Elective colon resection without curative intent in stage IV colon cancer.
Surgical Oncology 2019 March
BACKGROUND: Evidence suggests that elective primary colon resection (ePCR) in patients with asymptomatic colon tumors and unresectable metastases is not required and may expose patients to unnecessary operative risk.
METHODS: Stage IV colon cancer patients with liver metastases from 2000 to 2011 were identified with SEER-Medicare data. Liver-based therapy or urgent/emergent colectomies were excluded. Chemotherapy alone was compared to ePCR ± chemotherapy. Univariate and multivariate analyses were used to identify predictors of ePCR. Multivariate Cox regression compared survival.
RESULTS: 5139 patients were identified. The ePCR rate decreased over time; 84% underwent ePCR in 2000, compared to 52% in 2011 (p < 0.001). In multivariate analysis, older patients were more likely to undergo ePCR, as were patients from rural areas (OR 1.65, p < 0.001). The odds of PCR in high poverty areas (>10%) were almost 25% higher than those in low poverty areas (OR 1.23, p = 0.03). African-Americana were less likely to undergo PCR than Caucasians (OR 0.76, p = 0.01). In multivariate survival analysis, PCR was associated with a significant survival benefit (HR 0.59, p < 0.001).
CONCLUSIONS: Although ePCR is not recommended with unresectable metastases and the rate has decreased significantly, over 50% of patients with untreated hepatic metastases underwent ePCR in 2011. Disparities exist in use of ePCR that are likely multifactorial and deserve further study.
METHODS: Stage IV colon cancer patients with liver metastases from 2000 to 2011 were identified with SEER-Medicare data. Liver-based therapy or urgent/emergent colectomies were excluded. Chemotherapy alone was compared to ePCR ± chemotherapy. Univariate and multivariate analyses were used to identify predictors of ePCR. Multivariate Cox regression compared survival.
RESULTS: 5139 patients were identified. The ePCR rate decreased over time; 84% underwent ePCR in 2000, compared to 52% in 2011 (p < 0.001). In multivariate analysis, older patients were more likely to undergo ePCR, as were patients from rural areas (OR 1.65, p < 0.001). The odds of PCR in high poverty areas (>10%) were almost 25% higher than those in low poverty areas (OR 1.23, p = 0.03). African-Americana were less likely to undergo PCR than Caucasians (OR 0.76, p = 0.01). In multivariate survival analysis, PCR was associated with a significant survival benefit (HR 0.59, p < 0.001).
CONCLUSIONS: Although ePCR is not recommended with unresectable metastases and the rate has decreased significantly, over 50% of patients with untreated hepatic metastases underwent ePCR in 2011. Disparities exist in use of ePCR that are likely multifactorial and deserve further study.
Full text links
Trending Papers
Bacteremia with gram positive bacteria - when and how do I need to look for endocarditis?Clinical Microbiology and Infection 2023 August 32
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app
Read by QxMD is copyright © 2021 QxMD Software Inc. All rights reserved. By using this service, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy.
You can now claim free CME credits for this literature searchClaim now
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app