Article

A population-based study of adjuvant chemotherapy for stage-II and -III colon cancers

Registre Bourguignon des Cancers Digestifs, Inserm U866, Université de Bourgogne, CHU de Dijon, BP 87900, 21079 Dijon cedex, France.
Gastroentérologie Clinique et Biologique (Impact Factor: 1.14). 02/2010; 34(2):144-9. DOI: 10.1016/j.gcb.2009.08.012
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT

Although clinical trials have demonstrated that adjuvant chemotherapy improves survival for stage-III colon cancer, the benefits remain controversial for stage-II lesions. The objective of the present study was to determine the extent to which adjuvant chemotherapy is used for patients with stage-II and -III colon cancers.
The study population comprised 1074 patients with stage-II and -III colon cancers diagnosed in 2000 in 12 French administrative districts and recorded in population-based cancer registries. Data were collected using a standardized procedure.
Overall, 20.4% of patients with stage II and 61.9% with stage III received adjuvant chemotherapy. Age at diagnosis was the strongest determinant of chemotherapy. Among stage-II patients, those receiving chemotherapy decreased from 57.6% in patients aged <or=50 years to 1.1% in those aged >or=85. The corresponding percentages with stage III were 93.6% and 1.4%. In multivariate analyses, other factors found to be independently and significantly associated with administration of adjuvant chemotherapy for stage II were extension of the cancer (stage IIA vs. stage IIB), clinical presentation (obstruction or perforation vs. uncomplicated cancer) and discussion of the case at a multidisciplinary case-review meeting. For stage III, apart from age, discussion of the case at a multidisciplinary meeting was the only factor independently associated with administration of chemotherapy.
Adjuvant chemotherapy for stage-III colon cancer is used extensively for patients under 75 years of age. However, many elderly patients do not receive such treatment. On the other hand, a substantial percentage of stage-II colon cancer patients receive adjuvant chemotherapy despite its uncertain benefits.

0 Followers
 · 
4 Reads
  • Source
    • "Studies were conducted in the US [12,13,26,39–44], UK [45] [46] [47] [48] [49], Australia [50] [51] [52], France [53] [54], Sweden [55] [56], The Netherlands [57] [58], New Zealand [59] [60], Germany [61] and Denmark [62]. Two studies recruited patients with a range of cancer diagnoses [41] [48]. "
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Background: Conducting regular multidisciplinary team (MDT) meetings requires significant investment of time and finances. It is thus important to assess the empirical benefits of such practice. A systematic review was conducted to evaluate the literature regarding the impact of MDT meetings on patient assessment, management and outcomes in oncology settings. Methods: Relevant studies were identified by searching OVID MEDLINE, PsycINFO, and EMBASE databases from 1995 to April 2015, using the keywords: multidisciplinary team meeting* OR multidisciplinary discussion* OR multidisciplinary conference* OR case review meeting* OR multidisciplinary care forum* OR multidisciplinary tumour board* OR case conference* OR case discussion* AND oncology OR cancer. Studies were included if they assessed measurable outcomes, and used a comparison group and/or a pre- and post-test design. Results: Twenty-seven articles met inclusion criteria. There was limited evidence for improved survival outcomes of patients discussed at MDT meetings. Between 4% and 45% of patients discussed at MDT meetings experienced changes in diagnostic reports following the meeting. Patients discussed at MDT meetings were more likely to receive more accurate and complete pre-operative staging, and neo-adjuvant/adjuvant treatment. Quality of studies was affected by selection bias and the use of historical cohorts impacted study quality. Conclusions: MDT meetings impact upon patient assessment and management practices. However, there was little evidence indicating that MDT meetings resulted in improvements in clinical outcomes. Future research should assess the impact of MDT meetings on patient satisfaction and quality of life, as well as, rates of cross-referral between disciplines.
    Full-text · Article · Nov 2015 · Cancer Treatment Reviews
  • Source
    • "We examine differences across patient-, tumor- and hospital-related factors using 27 criteria (11 for colon and 16 for rectal cancer) to describe the quality of colorectal cancer care. We also use statistical models to investigate factors linked to three specific quality indicators identified by the National Quality Forum/American College of Surgeons/Commission on Cancer and National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN)/American Society of Clinical Oncology [11] and potentially linked to better survival: examination of ≥12 lymph nodes (LN) [12,13], use of adjuvant chemotherapy for stage II patients [14] and non-use for stage III patients [15]. "
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Background Colorectal cancer (CRC) care has improved considerably, particularly since the implementation of a quality of care program centered on national evidence-based guidelines. Formal quality assessment is however still needed. The aim of this research was to identify factors associated with practice variation in CRC patient care. Methods CRC patients identified from all cancer centers in South-West France were included. We investigated variations in practices (from diagnosis to surgery), and compliance with recommended guidelines for colon and rectal cancer. We identified factors associated with three colon cancer practice variations potentially linked to better survival: examination of ≥12 lymph nodes (LN), non-use and use of adjuvant chemotherapy for stage II and stage III patients, respectively. Results We included 1,206 patients, 825 (68%) with colon and 381 (32%) with rectal cancer, from 53 hospitals. Compliance was high for resection, pathology report, LN examination, and chemotherapy use for stage III patients. In colon cancer, 26% of stage II patients received adjuvant chemotherapy and 71% of stage III patients. 84% of stage US T3T4 rectal cancer patients received pre-operative radiotherapy. In colon cancer, factors associated with examination of ≥12 LNs were: lower ECOG score, advanced stage and larger hospital volume; factors negatively associated were: left sided tumor location and one hospital district. Use of chemotherapy in stage II patients was associated with younger age, advanced stage, emergency setting and care structure (private and location); whereas under-use in stage III patients was associated with advanced age, presence of comorbidities and private hospitals. Conclusions Although some changes in practices may have occurred since this observational study, these findings represent the most recent report on practices in CRC in this region, and offer a useful methodological approach for assessing quality of care. Guideline compliance was high, although some organizational factors such as hospital size or location influence practice variation. These factors should be the focus of any future guideline implementation.
    Full-text · Article · Jul 2012 · BMC Cancer
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: The Wigner-Ville Distribution (WVD) has recently been shown to be a valuable tool for time-Frequency Signal Analysis. Its first order moments yield directly the instantaneous frequency of the Signal. The problem of applying a window to the WVD is shown to be the same as that occurring when one uses the Fourier Transform. The choice of any classical window does not affect the estimation of the instantaneous frequency fi(t) in both deterministic and random cases. It is shown that the WVD estimator of the "evolutive spectrum" is unbiased in both time and frequency. Accuracy and statistical stability of the method are discussed. Its application to the analysis of microstructure temperature gradient signals shows that the WVD exhibits more information about the turbulence effect than the Short Time Fourier Transform.
    Full-text · Conference Paper · May 1986
Show more