R Vernet1,2, J M Borras2,3, L Aliste2,3, M Antonio4, A Guarga5, P Manchon-Walsh6,7. 1. Escola Universitària d'Infermeria i Teràpia Ocupacional (EUIT), Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona (UAB), C/De la Riba, 90, 08221, Terrassa, Barcelona, Spain. 2. Department of Clinical Sciences, Biomedical Research Institute of Bellvitge (IDIBELL), University of Barcelona, C/Feixa Llarga, s/n, L'Hospitalet de Llobregat, 08907, Barcelona, Spain. 3. Catalonian Cancer Strategy, Department of Health, Government of Catalonia, Avd. Gran Via de l'Hospitalet, 199-203, L'Hospitalet de Llobregat, 08908, Barcelona, Spain. 4. Medical Oncology, Institut Catala d'Oncologia (ICO), L'Hospitalet de Llobregat, 08907, Barcelona, Spain. 5. Health Service Procurement and Assessment, Catalonian Health Service (CatSalut), Travessera de les Corts 131-159, 08028, Barcelona, Spain. 6. Department of Clinical Sciences, Biomedical Research Institute of Bellvitge (IDIBELL), University of Barcelona, C/Feixa Llarga, s/n, L'Hospitalet de Llobregat, 08907, Barcelona, Spain. pmanchon@iconcologia.net. 7. Catalonian Cancer Strategy, Department of Health, Government of Catalonia, Avd. Gran Via de l'Hospitalet, 199-203, L'Hospitalet de Llobregat, 08908, Barcelona, Spain. pmanchon@iconcologia.net.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Population ageing is a relevant concern in people diagnosed with rectal cancer. This study evaluates the adherence to clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) and patient outcomes in rectal cancer, with a particular focus on variation according to age. METHODS: This is a multicentre retrospective cohort study of all patients surgically treated for the first time for primary rectal cancer with curative intent in public hospitals in Catalonia during two study periods: first, with data from 2005 to 2007, and then with data from 2011 to 2012. We obtained the study data through a comprehensive review of patients' clinical records. Information on diagnosis, treatment and follow-up was collected and then compared with the relevant CPGs. We then performed a descriptive analysis of the categorical variables followed by a univariate and multivariate logistic regression analysis to calculate the odds ratio. Finally, we calculated the recurrence and death rates per person-year at 2 years' follow-up. RESULTS: In total, 3770 people were included in this study. The participants aged 70 and under were more likely to receive neoadjuvant therapy than those aged over 80 (2005/2007, 63 vs 17.4% p < 0.001; 2011/2012, 72 vs 41.1% p < 0.001); however, in the second study period there was less imbalance between the two groups in this regard, showing improved administration of neoadjuvant therapy in the elderly. The quality of surgery was suboptimal in a larger proportion of the elderly population, and the choice of surgical technique was dependent to some extent on the age of the participant. Recurrence and survival rates were significantly better in the second study period. CONCLUSIONS: Compared to younger patients, the most elderly were less likely to receive the recommended adjuvant treatment, laparoscopy and total mesorectal excision. However, we observed improved adherence to the recommended treatment regimen in the most elderly participants, resulting in decreased recurrence and increased survival rates in this population.
BACKGROUND: Population ageing is a relevant concern in people diagnosed with rectal cancer. This study evaluates the adherence to clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) and patient outcomes in rectal cancer, with a particular focus on variation according to age. METHODS: This is a multicentre retrospective cohort study of all patients surgically treated for the first time for primary rectal cancer with curative intent in public hospitals in Catalonia during two study periods: first, with data from 2005 to 2007, and then with data from 2011 to 2012. We obtained the study data through a comprehensive review of patients' clinical records. Information on diagnosis, treatment and follow-up was collected and then compared with the relevant CPGs. We then performed a descriptive analysis of the categorical variables followed by a univariate and multivariate logistic regression analysis to calculate the odds ratio. Finally, we calculated the recurrence and death rates per person-year at 2 years' follow-up. RESULTS: In total, 3770 people were included in this study. The participants aged 70 and under were more likely to receive neoadjuvant therapy than those aged over 80 (2005/2007, 63 vs 17.4% p < 0.001; 2011/2012, 72 vs 41.1% p < 0.001); however, in the second study period there was less imbalance between the two groups in this regard, showing improved administration of neoadjuvant therapy in the elderly. The quality of surgery was suboptimal in a larger proportion of the elderly population, and the choice of surgical technique was dependent to some extent on the age of the participant. Recurrence and survival rates were significantly better in the second study period. CONCLUSIONS: Compared to younger patients, the most elderly were less likely to receive the recommended adjuvant treatment, laparoscopy and total mesorectal excision. However, we observed improved adherence to the recommended treatment regimen in the most elderly participants, resulting in decreased recurrence and increased survival rates in this population.
Entities:
Keywords:
Comorbidity; Elderly; Patterns of care; Rectal cancer; Surgery; Treatment
Authors: M A Shahir; V E P P Lemmens; L V van de Poll-Franse; A C Voogd; H Martijn; M L G Janssen-Heijnen Journal: Eur J Cancer Date: 2006-06-22 Impact factor: 9.162
Authors: Valery E P P Lemmens; Maryska L G Janssen-Heijnen; Saskia Houterman; Kees D G W Verheij; Hendrik Martijn; Lonneke van de Poll-Franse; Jan Willem W Coebergh Journal: World J Surg Date: 2007-01 Impact factor: 3.352
Authors: Ans J C M Vulto; Valery E P P Lemmens; Marieke W J Louwman; Maryska L G Janssen-Heijnen; Philip H P Poortmans; Marnix L M Lybeert; Jan Willem W Coebergh Journal: Cancer Date: 2006-06-15 Impact factor: 6.860
Authors: J Ferlay; E Steliarova-Foucher; J Lortet-Tieulent; S Rosso; J W W Coebergh; H Comber; D Forman; F Bray Journal: Eur J Cancer Date: 2013-02-26 Impact factor: 9.162
Authors: Jacques Ferlay; Isabelle Soerjomataram; Rajesh Dikshit; Sultan Eser; Colin Mathers; Marise Rebelo; Donald Maxwell Parkin; David Forman; Freddie Bray Journal: Int J Cancer Date: 2014-10-09 Impact factor: 7.396
Authors: Cornelis J H van de Velde; Petra G Boelens; Josep M Borras; Jan-Willem Coebergh; Andres Cervantes; Lennart Blomqvist; Regina G H Beets-Tan; Colette B M van den Broek; Gina Brown; Eric Van Cutsem; Eloy Espin; Karin Haustermans; Bengt Glimelius; Lene H Iversen; J Han van Krieken; Corrie A M Marijnen; Geoffrey Henning; Jola Gore-Booth; Elisa Meldolesi; Pawel Mroczkowski; Iris Nagtegaal; Peter Naredi; Hector Ortiz; Lars Påhlman; Philip Quirke; Claus Rödel; Arnaud Roth; Harm Rutten; Hans J Schmoll; Jason J Smith; Pieter J Tanis; Claire Taylor; Arne Wibe; Theo Wiggers; Maria A Gambacorta; Cynthia Aristei; Vincenzo Valentini Journal: Eur J Cancer Date: 2013-10-31 Impact factor: 9.162
Authors: C Gomez-Moreno; H Verduzco-Aguirre; S Contreras-Garduño; A Perez-de-Acha; J Alcalde-Castro; Y Chavarri-Guerra; J M A García-Lara; A P Navarrete-Reyes; J A Avila-Funes; E Soto-Perez-de-Celis Journal: Clin Transl Oncol Date: 2019-04-11 Impact factor: 3.405
Authors: Javier Mar; Ane Anton-Ladislao; Oliver Ibarrondo; Arantzazu Arrospide; Santiago Lázaro-Aramburu; Nerea Gonzalez; Marisa Bare; Antonio Escobar; Maximino Redondo; José M Quintana Journal: Surg Endosc Date: 2019-05-28 Impact factor: 4.584
Authors: M G Torras; E Canals; C Muñoz-Montplet; A Vidal; D Jurado; A Eraso; S Villà; M Caro; J Molero; M Macià; M Puigdemont; E González-Muñoz; A López; F Guedea; J M Borras Journal: Radiat Oncol Date: 2020-01-31 Impact factor: 3.481