Influence of age on variation in patterns of care in patients with rectal cancer in Catalonia (Spain)

Guideline- Versus Non-Guideline-Based Neoadjuvant Management of Clinical T4 Rectal Cancer

(1) Background: Practice guidelines recommend neoadjuvant treatment for clinical T4 rectal cancer. The primary objective of this retrospective study was to assess whether compliance with guidelines correlates with patient outcomes. Secondarily, we evaluated predictors of adherence to guidelines and mortality. (2) Methods: A total of 397 qualified rectal cancer (RC) patients from 2017 to 2020 at West China Hospital of Sichuan University were included. Patients were divided into two groups depending on adherence to neoadjuvant treatment guidelines. The main endpoints were overall survival (OS) and disease special survival (DSS). We analyzed factors associated with guideline adherence and mortality. (3) Results: Compliance with guidelines was only 39.55%. Patients' neoadjuvant therapy treated not according to the guidelines for clinical T4 RC was not associated with an overall survival (95.7% vs. 88.9%) and disease special survival (96.3% vs. 91.1%) benefit. Patients were more likely to get recommended therapy with positive patient compliance. Staging Ⅲ, medium/high differentiation and objective compliance were associated with increased risk of mortality. (4) Conclusions: Guideline adherence for clinical T4 RC in our system is low. Compliance with the relevant guidelines for neoadjuvant therapy seems not to lead to better overall survival for patients with clinical T4 RC.

The Impact of Age in the Treatment of Non-comorbid Patients with Rectal Cancer: Survival Outcomes from the National Cancer Database

BACKGROUND

Multimodal therapy has improved survival outcomes for rectal cancer (RC) significantly with an exemption for older patients. We sought to assess whether older non-comorbid patients receive substandard oncological treatment for localized RC referring to the National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN) guidelines and whether it affects survival outcomes.

METHODS

This is a retrospective study using patient data from the National Cancer Data Base (NCDB) for histologically confirmed RC from 2002 to 2014. Non-comorbid patients between ≥50 and ≤85 years and defined treatment for localized RC were included and assigned to a younger (<75 years) and an older group (≥75 years). Treatment approaches and their impact on relative survival (RS) were analyzed using loess regression models and compared between both groups. Furthermore, mediation analysis was performed to measure the independent relative effect on age and other variables on RS. Data were assessed using the Strengthening the Reporting of Observational studies in Epidemiology (STROBE) checklist.

RESULTS

Of 59,769 included patients, 48,389 (81.0%) were assigned to the younger group (<75 years). Oncologic resection was performed in 79.6% of the younger patients compared to 67.2% of the older patients (p < 0.001). Chemotherapy (74.3% vs. 56.1%) and radiotherapy (72.0% vs. 58.1%) were provided less often in older patients, respectively (p < 0.001). Increasing age was associated with enhanced 30- and 90-day mortality with 0.6% and 1.1% in the younger and 2.0% and 4.1% in the elderly group (p < 0.001) and worse RS rates [multivariable adjusted HR: 1.93 (95% CI 1.87-2.00), p < 0.001]. Adherence to standard oncological therapy resulted in a significant increase in 5-year RS (multivariable adjusted HR: 0.80 (95% CI 0.74-0.86), p < 0.001). Mediation analysis revealed that RS was mainly affected by age itself (84%) rather than the choice of therapy.

CONCLUSIONS

The likelihood to receive substandard oncological therapy increases in the older population and negatively affects RS. Since age itself has a major impact on RS, better patient selection should be performed to identify those that are potentially eligible for standard oncological care regardless of their age.

Factors associated with non-presentation in a multidisciplinary team meeting for colon cancer: A matched retrospective cohort study in a French area

BACKGROUND

Survival of patients with colon cancer has increased in recent years due to advances in treatment and the implementation of multidisciplinary team meetings (MDTm). However, the organization of MDTm can be improved. The objectives of this work were to characterize patients with colon cancer who were not presented in MDTm and to analyse the reasons for their non-presentation.

METHODS

The study was based on a retrospective cohort including patients with colon cancer diagnosed between 2014 and 2016. Risk factors for non-presentation in MDTm were investigated after 1:1 matching on age, gender and tumour location, using multivariate analysis.

RESULTS

amongst 1616 patients diagnosed with colon cancer, 20.5% were not presented in MDTm. The most common reasons for non-presentation were 'advanced age or poor general condition' (22.6%) and 'superficial tumour' (20.5%), while 20.8% of non-presentation remained unexplained. Non-presentation in MDTm was associated with ECOG PS of 2 (OR 0.51, 95%CI 0.32-0.81, p = 0.005), best supportive care (OR 0.05, 95%CI 0.00-0.38, p = 0.016) and early death (OR 0.09, 95%CI 0.04-0.19, p<0.001). By contrast, patients with symptomatic tumours were more likely to be presented in MDTm than patients participating in mass screening (OR 2.16, 95%CI 1.09-4.32, p = 0.028). Presentation was significantly associated with diagnosis by a digestive surgeon (OR 2.16, 95%CI 1.22-3.92, p = 0.01) and a high UICC stage.

CONCLUSIONS

This study identified factors associated with non-presentation in a multidisciplinary team meeting for colon cancer such as an advanced age or a superficial tumour, paving the way for targeted improvements.

Adherence to neoadjuvant therapy guidelines for locally advanced rectal cancers in a region with sociodemographic disparities

BACKGROUND

Practice guidelines recommend neoadjuvant chemoradiation (NCR) for locally advanced rectal cancer (LARC). We examined guideline adherence in a healthcare system serving a region with socioeconomic disparities and poor cancer outcomes.

METHODS

Retrospective analysis of factors associated with guideline adherence.

RESULTS

63.1% of stage II/III LARC patients received NCR. Factors associated with adherence included white race (OR = 2.15, p = 0.024), private insurance (OR = 2.70, p = 0.005), employed status (OR = 2.30, p = 0.031), age at diagnosis (OR = 0.74, p = 0.032), appropriate local staging (OR = 9.17, p < 0.0001), and diagnosis later in the study period (OR per 1 year = 1.20, p = 0.006). By multivariate analysis, private insurance (OR = 2.51, p = 0.023), younger age (OR per 10 years = 0.72, p = 0.048) and appropriate local staging (OR = 6.67, p < 0.0001) were associated with adherence.

CONCLUSION

Guideline adherence for LARC in our system is low and is impacted by employment, race and insurance status. Standard of care compliance remains an important target for improvement efforts in this underserved region of the nation's Mid-South.

Improving quality of care and clinical outcomes for rectal cancer through clinical audits in a multicentre cancer care organisation

Introduction

Colorectal cancer treatment requires a complex, multidisciplinary approach. Because of the potential variability, monitoring through clinical audits is advisable. This study assesses the effects of a quality improvement action plan in patients with locally advanced rectal cancer and treated with radiotherapy.

Methods

Comparative, multicentre study in two cohorts of 120 patients each, selected randomly from patients diagnosed with rectal cancer who had initiated radiotherapy with a curative intent. Based on the results from a baseline clinical audit in 2013, a quality improvement action plan was designed and implemented; a second audit in 2017 evaluated its impact.

Results

Standardised information was present on 77.5% of the magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) staging reports. Treatment strategies were similar in all three study centres. Of the patients whose treatment was interrupted, just 9.7% received a compensation dose. There was an increase in MRI re-staging from 32.5 to 61.5%, and a significant decrease in unreported circumferential resection margins following neoadjuvant therapy (ypCRM), from 34.5 to 5.6% (p <  0.001).

Conclusions

The comparison between two clinical audits showed improvements in neoadjuvant radiotherapy in rectal cancer patients. Some indicators reveal areas in need of additional efforts, for example to reduce the overall treatment time.

Lymph node ratio, an independent prognostic factor for patients with stage II-III rectal carcinoma

BACKGROUND

Identification of the proper surgical method and the most reliable prognostic parameters of rectal carcinomas is a challenging issue. The aim of this paper was to determine the possible prognostic role of the number of harvested lymph nodes versus lymph node ratio (LNR) in patients with rectal carcinomas, and the proper value of LNR that can be used as prognostic parameter.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A retrospective study was performed in 186 consecutive patients with rectal carcinomas that underwent surgical resection. The LNR was calculated for cases from stage II-III, and was correlated with classic prognostic parameters and overall survival (OS).

RESULTS

A statistically significant difference was found between LNR of 0.15 and OS (p = 0.03), respectively LNR > 0.15 and TNM stage (p < 0.0001), but also tumor infiltration level (p < 0.05). The number of harvested lymph nodes was not correlated with the tumor stage (r = 0.148, p = 0.06) and this parameter did not influence the OS, when the number of 12 or 14 lymph nodes was used as the ideal value (p = 0.6 and p = 0.66, respectively).

CONCLUSION

In patients with rectal carcinomas that underwent preoperative chemoradiotherapy, a LNR of 0.15 is a parameter with independent prognostic value, comparing with the number of harvested lymph nodes. The specific LNR should be calculated in larger cohorts.

Perceptions of aging and ageism among Mexican physicians-in-training

INTRODUCTION

Attributing negative stereotypes to older adults (ageism) may lead to undertreatment, but little is known about the prevalence of ageism among physicians treating patients with cancer in Ibero-America. We studied stereotypes of aging among Mexican physicians-in-training.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Physicians-in-training attending an oncology meeting answered the "Negative Attributes and Positive Potential in Old Age" survey. Ten questions assessed positive characteristics of aging (PPOA; score 1-4, higher scores represent a positive perception), and four assessed negative characteristics (NAOA; score 1-4, higher score representing a negative perception). Descriptive statistics were used to analyze the questionnaires. Participants completed the "Image-of-Aging" question by writing five words describing older adults and young individuals. Each word was rated from - 5 (negative) to + 5 (positive), and presented as word clouds.

RESULTS

One hundred physicians-in-training (median age 28.5) were included. For the PPOA scale, the mean score was 2.9 (SD 0.4), while for the NAOA scale it was 2.1 (SD 0.4). Perceptions of aging were better among women and trainees enrolled in geriatrics and/or oncology-related programs. In the "Image-of-Aging" questions, median rating of words describing older adults was - 2, compared to + 3 for young individuals (p < 0.001). Among words used to describe older adults, the most frequent was "frail/frailty" (n = 45), while "health" (n = 46) was the most frequent for younger individuals.

CONCLUSIONS

Mexican physicians-in-training showed mostly negative perceptions of aging, exemplified by the use of negative terms to describe older adults. Creating educational initiatives aimed at decreasing ageism among oncology trainees is necessary across Ibero-America.

[Adapting the care pathway]

The implementation of cross-functional measures along the care pathway of cancer patients in France is globally lower in the elderly. However, age is not a criterion for excluding curative treatment, and the evaluation of physical, psychological and social resources and comorbidities is particularly significant in this population. Identifying needs in terms of support care which influences the patient's quality of life as well as the efficacy of treatments is also essential. The objective of geriatric oncology coordination is to offer elderly cancer patients global treatment, curative or otherwise, through the putting in place of a personalised care programme.