Variation in hospital treatment patterns for metastatic colorectal cancer

Trends and comparisons of palliative care utilization for patients with metastatic gynecologic malignancy

OBJECTIVE

To assess the use of non-curative interventions and palliative pain management for patients with advanced gynecologic malignancy in the United States.

METHODS

This retrospective cohort study queried the Commission-on-Cancer's National Cancer Database. The study population was 2,098,291 patients with stage IV malignancies from 2004 to 2020, including 5 gynecologic malignancies (uterine cervix, uterine corpus, tubo-ovary, vulva, and vagina) and 7 non-gynecologic malignancies (lung, pancreas, colorectum, breast, kidney, liver, and bladder), stratified by gender. Utilization rates and temporal trends of non-curative interventions (systemic therapy, surgery, radiotherapy) and palliative pain management in the first course of intervention were evaluated across the malignancy types.

RESULTS

In 19 gender-stratified malignancy groups, the median rate of non-curative interventions and palliative pain management use rate was 18.3%. All the gynecologic malignancies ranked below the median, including the 3 lowest groups (12.6%, 10.5%, and 7.8% for uterine corpus, vulva, and tubo-ovary, respectively). Non-curative interventions and palliative pain management use increased significantly in non-gynecologic malignancies, whereas utilization remained unchanged over several years for most gynecologic malignancies, including uterine cervix (19.8% to 20.1% for 2012-2020, p-trend = .744), uterine corpus (12.0% to 13.4% for 2013-2020, p-trend = .072), and tubo-ovary (8.3% to 9.2% for 2011-2020, p-trend = .311). Compared with non-gynecologic malignancies, patients with gynecologic malignancy were less likely to receive non-curative systemic therapy by 48% to 80% (all 5 types), non-curative surgery by 15% to 61% (all but vagina), non-curative radiotherapy by 37% to 95% (uterus, tubo-ovary, vulva), and palliative pain management by 18% to 45% (all 5 types) (all, adjusted-p < .05).

CONCLUSIONS

In this cohort study, the initial utilization of non-curative interventions and palliative pain management has been unchanged for patients with advanced gynecologic malignancy, and fewer patients receive palliative care than those with non-gynecologic malignancy, including palliative pain management. Possible under-utilization of palliative care services for patients with advanced gynecologic malignancy call for attention and further investigation.

Surgical Treatment Intensity at the End of Life in Patients With Cancer: A Systematic Review

Objective

To synthesize evidence of surgical treatment intensity, defined as a measure of the quantity of invasive procedures, received by patients in patients with cancer within a defined time period around the 'end of life' (EoL).

Background

Concern regarding overly 'aggressive' care or high health care utilization at the EoL, particularly in cancer, is growing. The contribution surgery makes to the quality and cost of EoL care in cancer has not yet been quantified.

Methods

This PROSPERO registered systematic review used PRIMSA guidelines to search electronic databases for observational studies detailing surgical intensity at the EoL in adult cancer patients. Intensity was compared by disease, individual characteristics, geographical region, and palliative care involvement. A risk of bias tool assessed quality and a narrative synthesis of findings was completed.

Results

In total, 39 papers were identified in this search. Up to 79% of patients underwent invasive procedures in the last month of life. Heterogeneity in patient groups, inclusion criteria, and EoL time periods lead to huge variation in results, with treatment intention often not identified. Patient, geographical, and pathological factors, alongside involvement of palliative/hospice care, were all identified as contributors to treatment intensity variation.

Conclusions

A significant proportion of patients with cancer undergo invasive and costly invasive procedures at the EoL. There is significant reporting heterogeneity, with variation in patient inclusion criteria and EoL timeframes, demonstrating uncertainty within the literature. Identification of the context where surgical treatment intensity at the EoL is potentially inappropriate is not currently possible.

Hospital Service Volume as an Indicator of Treatment Patterns for Colorectal Cancer

INTRODUCTION

A hospital's approach (volume of cancer treatment services provided) to treating metastatic colorectal cancer influences a patient's treatment as strongly as patient disease status. The implications of hospital-level treatment approaches across disease stages remain understudied. We sought to determine if hospital service volume (SV) for metastatic colorectal cancer could be predictive of nonstandard treatment patterns in stages I-III colon cancer.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Using the National Cancer Database, we examined rates of nonstandard treatment patterns among patients with colon cancer between 2010 and 2017. After adjusting for clinicopathological characteristics using multivariable logistic regression, we evaluated the relationship between hospital-level SV for metastatic colorectal cancer and nonstandard treatment approaches for patients with stages I-III colon cancer.

RESULTS

There were significant associations between hospital-level SV for metastatic colorectal cancer and the odds of chemotherapy overtreatment among patients with stage I-III colon cancer, as well as undertreatment among patients with stages II-III disease after adjusting for hospital-, patient-, and tumor-level covariates. Patients at the highest-level SV hospitals for metastatic disease had 1.29 higher odds (95% CI = 1.18-1.41; P < 0.0001) of receiving overtreatment compared to patients from lowest SV hospitals. The odds ratio of undertreatment in highest SV compared to lowest SV was 0.64 (95% CI 0.56-0.72; P< 0.0001).

CONCLUSIONS

Hospital-level SV of patients with metastatic colon cancer is a significant indicator of nonstandard treatment patterns among patients with stage I-III colon cancer. Hospitals with the highest volume of cancer treatments have higher odds of providing overtreatment, while low SVs are associated with higher odds of undertreatment.

Variation in hospital utilization of palliative interventions for patients with advanced gastrointestinal cancer near end of life

BACKGROUND

Patients with advanced gastrointestinal (GI) cancer often undergo noncurative interventions with palliative intent to relieve high symptom burden near end of life. Hospital-level variation in intervention utilization remains unclear.

METHODS

National cohort study of 142 304 patients with stage III or IV GI cancer within the National Cancer Database (2004-2014) who died within 1-year of diagnosis. Hospitals were stratified by palliative intervention utilization (surgery, chemotherapy, radiation, pain management). Multivariable, multinomial regression evaluated the association between patient/hospital factors and palliative intervention utilization.

RESULTS

Across 1322 hospitals, median hospital palliative intervention utilization was 12.0% [interquartile range: 0.0%-26.1%]. Utilization increased over time in all but lowest utilizing hospitals. Relative to lowest utilizing hospitals, factors associated with a lower likelihood of care at highest utilizing hospitals included: race (White [ref]; Black-Relative Risk Ratio [RRR] 0.81, 95% confidence interval [0.77-0.85]) and lower income (RRR 0.81 [0.78-0.84]). Factors associated with a higher likelihood included: lower education level (RRR 1.62 [1.55-1.69]) and hospital type (community program [ref]; comprehensive community-RRR 1.33 [1.26-1.41]; academic-RRR 1.88 [1.77-1.99]; integrated network-RRR 1.79 [1.66-1.93]).

CONCLUSION

Hospital variation in palliative intervention use is substantial and potentially associated with sociodemographic and hospital characteristics. Future work can examine how differences in hospital care processes translate to quantity/quality of life for cancer patients.

Trends and disparities in the utilization of systemic chemotherapy in patients with metastatic hepato-pancreato-biliary cancers

BACKGROUND

We described trends and disparities in utilization of systemic chemotherapy in metastatic hepato-pancreato-biliary (HPB) cancers.

METHODS

We queried the National Cancer Database for metastatic HPB cancers [hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC), biliary tract cancers (BTC), pancreatic adenocarcinoma (PDAC)]. We used multivariable analysis to examine the factors associated with utilization of systemic chemotherapy. We utilized marginal structural logistic models to estimate the effect of health insurance, facility type, or facility volume on utilization of systemic chemotherapy.

RESULTS

We identified 162,283 patients with metastatic HPB cancers: 23,923 (14.7%) had HCC, 26,766 (16.5%) had BTC, and 111,594 (68.8%) had PDAC. A total of 37.2% patients with HCC, 55.6% with BTC, and 56.4% with PDAC received chemotherapy. Age ≥70 years and Charlson-Deyo score ≥2 were associated with lower likelihood of receiving chemotherapy across all cancers. Patients with private health insurance had higher receipt of chemotherapy. Receiving treatment at academic facilities had no effect on the receipt of chemotherapy. Treatment of patients with HCC or PDAC at high-volume facilities resulted in higher receipt of chemotherapy.

CONCLUSION

A significant proportion of patients with metastatic HPB cancers do not receive systemic chemotherapy. Several disparities in administration of chemotherapy for metastatic HPB cancers exist.

Temporal development in survival, and gender and regional differences in the Swedish population of patients with synchronous and metachronous metastatic colorectal cancer

BACKGROUND

Survival in patients with metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) has markedly improved in patients included in clinical trials. In population-based materials, improvements were seen until about a decade ago, but it is unclear if survival has continued to improve. It is also unclear if regional or gender differences exist.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

All patients with mCRC (N = 19,566) in Sweden between 2007 and 2016 were identified from the national quality register, SCRCR, with almost complete coverage. Overall survival (OS) from diagnosis of metastatic disease was calculated in two calendar periods, 2007-2011 and 2012-2016. Differences between groups were compared using Cox regression.

RESULTS

Median age was 72 years, 55% were males, synchronous presentation was seen in 13,630 patients and metachronous in 5936. In synchronous disease, the primary tumour was removed more often during the first than the second period (51% vs 41%, p < 0.001). Median OS (mOS) was 14.0 months. It was longer in those with metachronous than synchronous disease (17.6 vs 13.1 months, p < 0.001) and in males (15.0 vs 12.8 months, p < 0.001), and markedly influenced by age and primary location. It was longer in patients diagnosed during the second period than during the first (14.9 vs 13.1 months, HR 0.89 (95% CI 0.86-0.92), p < 0.001). This difference was seen in all subgroups according to sex, age, presentation, and sidedness. mOS was about one month shorter in 1/6 healthcare regions, most pronounced during the first period. Differences in median of up to 5 months were seen between the region with the shortest and longest mOS.

CONCLUSIONS

Overall survival in Swedish patients with mCRC has improved during the past decade but is still substantially worse than reported from clinical trials/hospital-based series, reflecting the selection of patients to trials. Regional differences were seen, but they decreased with time. Women did not have a poorer prognosis in multivariable analyses.

Hospital factors and metastatic surgery in colorectal cancer patients, a population-based cohort study

Background

Only a limited proportion of patients with metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) receives metastatic surgery (including local ablative therapy). The aim was to investigate whether hospital volume and hospital level were associated with the chance of metastatic surgery.

Methods

This national cohort retrieved from the CRCBaSe linkage included all Swedish adult patients diagnosed with synchronous mCRC in 2009–2016. The association between annual hospital volume of incident mCRC patients and the chance of metastatic surgery, and survival, were assessed using logistic regression and Cox regression models, respectively. Hospital level (university/non-university) was evaluated as a secondary exposure in a similar manner. Both uni- and multivariable (adjusted for sex, age, Charlson comorbidity index, year of diagnosis, cancer characteristics and socioeconomic factors) models were fitted.

Results

A total of 1,674 (17%) out of 9,968 mCRC patients had metastatic surgery. High hospital volume was not associated with increased odds of metastatic surgery after including hospital level in the model, whereas hospital level was (odds ratio (OR) (95% confidence interval (CI)): 1.94 (1.68–2.24)). All-cause mortality was lower in university versus non-university hospitals (hazard ratio (95% CI): 0.83 (0.78–0.88)).

Conclusions

Patients with mCRC initially cared for by a university hospital experienced a greater chance to receive metastatic surgery and had superior overall survival. High hospital volume in itself was not associated with a greater chance to receive metastatic surgery nor a greater survival probability. Additional efforts should be imposed to provide more equal care for mCRC patients across Swedish hospitals.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12885-022-10005-8.

Treatment of Stage IV Colon Cancer in the United States: A Patterns-of-Care Analysis

BACKGROUND

National guidelines recommend chemotherapy as the mainstay of treatment for stage IV colon cancer, with primary tumor resection (PTR) reserved for patients with symptomatic primary or curable disease. The aims of this study were to characterize the treatment modalities received by patients with stage IV colon cancer and to determine the patient-, tumor-, and hospital-level factors associated with those treatments.

METHODS

Patients diagnosed with stage IV colon cancer in 2014 were extracted from the SEER Patterns of Care initiative. Treatments were categorized into chemotherapy only, PTR only, PTR + chemotherapy, and none/unknown.

RESULTS

The total weighted number of cases was 3,336; 17% of patients received PTR only, 23% received chemotherapy only, 41% received PTR + chemotherapy, and 17% received no treatment. In multivariable analyses, compared with chemotherapy only, PTR + chemotherapy was associated with being married (odds ratio [OR], 1.9), having bowel obstruction (OR, 2.55), and having perforation (OR, 2.29), whereas older age (OR, 5.95), Medicaid coverage (OR, 2.46), higher T stage (OR, 3.51), and higher N stage (OR, 6.77) were associated with PTR only. Patients who received no treatment did not have more comorbidities or more severe disease burden but were more likely to be older (OR, 3.91) and non-Hispanic African American (OR, 2.92; all P<.05). Treatment at smaller, nonacademic hospitals was associated with PTR (± chemotherapy).

CONCLUSIONS

PTR was included in the treatment regimen for most patients with stage IV colon cancer and was associated with smaller, nonacademic hospitals. Efforts to improve guideline implementation may be beneficial in these hospitals and also in non-Hispanic African American and older populations.

Predictors of curative-intent oncologic management among patients with stage IV rectal cancer

BACKGROUND

Management of stage IV rectal adenocarcinoma is categorized into curative and palliative-intent strategies. The aim of this study is to determine the incidence of and associations with curative-intent treatment in stage IV rectal cancer.

METHODS

The National Cancer Database from 2010 to 2016 was queried for patients with stage IV rectal adenocarcinoma and were grouped into curative-intent and non-curative management. Multivariable logistic regression was used to predict use of curative-intent management.

RESULTS

16,862 patients were included in this study: 4886 (30.0%) curative-intent and 11,975 (71.0%) non-curative. Multivariable regression demonstrated curative intent was associated with young age, female gender, white race, private insurance, mucinous histology and anaplastic grade.

CONCLUSION

Use of curative intent oncologic management among patients with stage IV rectal adenocarcinoma is influenced by age, tumor biology and location of metastatic disease. Association with gender and insurance imply the presence of disparity in the delivery of cancer care among this patient population.

Differences in Sociodemographic Disparities Between Patients Undergoing Surgery for Advanced Colorectal or Ovarian Cancer

BACKGROUND

Cytoreductive surgery (CRS) for ovarian cancer with peritoneal metastases (OPM) is an established treatment, yet access-related racial and socioeconomic disparities are well documented. CRS for colorectal cancer with peritoneal metastases (CRPM) is garnering more widespread acceptance, and it is unknown what disparities exist with regards to access.

METHODS

This retrospective cross-sectional multicenter study analyzed medical records from the National Cancer Database from 2010 to 2015. Patients diagnosed with CRPM or ORP only and either no or confirmed resection were included. Patient- and facility-level characteristics were analyzed using uni- and multivariable logistic regressions to identify associations with receipt of CRS.

RESULTS

A total of 6634 patients diagnosed with CRPM and 14,474 diagnosed with OPM were included in this study. Among patients with CRPM, 18.1% underwent CRS. On multivariable analysis, female gender (odds ratio [95% CI] 2.04 [1.77-2.35]; P < 0.001) and treatment at an academic or research facility (OR 1.55 [1.17-2.05]; P = 0.002) were associated with CRS. Among patients with OPM, 87.1% underwent CRS. On multivariable analysis, treatment at facilities with higher-income patient populations was positively associated with CRS, while age (OR 0.97 [0.96-0.98]; P < .0001), use of nonprivate insurance (OR 0.69 [0.56-0.85]; P = 0.001), and listed as Black (OR 0.62 [0.45-0.86]; P = 0.004) were negatively associated with CRS.

CONCLUSION

There were more systemic barriers to CRS for patients with OPM than for patients with CRPM. As CRS becomes more widely practiced for CRPM, it is likely that more socioeconomic and demographic barriers will be elucidated.

Cytoreductive Surgery for Selected Patients Whose Metastatic Gastric Cancer was Treated with Systemic Chemotherapy

BACKGROUND

The authors hypothesized that cytoreductive surgery (CRS, comprising gastrectomy combined with metastasectomy) in addition to systemic chemotherapy (SC) is associated with a better survival than chemotherapy alone for patients with metastatic gastric adenocarcinoma (MGA).

METHODS

Patients with MGA who received SC between 2004 and 2016 were identified using the National Cancer Database (NCDB). Nearest-neighbor 1:1 propensity score-matching was used to create comparable groups. Overall survival (OS) was compared between subgroups using Kaplan-Meier analyses. Immortal bias analysis was performed among those who survived longer than 90 days.

RESULTS

The study identified 29,728 chemotherapy-treated patients, who were divided into the following four subgroups: no surgery (NS, n = 25,690), metastasectomy alone (n = 1170), gastrectomy alone (n = 2248), and CRS (n = 620) with median OS periods of 8.6, 10.9, 14.8, and 16.3 months, respectively (p < 0.001). Compared with the patients who underwent NS, the patients who had CRS were younger (58.9 ± 13.4 vs 62.0 ± 13.1 years), had a lower proportion of disease involving multiple sites (4.6% vs 19.1%), and were more likely to be clinically occult (cM0 stage: 59.2% vs 8.3%) (p < 0.001 for all). The median OS for the propensity-matched patients who underwent CRS (n = 615) was longer than for those with NS (16.4 vs 9.3 months; p < 0.001), including in those with clinical M1 stage (n = 210). In the Cox regression model using the matched data, the hazard ratio for CRS versus NS was 0.56 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.49-0.63). In the immortal-matched cohort, the corresponding median OS was 17.0 versus 9.5 months (p < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

In addition to SC, CRS may be associated with an OS benefit for a selected group of MGA patients meriting further prospective investigation.

Synchronous metastatic colon cancer and the importance of primary tumor laterality - A National Cancer Database analysis of right- versus left-sided colon cancer

BACKGROUND

The role of laterality for patients with synchronous metastatic colon cancer (SMCC) is not well-defined.

METHODS

Using the National Cancer Database (2010-2015), we compared patients with metastatic right- (RCC) versus left-sided colon cancer (LCC). We performed Kaplan-Meier analysis to compare overall survival (OS) for each metastatic site and utilized adjusted Cox proportional hazard analysis to identify predictors of OS.

RESULTS

Patients with RCCs were more likely to be older, female, and have more comorbidities. LCCs were more likely to metastasize to liver and lung, whereas RCCs were more likely to metastasize to peritoneum and brain. There was equal likelihood to metastasize to bone. OS was significantly longer for LCCs for all metastatic sites. After controlling for multiple variables, RCC (HR 1.426, p < 0.001) remained an independent predictor of worse OS compared to LCC.

CONCLUSIONS

Laterality of the primary tumor plays an important role in outcomes for patients with SMCC.

Are academic hospitals better at treating metastatic colorectal cancer?

BACKGROUND

There is a strong association between hospital volume and surgical outcomes in resectable colorectal cancer. The purpose of our study was to investigate the association between hospital facility type and survival of patients with metastatic colorectal cancer.

METHODS

Adults from the National Cancer Database (2010-2015) with a primary diagnosis of colorectal metastases were included and stratified by facility type: community cancer program, comprehensive community cancer program, and academic/research program. The primary outcome was 5-year overall survival, analyzed using Kaplan-Meier survival curves, log-rank test, and the Cox proportional hazards regression model.

RESULTS

Among the 52,958 included patients, 13.72% were treated at a community cancer program, 49.89% at a comprehensive community cancer program, and 36.29% at an academic/research program. A significant increase in the proportion of patients being treated in an academic/research program has been observed from 2010 to 2015. An academic/research program tended to use more chemotherapy with colorectal radical resection and liver or lung resection and immunotherapy with chemotherapy. In adjusted analysis, the academic/research program had decreased risk of mortality in comparison to the community cancer program and the comprehensive community cancer program (hazard ratio 0.90, 95% confidence interval 0.86-0.94; 0.87, 0.85-0.90; each P < .001; respectively). Similar results were seen after stratifying by metastatic site and treatment type.

CONCLUSION

The prognosis and overall survival of patients with metastatic disease is better in an academic/research program compared with a community cancer program or a comprehensive community cancer program, with this difference persisting across sites of metastatic disease and treatment types. Further studies are required to validate these results and investigate disparities in the management of metastatic colorectal cancer.

Characteristics of Patients Seeking Second Opinions at a Multidisciplinary Colorectal Cancer Clinic

BACKGROUND

Patients seeking second opinions are a challenge for the colorectal cancer provider because of complexity, failed therapeutic relationship with another provider, need for reassurance, and desire for exploration of treatment options.

OBJECTIVE

The purpose of this study was to describe the patient and treatment characteristics of patients seeking initial and second opinions in colorectal cancer care at a multidisciplinary colorectal cancer clinic.

DESIGN

This was a retrospective cohort study.

SETTINGS

A prospectively collected clinical registry of a multidisciplinary colorectal cancer clinic was included.

PATIENTS

The study included patients with colon or rectal cancer seen from 2012 to 2017.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Data were analyzed for initial versus second opinion and demographic and clinical characteristics.

RESULTS

Of 1711 patients with colorectal cancer, 1008 (58.9%) sought an initial opinion and 700 (40.9%) sought a second opinion. As compared with initial-opinion patients, second-opinion patients were more likely to have stage IV disease (OR = 1.94 (95% CI, 1.47-2.58)), recurrent disease (OR = 1.67 (95% CI, 1.13-2.46)), and be ages 40 to 49 years (OR = 1.47 (95% CI, 1.02-2.12)). Initial- and second-opinion cohorts were similar in terms of sex, race, and proportion of colon versus rectal cancer. Among second-opinion patients, 246 (35%) transitioned their care to the multidisciplinary colorectal cancer clinic.

LIMITATIONS

We were unable to capture the final treatment plan for those patients who did not transfer care to the multidisciplinary colorectal cancer clinic.

CONCLUSIONS

Patients seeking a second opinion represent a unique subset of patients with colorectal cancer. In general, they are younger and more likely to have stage IV or recurrent disease than patients seeking an initial opinion. Although transfer of care to a multidisciplinary colorectal cancer clinic after second opinion is lower than for initial consultations, multidisciplinary colorectal cancer clinics provide an important role for patients with complex disease characteristics and treatment needs. See Video Abstract at http://links.lww.com/DCR/B192. CARACTERíSTICAS DE LOS PACIENTES QUE BUSCAN UNA SEGUNDA OPINIóN EN CLíNICAS MULTIDISCIPLINARIAS ESPECIALIZADAS EN CáNCER COLORECTAL: Los pacientes que buscan una segunda opinión son un desafío para el médico que trata el cáncer colorrectal debido a la complejidad de la situación, a la relación terapéutica fallida con otro especialista, a la necesidad de tranquilidad y el deseo de explorar otras opciones del tratamiento.El describir las características y el tratamiento de los pacientes que buscan opiniones iniciales y secundarias en la atención del cáncer colorrectal en una clínica especializada de manera multidisciplinaria en cáncer colorrectal.Este es un estudio de cohortes retrospectivo.Registro clínico de casos obtenidos prospectivamente en una clínica especializada de manera multidisciplinaria en cáncer colorrectal.Todos aquellos pacientes con cáncer de colon o recto examinados entre 2012-2017.Se analizaron los datos obtenidos en la opinión inicial y se compararon con la segunda opinión, se revisaron tanto sus características demográficas como clínicas.De 1711 pacientes con cáncer colorrectal, 1008 (58.9%) buscaron una opinión inicial, 700 (40.9%) buscaron una segunda opinión. En comparación con los pacientes de opinión inicial, los pacientes de segunda opinión presentaron más probabilidades de tener enfermedad en estadio IV (OR 1.94, IC 95% 1.47-2.58), enfermedad recurrente (OR 1.67, IC 95% 1.13-2.46) y tener edades entre 40 y 49 (O 1.47, IC 95% 1.02-2.12). Las cohortes iniciales y de segunda opinión fueron similares en términos de género, raza y proporción del cáncer de colon versus cáncer de recto. Entre los pacientes de segunda opinión, 246 (35%) transfirieron su tratamiento hacia una clínica multidisplinaria especializada en cáncer colorrectal.No se obtuvieron los planes del tratamiento final de aquellos pacientes que no transfirieron sus cuidados hacia una la clínica especializada en cáncer colorrectal.Los pacientes que buscan una segunda opinión representan un subconjunto único de personas con cáncer colorrectal. En general, son más jóvenes y tienen más probabilidades de tener enfermedad en estadio IV o recurrente, con relación a aquellos pacientes que buscan una opinión inicial. Aunque la transferencia de los cuidados hacia una clínica multidisciplinaria especializada en cáncer colorrectal después de una segunda opinión es menor que para las consultas iniciales. Las clínicas multidisciplinarias especializadas en cáncer colorrectal juegan un papel importante con los pacientes que tienen características complejas de enfermedad y necesidades particulares en el tratamiento. Consulte Video Resumen en http://links.lww.com/DCR/B192. (Traducción-Dr Xavier Delgadillo).

Liver-first approach to stage IV colon cancer with synchronous isolated liver metastases

Background

The only possibility for cure in patients with colon adenocarcinoma (CAC) with isolated liver metastases (ILM) is resection of both primary and metastatic tumors. Little is known about the implication of the sequence in which a colectomy and hepatectomy are performed on outcomes. This study analyzes whether resection sequence impacts clinical outcomes.

Methods

The National Cancer Database was queried for CAC cases with hepatic metastases from 2010-2015 with exclusion of extrahepatic metastases. We compared patients treated with a liver-first approach (LFA) to those treated with a colectomy-first or simultaneous approach using Kaplan Meier and multivariable Cox proportional hazards analysis.

Results

In 21,788 CAC patients identified, the LFA was uncommon (2%), but was associated with higher rates of completion resection of remaining tumor (41% vs. 22%, P<0.001). Patients selected for LFA were younger, less comorbid, and more commonly received upfront chemotherapy (P<0.05). The LFA was associated with increased median survival [34 months, 95% CI (30.5-39.6 months) vs. 24 months, 95% CI (23.7-24.6 months), logrank P<0.001] and decreased risk of death [HR 0.783; 95% CI (0.67-0.89), P=0.001].

Conclusions

The LFA to CAC with synchronous ILM is uncommon but is associated with greater likelihood of receiving chemotherapy prior to surgery and increased survival in selected candidates.

National statistics about resection of the primary tumor in asymptomatic patients with Stage IV colorectal cancer and unresectable metastases. Need for improvement in data collection. A systematic review with meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Patients with asymptomatic Stage IV colorectal cancer represent a significant heterogeneous group. National statistics represent an effective method to follow in real time the clinical outcomes of patients, and they may represent an important tool to analyze and to compare different therapeutic approaches. The aim of our study was to analyze the reviews of national data and single institutions reports, which compared the clinical outcomes of patients with asymptomatic Stage IV colorectal cancer and un-resectable metastases who had resection of the primary tumor with those who did not have resection. We gave special attention to the number of missing established relevant variables, to determine the appropriateness of the results of the published studies.

MATERIAL

We performed a systematic review of papers comparing patients who had and who had not primary tumor resection. Screened reports included the time of publication from June 2012 to June 2018; 2556 papers were identified and 27 were included into the review. The primary outcome was observed survival. We analyzed the number of major missing variables in National Data Bases and Single Institution Reports, to assess the overall validity of the conclusions of the analyzed reports.

RESULTS

In the majority of the reports and in the meta-analysis of studies with propensity score matching, resection of the primary tumor was correlated to improved survival and to the possibility for a better response to postoperative chemotherapy.

CONCLUSIONS

The high number of missing significant variables, and a clear clinical selection in single center reports make any analysis error-prone. National statistics might represent a valid method to follow in real time the clinical outcomes of these patients, comparing different therapeutic approaches. There is the need for improvement in national data collection, to make descriptive national statistics the ground for future progress in treatment. (PROSPERO) CRD 42018089691.

Impact of Single-organ Metastasis to the Liver or Lung and Genetic Mutation Status on Prognosis in Stage IV Colorectal Cancer

BACKGROUND

The impact of primary tumor site on overall survival in patients with stage IV colorectal cancer (CRC) with single-organ metastases to the liver or lung has not been studied. Furthermore, the prognostic significance of commonly tested genetic variants such as KRAS mutation and microsatellite instability (MSI) are not well-described in this population.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

This National Cancer Database was used to identify 38,328 patients with CRC that presented with synchronous metastases to the liver or lung between 2010 and 2014. The primary outcome was overall survival, and groups were compared using Kaplan-Meier analyses and Cox proportional hazard models.

RESULTS

On unadjusted analysis, median survival was significantly longer for patients with lung metastases compared with those with liver metastases for left-sided (27 vs. 25 months; P = .02) and right-sided CRC (19 vs. 15 months; P < .001), whereas rectosigmoid and rectal cancers showed no difference. On multivariate analysis, patients with liver metastases demonstrated worse survival compared with those with lung metastasis (hazard ratio, 1.37; 95% confidence interval, 1.31-1.43; P < .001). These trends were confirmed in patients that received chemotherapy but did not have their primary tumor or metastases resected. In patients with genetic testing, both KRAS mutants and MSI tumors had worse survival in left-sided and rectal tumors with liver metastases, but had similar survival to KRAS wild type tumors and microsatellite stable tumors, respectively, across other primary site and metastatic patterns.

CONCLUSIONS

For patients with single-organ metastases to the liver or lung, primary tumor site has an impact on overall survival. Further, KRAS mutation and MSI status are of prognostic importance in selected patients with single-organ metastases.

Facilities that service economically advantaged neighborhoods perform surgical metastasectomy more often for patients with colorectal liver metastases

BACKGROUND

Metastasectomy of isolated colorectal liver metastases (CRLM) requires significant clinical expertise and may not be readily available or offered. The authors hypothesized that hospitals that treat a greater percentage of patients from higher income catchment areas are more likely to perform metastasectomies regardless of patient or tumor characteristics.

METHODS

Using the National Cancer Data Base, the authors classified facilities into facility income quartiles (FIQs) based on the percentage of patients from the wealthiest neighborhoods (by zip code). Quartile 1 included facilities with <2.1% of the patients residing within the highest income zip codes, quartile 2 included facilities with 2.2% to 15.6% of patients residing within the highest income zip codes, quartile 3 included facilities with 15.7% to 40.2% of patients residing within the highest income zip codes, and quartile 4 included facilities with 40.3% to 90.5% of patients residing within the highest income ZIP codes. Patient, tumor, and facility characteristics were analyzed using a multivariate logistic regression to identify associations between metastasectomy and FIQ.

RESULTS

Patients with CRLM were more likely to undergo metastasectomy at facilities in the highest FIQ compared with the lowest FIQ (18% vs 11% in FIQ4; P = .001). This trend was not observed in the resection of primary tumors for nonmetastatic CRLM (rates of 95% vs 93%; P = .94). After adjusting for individual insurance status, distance traveled, zip code-level individual income, tumor, and host, patients who were treated at the highest FIQ facilities were found to be more likely to undergo metastasectomy (odds ratio, 1.29; 95% CI, 1.02-1.72 [P = .03]).

CONCLUSIONS

Metastasectomy for CRLM is more likely to occur at facilities that serve a greater percentage of patients from high-income catchment areas, regardless of individual patient characteristics. This disparity uniquely affects those patients with advanced cancers for which specialized expertise for therapy is necessary.

Treatments for Stage IV Colon Cancer and Overall Survival

BACKGROUND

The role of primary tumor resection (PTR) for asymptomatic stage IV colon cancer with unresectable metastases remains unclear. Increasingly there has been a trend away from resection. The aim of this study was to examine trends in the treatment of stage IV colon cancers, impact of different treatments on long-term mortality, and factors associated with receipt of postoperative chemotherapy.

METHODS

The 2006-2012 National Cancer Data Base was queried for stage IV colon cancer patients. Treatments were grouped into PTR and chemotherapy, PTR only, chemotherapy only, and no treatment. A descriptive analysis was performed examining patient and hospital characteristics associated with different treatments. A Cox regression analysis was used to assess the adjusted effect of different treatments on long-term survival. A multivariable logistic regression was used to examine factors associated with postoperative chemotherapy.

RESULTS

Of 31,310 patients, who met inclusion criteria, 22% of the patients underwent PTR and chemotherapy, 37.5% received chemotherapy only, 11.9% underwent PTR, and 28.6% received no treatment. Patients who received no treatment had the highest hazard of death at 1, 3, and 5 y, followed by PTR only, and chemotherapy only compared with PTR combined with chemotherapy. Patients who were older and had more comorbidities were less likely to receive postoperative chemotherapy.

CONCLUSIONS

Primary tumor resection in conjunction with postoperative chemotherapy among stage IV colon cancer patients with unresectable metastases was associated with a long-term survival benefit compared with other treatment options. Efforts should be made to increase the use of postoperative chemotherapy where feasible.

Review of Colorectal Studies Using the National Cancer Database

The National Cancer Database (NCDB) is a large clinical oncology database developed with data collected from Commission on Cancer (CoC)-accredited facilities. The CoC is managed under the American College of Surgeons, and is a multidisciplinary team that maintains standards in cancer care delivery in health care settings. This database has been used in multiple cancer-focused studies and reports on cancer diagnosis, hospital-level, and patient-related demographics. The focus of this review is to explore and discuss the use of NCDB in colorectal surgery research. Furthermore, our aim for this review is to formulate a guide for researchers who are interested in using the NCDB to complete colorectal research.

Regional Differences in Palliative Care Utilization Among Geriatric Colorectal Cancer Patients Needing Emergent Surgery

BACKGROUND

The benefits of palliative care (PC) in critical illness are validated across a range of diseases, yet it remains underutilized in surgical patients. This study analyzed patient and hospital factors predictive of PC utilization for elderly patients with colorectal cancer (CRC) requiring emergent surgery.

METHODS

The National Inpatient Sample was queried for patients aged ≥ 65 years admitted emergently with CRC from 2009 to 2014. Patients undergoing colectomy, enterectomy, or ostomy formation were included and stratified according to documentation of PC consultation during admission. Chi-squared testing identified unadjusted group differences, and multivariable logistic regression identified predictors of PC.

RESULTS

Of 86,573 discharges meeting inclusion criteria, only 3598 (4.2%) had PC consultation. Colectomy (86.6%) and ostomy formation (30.4%) accounted for the operative majority. PC frequency increased over time (2.9% in 2009 to 6.2% in 2014, P < 0.001) and was nearly twice as likely to occur in the West compared with the Northeast (5.7 vs. 3.3%, P < 0.001) and in not-for-profit compared with proprietary hospitals (4.5 vs. 2.3%, P < 0.001). PC patients were more likely to have metastases (60.1 vs. 39.9%, P < 0.001) and die during admission (41.5 vs. 6.4%, P < 0.001). On multivariable logistic regression, PC predictors (P < 0.05) included region outside the Northeast, increasing age, more recent year, and metastatic disease.

CONCLUSIONS

In the USA, PC consultation for geriatric patients with surgically managed complicated CRC is low. Regional variation appears to play an important role. With mounting evidence that PC improves quality of life and outcomes, understanding the barriers associated with its provision to surgical patients is paramount.

Variation in primary site resection practices for advanced colon cancer: a study using the National Cancer Data Base

BACKGROUND

Treatment of metastatic colon cancer may be driven as much by practice patterns as by features of disease. To optimize management, there is a need to better understand what is determining primary site resection use.

METHODS

We evaluated all patients with stage IV cancers in the National Cancer Data Base from 2002 to 2012 (50,791 patients, 1,230 hospitals). We first identified patient characteristics associated with primary tumor resection. Then, we assessed nationwide variation in hospital resection rates.

RESULTS

Overall, 27,387 (53.9%) patients underwent primary site resection. Factors associated with resection included younger age, having less than 2 major comorbidities, and white race (P < .001). Nationwide, hospital-adjusted primary tumor resection rates ranged from 26.0% to 87.8% with broad differences across geographical areas and hospital accreditation types.

CONCLUSIONS

There is statistically significant variation in hospital rates of primary site resection. This demonstrates inconsistent adherence to guidelines in the presence of conflicting evidence regarding resection benefit.

Multimodal cancer care in poor prognosis cancers: Resection drives long-term outcomes

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES

Hospitals with high complex oncologic surgical volume have improved short-term outcomes. However, for long-term outcomes, the influence of other therapies must be considered. We compared effects of resection with other therapies on long-term outcomes across U.S. hospitals.

METHODS

We examined claims in the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER)-Medicare dataset for patients with esophageal (EC) and pancreatic (PC) cancers between 2005-2009, with follow-up through 2011, performing multivariable Cox proportional hazards analyses. We stratified hospitals by volume and compared rates of treatments in the context of survival.

RESULTS

We studied 905 EC and 3,293 PC patients at 138 and 375 hospitals, respectively. For EC, resection rates were significantly higher (32.9% vs. 9.5%, P < 0.001) in the highest versus lowest volume hospitals. Adjusted survival was also statistically significantly better (48.5% vs. 43.1%, P < 0.001). For PC, resection rates were also statistically significantly higher (30.1% vs. 12.0%, P < 0.001) with higher adjusted survival (21.5% vs. 19.9%, P = 0.01). We did not find variation in rates of other cancer treatments across hospitals.

CONCLUSIONS

A significant association exists between long-term survival and rates of cancer-directed surgery across hospitals, without variation in rates of other therapies. Access to resection appears to be key to reducing variation in long-term survival. J. Surg. Oncol. 2016;113:599-604. © 2016 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.