Measuring the impact of these improvements on survival outcomes is challenging, however, against the background of overall survival gains from advancements in the prevention, screening, and treatment of other conditions. Relative survival is a metric that accounts for these concurrent changes, allowing assessment of changes in CRC survival. We describe stage- and location-specific trends in relative survival after CRC diagnosis. METHODS: We analyzed survival outcomes for 233965 people in the Surveillance Epidemiology and End Results (SEER) program who were diagnosed with CRC between January 1, 1975, and December 31, 2003. All models were adjusted for sex, race (black vs white), age at diagnosis, time since diagnosis, and diagnosis year. We estimated the proportional difference in survival for CRC patients compared with overall survival for age-, sex-, race-, and period-matched controls to account for concurrent changes in overall survival using two-sided Wald tests. RESULTS: We found statistically significant reductions in excess hazard of mortality from CRC in 2003 relative to 1975, with excess hazard ratios ranging from 0.75 (stage IV colon cancer; P < .001) to 0.32 (stage I rectal cancer; P < .001), indicating improvements in relative survival for all stages and cancer locations. These improvements occurred in earlier years for patients diagnosed with stage I cancers, with smaller but continuing improvements for later-stage cancers. CONCLUSIONS: Our results demonstrate a steady trend toward improved relative survival for CRC, indicating that treatment and surveillance improvements have had an impact at the population level.
BACKGROUND: Treatment options for colorectal cancer (CRC) have improved substantially over the past 25 years. Measuring the impact of these improvements on survival outcomes is challenging, however, against the background of overall survival gains from advancements in the prevention, screening, and treatment of other conditions. Relative survival is a metric that accounts for these concurrent changes, allowing assessment of changes in CRC survival. We describe stage- and location-specific trends in relative survival after CRC diagnosis. METHODS: We analyzed survival outcomes for 233965 people in the Surveillance Epidemiology and End Results (SEER) program who were diagnosed with CRC between January 1, 1975, and December 31, 2003. All models were adjusted for sex, race (black vs white), age at diagnosis, time since diagnosis, and diagnosis year. We estimated the proportional difference in survival for CRC patients compared with overall survival for age-, sex-, race-, and period-matched controls to account for concurrent changes in overall survival using two-sided Wald tests. RESULTS: We found statistically significant reductions in excess hazard of mortality from CRC in 2003 relative to 1975, with excess hazard ratios ranging from 0.75 (stage IV colon cancer; P < .001) to 0.32 (stage I rectal cancer; P < .001), indicating improvements in relative survival for all stages and cancer locations. These improvements occurred in earlier years for patients diagnosed with stage I cancers, with smaller but continuing improvements for later-stage cancers. CONCLUSIONS: Our results demonstrate a steady trend toward improved relative survival for CRC, indicating that treatment and surveillance improvements have had an impact at the population level.
Authors: Donald A Berry; Kathleen A Cronin; Sylvia K Plevritis; Dennis G Fryback; Lauren Clarke; Marvin Zelen; Jeanne S Mandelblatt; Andrei Y Yakovlev; J Dik F Habbema; Eric J Feuer Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2005-10-27 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: L B Saltz; J V Cox; C Blanke; L S Rosen; L Fehrenbacher; M J Moore; J A Maroun; S P Ackland; P K Locker; N Pirotta; G L Elfring; L L Miller Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2000-09-28 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: J D Hardcastle; J O Chamberlain; M H Robinson; S M Moss; S S Amar; T W Balfour; P D James; C M Mangham Journal: Lancet Date: 1996-11-30 Impact factor: 79.321
Authors: Richard M Goldberg; Daniel J Sargent; Roscoe F Morton; Charles S Fuchs; Ramesh K Ramanathan; Stephen K Williamson; Brian P Findlay; Henry C Pitot; Steven R Alberts Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2003-12-09 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: Jean L Freeman; Carrie N Klabunde; Nicola Schussler; Joan L Warren; Beth A Virnig; Gregory S Cooper Journal: Med Care Date: 2002-08 Impact factor: 2.983
Authors: Brynn Fowler; N Jewel Samadder; Deanna Kepka; Qian Ding; Lisa Pappas; Anne C Kirchhoff Journal: J Rural Health Date: 2017-04-20 Impact factor: 4.333
Authors: Daniel Delitto; Thomas J George; Tyler J Loftus; Peihua Qiu; George J Chang; Carmen J Allegra; William A Hall; Steven J Hughes; Sanda A Tan; Christiana M Shaw; Atif Iqbal Journal: J Natl Cancer Inst Date: 2018-05-01 Impact factor: 13.506
Authors: Reinier G S Meester; Iris Lansdorp-Vogelaar; Sidney J Winawer; Ann G Zauber; Amy B Knudsen; Uri Ladabaum Journal: Ann Intern Med Date: 2019-09-24 Impact factor: 25.391
Authors: Frank van Hees; Sameer D Saini; Iris Lansdorp-Vogelaar; Sandeep Vijan; Reinier G S Meester; Harry J de Koning; Ann G Zauber; Marjolein van Ballegooijen Journal: Gastroenterology Date: 2015-08-04 Impact factor: 22.682
Authors: Carolyn M Rutter; Amy B Knudsen; Tracey L Marsh; V Paul Doria-Rose; Eric Johnson; Chester Pabiniak; Karen M Kuntz; Marjolein van Ballegooijen; Ann G Zauber; Iris Lansdorp-Vogelaar Journal: Med Decis Making Date: 2016-01-08 Impact factor: 2.583
Authors: Jason D Wright; Ling Chen; Ana I Tergas; William M Burke; June Y Hou; Alfred I Neugut; Cande V Ananth; Dawn L Hershman Journal: Am J Obstet Gynecol Date: 2015-07-23 Impact factor: 8.661