| Literature DB >> 25290692 |
Binbin Su1, Baixuan Xu2, Jun Wan1.
Abstract
PURPOSE: The aim of this study was to evaluate the relationship between long-term aspirin use with pretreatment 18 Fluorodeoxyglucose (FDG) uptake of primary lesions of Colorectal cancer (CRC) and evaluate their clinical significance.Entities:
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2014 PMID: 25290692 PMCID: PMC4188583 DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0109459
Source DB: PubMed Journal: PLoS One ISSN: 1932-6203 Impact factor: 3.240
Patient demographics and clinical characteristics.
| Characteristic | Aspirin group n = 20 | Control group n = 64 | P-value |
| Age (y) | 75.2±9.87 | 71.7±13.8 | 0.30 |
| Gender | |||
| Male | 16(80%) | 46(71.9%) | 0.47 |
| Female | 4(20%) | 18(28.1%) | |
| Tumor sizes (cm) | 4.26±1.80 | 4.87±2.16 | 0.25 |
| Differentiation | |||
| Well | 15(75%) | 51(79.7%) | 0.65 |
| Poor | 5(25%) | 13(20.3%) | |
| T classification | |||
| T1+T2 | 4(20%) | 13(20.3%) | 0.97 |
| T3+T4 | 16(80%) | 51(79.7%) | |
| N classification | |||
| N0 | 13(65%) | 43(67.2%) | 0.85 |
| N1+N2 | 7(35%) | 21(32.8%) | |
| Pretreament SUV max | 9.74±2.62 | 13.91±6.18 | 0.004 |
| Dose of aspirin (mg/d) | 100 | 0 | 0 |
Clinicopathological implication of Pretreament SUVmax combination status.
| Characteristic | No. of patients | Pretreament SUVmax | P-value |
| Age (y) | |||
| <60 | 14 | 14.0±5.56 | 0.4 |
| ≥60 | 70 | 12.6±5.87 | |
| Gender | |||
| Male | 62 | 13.2±6.45 | 0.4 |
| Female | 22 | 12.0±3.35 | |
| Tumor sizes (cm) | |||
| <5 | 49 | 11.2±5.03 | 0.02 |
| ≥5 | 35 | 15.2±6.12 | |
| Differentiation | |||
| Well | 66 | 12.78±5.73 | 0.67 |
| Poor | 18 | 13.4±6.24 | |
| T classification | |||
| T1+T2 | 17 | 10.1±4.17 | 0.02 |
| T3+T4 | 67 | 13.63±5.97 | |
| N classification | |||
| N0 | 56 | 13.5±6.26 | 0.17 |
| N1+N2 | 28 | 11.7±4.65 | |
| Aspirin use | |||
| Yes | 20 | 9.74±2.62 | 0.04 |
| No | 64 | 13.91±6.18 |
Figure 1Progression-free survival as differentiated by TNM stage, history of aspirin use and SUVmax, respectively.
A: PFS differences between TNM categories, p = 0.01. B: PFS differences between aspirin categories, p = 0.04; C: PFS differences between SUV max categories, p = 0.11.
Univariate and multivariate analysis of prognostic factors of PFS.
| Characteristic | Univariate analysis | Multivariate analysis | ||||
| HR | 95%CI | P | HR | 95%CI | P | |
| Age (<60 vs ≥60) | 0.45 | 0.21–1.97 | 0.453 | |||
| Gender (M vs F) | 0.65 | 0.23–1.81 | 0.414 | |||
| Sizes (<5 cm vs ≥5 cm) | 0.871 | 0.38–2.25 | 0.929 | |||
| Dif (well vs poor) | 4.121 | 1.666–10.194 | 0.002 | 2.47 | 0.914–6.689 | 0.075 |
| T (T1+2 vs T3+4) | 1.624 | 0.476–5.548 | 0.439 | |||
| N (N0 vs N1+N2) | 3.578 | 1.45–8.77 | 0.005 | 2.696 | 1.008–7.209 | 0.048 |
| Aspirin (yes vs no) | 4.10 | 0.945–17.82 | 0.06 | 3.58 | 0.81–5.884 | 0.093 |
| SUVmax (<13 vs ≥13) | 2.061 | 0.822–5.17 | 2.06 | |||