Literature DB >> 36169964

Treatment Utilization and Outcomes for Locally Advanced Rectal Cancer in Older Patients.

Sean Nassoiy1, Wade Christopher1, Rebecca Marcus1, Jennifer Keller1, Jessica Weiss1, Shu-Ching Chang2, Leland Foshag1, Richard Essner1, Trevan Fischer1, Melanie Goldfarb1.   

Abstract

Importance: The number of older patients (80 years and older) diagnosed with locally advanced rectal cancer (LARC) is expected to increase. Although current guidelines recommend neoadjuvant chemoradiation therapy (NACRT) followed by resection, little is known about management and outcomes in this older population. Objective: To assess the trends in management of older patients diagnosed with LARC who had a surgical resection. Design, Setting, and Participants: Patients 80 years and older who had a surgical resection for LARC were identified in the 2004-2016 National Cancer Database. Patients were grouped based on therapy sequence: (1) surgery followed by adjuvant therapy (AT), ie, chemotherapy or radiation; (2) surgery alone; or (3) NACRT followed by surgical resection. Data were analyzed in May 2021. Exposures: NACRT followed by surgery, and surgery with or without AT. Main Outcomes and Measures: Overall survival (OS) was assessed using Kaplan-Meier analyses with inverse probability of treatment weighting (IPTW) and Cox proportional hazards regression were performed to examine the association of NACRT with the risk of death.
Results: Of 3868 patients with LARC who underwent surgical resection, 2042 (52.8%) were male, and the mean (SD) age was 83.4 (3.0) years. A total of 2273 (58.8%) received NACRT followed by surgical resection. Factors independently associated with NACRT were more recent diagnosis, age 80 to 85 years (vs 86 years and older), fewer comorbidities, larger tumors, and node-positive disease. The Kaplan-Meier analyses with IPTW showed that 3-year and 5-year OS for NACRT (3-year: 68.9%; 95% CI, 67.0-70.8; 5-year: 51.1%; 95% CI, 49.0-53.4) vs surgery with AT (3-year: 64.4%; 95% CI, 59.0-70.2; 5-year: 43.0%; 95% CI, 37.4-49.5) vs surgery alone (3-year: 55.8%; 95% CI, 52.0-60.0; 5-year: 34.7%; 95% CI, 30.8-39.0) was significantly different (P < .001). After adjusting for confounders, patients who received NACRT were more likely to undergo an R0 resection (adjusted odds ratio, 2.16; 95% CI, 1.62-2.88), which independently improved OS (P < .001). Moreover, receipt of NACRT was independently associated with a 25% decreased risk of death (adjusted hazard ratio, 0.75; 95% CI, 0.69-0.82) compared with alternative treatment sequences. Conclusions and Relevance: Approximately 40% of older patients with LARC did not receive the current standard of care. In this cohort, NACRT was associated with a higher likelihood of an R0 resection and improved OS. Clinicians should advocate for receipt of NACRT in older patients with LARC.

Entities:  

Year:  2022        PMID: 36169964      PMCID: PMC9520439          DOI: 10.1001/jamasurg.2022.4456

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  JAMA Surg        ISSN: 2168-6254            Impact factor:   16.681


  21 in total

1.  Preoperative radiotherapy for resectable rectal cancer: A meta-analysis.

Authors:  C Cammà; M Giunta; F Fiorica; L Pagliaro; A Craxì; M Cottone
Journal:  JAMA       Date:  2000 Aug 23-30       Impact factor: 56.272

2.  Preoperative radiotherapy combined with total mesorectal excision for resectable rectal cancer.

Authors:  E Kapiteijn; C A Marijnen; I D Nagtegaal; H Putter; W H Steup; T Wiggers; H J Rutten; L Pahlman; B Glimelius; J H van Krieken; J W Leer; C J van de Velde
Journal:  N Engl J Med       Date:  2001-08-30       Impact factor: 91.245

Review 3.  Should we invest in biological age predictors to treat colorectal cancer in older adults?

Authors:  Sara Hägg; Juulia Jylhävä
Journal:  Eur J Surg Oncol       Date:  2019-11-08       Impact factor: 4.424

4.  Preoperative versus postoperative chemoradiotherapy for rectal cancer.

Authors:  Rolf Sauer; Heinz Becker; Werner Hohenberger; Claus Rödel; Christian Wittekind; Rainer Fietkau; Peter Martus; Jörg Tschmelitsch; Eva Hager; Clemens F Hess; Johann-H Karstens; Torsten Liersch; Heinz Schmidberger; Rudolf Raab
Journal:  N Engl J Med       Date:  2004-10-21       Impact factor: 91.245

5.  Challenges of guarantee-time bias.

Authors:  Anita Giobbie-Hurder; Richard D Gelber; Meredith M Regan
Journal:  J Clin Oncol       Date:  2013-07-08       Impact factor: 44.544

Review 6.  Frailty and cancer: Implications for oncology surgery, medical oncology, and radiation oncology.

Authors:  Cecilia G Ethun; Mehmet A Bilen; Ashesh B Jani; Shishir K Maithel; Kenneth Ogan; Viraj A Master
Journal:  CA Cancer J Clin       Date:  2017-07-21       Impact factor: 508.702

7.  Colorectal cancer statistics, 2020.

Authors:  Rebecca L Siegel; Kimberly D Miller; Ann Goding Sauer; Stacey A Fedewa; Lynn F Butterly; Joseph C Anderson; Andrea Cercek; Robert A Smith; Ahmedin Jemal
Journal:  CA Cancer J Clin       Date:  2020-03-05       Impact factor: 508.702

8.  Adjuvant chemotherapy for stage III colon cancer in the oldest old: results beyond clinical guidelines.

Authors:  Anasooya Abraham; Elizabeth B Habermann; David A Rothenberger; Mary Kwaan; Armin D Weinberg; Helen M Parsons; Pankaj Gupta; Waddah B Al-Refaie
Journal:  Cancer       Date:  2012-07-17       Impact factor: 6.860

9.  Patterns of adjuvant chemotherapy use in a population-based cohort of patients with resected stage II or III colon cancer.

Authors:  Thomas A Abrams; Rick Brightly; Jianbin Mao; Gregory Kirkner; Jeffrey A Meyerhardt; Deborah Schrag; Charles S Fuchs
Journal:  J Clin Oncol       Date:  2011-07-18       Impact factor: 44.544

10.  Variance estimation when using inverse probability of treatment weighting (IPTW) with survival analysis.

Authors:  Peter C Austin
Journal:  Stat Med       Date:  2016-08-22       Impact factor: 2.373

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.