Adjuvant Chemotherapy Among Elderly Colon Cancer Patients : from gut feeling towards evidence-based use in clinical practice

Elderly represent a substantial part of the colon cancer patients and this will increase even further in the near future due to demographic developments. This thesis provides a substantial contribution to the limited available evidence on the use and effectiveness of adjuvant chemotherapy among unselected elderly patients with stage III colon cancer treated in everyday clinical practice. It was shown that elderly derive comparable benefit from adjuvant chemotherapy as their younger counterparts, indicating that consideration of adjuvant chemotherapy is warranted for all patients. It was also shown that capecitabine monotherapy is better tolerated and less toxic, without limiting the recurrence-free and overall survival benefit, compared to a combination of capecitabine and oxaliplatin. Therefore, the addition of oxaliplatin should not be standard care for the majority of elderly stage III colon cancer patients treated in daily clinical practice

Trends in incidence, treatment, and relative survival of colorectal cancer in the Netherlands between 2000 and 2021

Background: The epidemiology of colorectal cancer (CRC) has changed rapidly over the years. The aim of this study was to assess the trends in incidence, treatment, and relative survival (RS) of patients diagnosed with CRC in the Netherlands between 2000 and 2021. Patients and methods: 2 75667 patients diagnosed with CRC between 2000 and 2021 were included from the Netherlands Cancer Registry. Analyses were stratified for disease extent (localised: T1-3N0M0; regional: T4N0M0/T1-4N1-2M0; distant: T1-4N0-2M1) and localisation (colon; rectum). Trends were assessed with joinpoint regression. Results: CRC incidence increased until the mid-2010s but decreased strongly thereafter to rates comparable with the early 2000s. Amongst other trend changes, local excision rates increased for patients with localised colon (2021: 13.6 %) and rectal cancer (2021: 34.9 %). Moreover, primary tumour resection became less common in patients with distant colon (2000–2021: 60.9–12.5 %) or rectal cancer (2000–2021: 47.8–6.9 %), while local treatment of metastases rates increased. Five-year RS improved continuously for localised and regional colon (97.7 % and 72.0 % in 2017, respectively) and rectal cancer (95.2 % and 76.3 % in 2017, respectively). The rate of anti-cancer treatments decreased in distant colon (2010–2021: 80.3 % to 67.2 %; p &lt; 0.001) and rectal cancer (2011–2021: 86.0 % to 77.0 %; p &lt; 0.001). The improvement of five-year RS stagnated for distant colon (2010–2017: 11.2 % to 11.9 %; average percentage of change [APC]: 2.1, 95 % confidence interval [CI]: −7.6, 4.7) and rectal cancer (2009–2017: 12.7 % to 15.6 %; APC: 1.4, 95 % CI: −19.1, 5.5). Conclusions: Major changes in the incidence and treatment of CRC between 2000 and 2021 were identified and quantified. Five-year RS increased continuously for patients with localised and regional CRC, but stagnated for patients with distant CRC, likely caused by decreased rates of anti-cancer treatment in this group.</p

Trends in incidence, treatment, and relative survival of colorectal cancer in the Netherlands between 2000 and 2021

Background: The epidemiology of colorectal cancer (CRC) has changed rapidly over the years. The aim of this study was to assess the trends in incidence, treatment, and relative survival (RS) of patients diagnosed with CRC in the Netherlands between 2000 and 2021. Patients and methods: 2 75667 patients diagnosed with CRC between 2000 and 2021 were included from the Netherlands Cancer Registry. Analyses were stratified for disease extent (localised: T1-3N0M0; regional: T4N0M0/T1-4N1-2M0; distant: T1-4N0-2M1) and localisation (colon; rectum). Trends were assessed with joinpoint regression. Results: CRC incidence increased until the mid-2010s but decreased strongly thereafter to rates comparable with the early 2000s. Amongst other trend changes, local excision rates increased for patients with localised colon (2021: 13.6 %) and rectal cancer (2021: 34.9 %). Moreover, primary tumour resection became less common in patients with distant colon (2000–2021: 60.9–12.5 %) or rectal cancer (2000–2021: 47.8–6.9 %), while local treatment of metastases rates increased. Five-year RS improved continuously for localised and regional colon (97.7 % and 72.0 % in 2017, respectively) and rectal cancer (95.2 % and 76.3 % in 2017, respectively). The rate of anti-cancer treatments decreased in distant colon (2010–2021: 80.3 % to 67.2 %; p &lt; 0.001) and rectal cancer (2011–2021: 86.0 % to 77.0 %; p &lt; 0.001). The improvement of five-year RS stagnated for distant colon (2010–2017: 11.2 % to 11.9 %; average percentage of change [APC]: 2.1, 95 % confidence interval [CI]: −7.6, 4.7) and rectal cancer (2009–2017: 12.7 % to 15.6 %; APC: 1.4, 95 % CI: −19.1, 5.5). Conclusions: Major changes in the incidence and treatment of CRC between 2000 and 2021 were identified and quantified. Five-year RS increased continuously for patients with localised and regional CRC, but stagnated for patients with distant CRC, likely caused by decreased rates of anti-cancer treatment in this group.</p

Towards Equal Access to Cytoreductive Surgery with Hyperthermic Intraperitoneal Chemotherapy and Survival in Patients with Isolated Colorectal Peritoneal Metastases:A Nationwide Population-Based Study

Background: Before 2016, patients with isolated synchronous colorectal peritoneal metastases (PMCRC) diagnosed in expert centers had a higher odds of undergoing cytoreductive surgery with hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (CRS-HIPEC) and better overall survival (OS) than those diagnosed in referring centers. Nationwide efforts were initiated to increase awareness and improve referral networks. Methods: This nationwide study aimed to evaluate whether the between-center differences in odds of undergoing CRS-HIPEC and OS have reduced since these national efforts were initiated. All patients with isolated synchronous PMCRC diagnosed between 2009 and 2021 were identified from the Netherlands Cancer Registry. Associations between hospital of diagnosis and the odds of undergoing CRS-HIPEC, as well as OS, were assessed using multilevel multivariable regression analyses for two periods (2009–2015 and 2016–2021). Results: In total, 3948 patients were included. The percentage of patients undergoing CRS-HIPEC increased from 17.2% in 2009–2015 (25.4% in expert centers, 16.5% in referring centers), to 23.4% in 2016–2021 (30.2% in expert centers, 22.6% in referring centers). In 2009–2015, compared with diagnosis in a referring center, diagnosis in a HIPEC center showed a higher odds of undergoing CRS-HIPEC (odds ratio [OR] 1.64, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.02–2.67) and better survival (hazard ratio [HR] 0.80, 95% CI 0.66–0.96). In 2016–2021, there were no differences in the odds of undergoing CRS-HIPEC between patients diagnosed in HIPEC centers versus referring centers (OR 1.27, 95% CI 0.76–2.13) and survival (HR 1.00, 95% CI 0.76–1.32). Conclusion: Previously observed differences in odds of undergoing CRS-HIPEC were no longer present. Increased awareness and the harmonization of treatment for PMCRC may have contributed to equal access to care and a similar chance of survival at a national level.</p

Towards Equal Access to Cytoreductive Surgery with Hyperthermic Intraperitoneal Chemotherapy and Survival in Patients with Isolated Colorectal Peritoneal Metastases:A Nationwide Population-Based Study

Background: Before 2016, patients with isolated synchronous colorectal peritoneal metastases (PMCRC) diagnosed in expert centers had a higher odds of undergoing cytoreductive surgery with hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (CRS-HIPEC) and better overall survival (OS) than those diagnosed in referring centers. Nationwide efforts were initiated to increase awareness and improve referral networks. Methods: This nationwide study aimed to evaluate whether the between-center differences in odds of undergoing CRS-HIPEC and OS have reduced since these national efforts were initiated. All patients with isolated synchronous PMCRC diagnosed between 2009 and 2021 were identified from the Netherlands Cancer Registry. Associations between hospital of diagnosis and the odds of undergoing CRS-HIPEC, as well as OS, were assessed using multilevel multivariable regression analyses for two periods (2009–2015 and 2016–2021). Results: In total, 3948 patients were included. The percentage of patients undergoing CRS-HIPEC increased from 17.2% in 2009–2015 (25.4% in expert centers, 16.5% in referring centers), to 23.4% in 2016–2021 (30.2% in expert centers, 22.6% in referring centers). In 2009–2015, compared with diagnosis in a referring center, diagnosis in a HIPEC center showed a higher odds of undergoing CRS-HIPEC (odds ratio [OR] 1.64, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.02–2.67) and better survival (hazard ratio [HR] 0.80, 95% CI 0.66–0.96). In 2016–2021, there were no differences in the odds of undergoing CRS-HIPEC between patients diagnosed in HIPEC centers versus referring centers (OR 1.27, 95% CI 0.76–2.13) and survival (HR 1.00, 95% CI 0.76–1.32). Conclusion: Previously observed differences in odds of undergoing CRS-HIPEC were no longer present. Increased awareness and the harmonization of treatment for PMCRC may have contributed to equal access to care and a similar chance of survival at a national level.</p

Impact of the COVID-19 Pandemic on Colorectal Cancer Care in the Netherlands: A Population-based Study

Contains fulltext : 283493.pdf (Publisher’s version ) (Open Access)INTRODUCTION: The COVID-19 pandemic disrupted health care services worldwide. In the Netherlands, the first confirmed COVID-19 infection was on February 27, 2020. We aimed to investigate the impact of the pandemic on colorectal cancer care in the Netherlands. METHODS: Colorectal cancer patients who were diagnosed in 25 hospitals in weeks 2 to 26 of the year 2020 were selected from the Netherlands Cancer Registry (NCR) and divided in 4 periods. The average number of patients treated per type of initial treatment was analyzed by the Mantel-Haenszel test adjusted for age. Median time between diagnosis and treatment and between (neo)adjuvant therapy and surgery were analyzed by the Mann Whitney test. Percentages of (acute) resection, stoma and (neo)adjuvant therapy were compared using the Chi-squared test. RESULTS: In total, 1,653 patients were included. The patient population changed during the COVID-19 pandemic regarding higher stage and more clinical presentation with ileus at time of diagnosis. Slight changes were found regarding type of initial treatment. Median time between diagnosis and treatment decreased on average by 4.5 days during the pandemic. The proportion of colon cancer patients receiving a stoma significantly increased with 6.5% during the pandemic. No differences were found in resection rate and treatment with (neo)adjuvant therapy. CONCLUSION: Despite the disruptive impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on global health care, the impact on colorectal cancer care in the Netherlands was limited

Modeling Personalized Adjuvant TreaTment in EaRly stage coloN cancer (PATTERN)

Aim To develop a decision model for the population-level evaluation of strategies to improve the selection of stage II colon cancer (CC) patients who benefit from adjuvant chemotherapy. Methods A Markov cohort model with a one-month cycle length and a lifelong time horizon was developed. Five health states were included; diagnosis, 90-day mortality, death other causes, recurrence and CC death. Data from the Netherlands Cancer Registry were used to parameterize the model. Transition probabilities were estimated using parametric survival models including relevant clinical and pathological covariates. Subsequently, biomarker status was implemented using external data. Treatment effect was incorporated using pooled trial data. Model development, data sources used, parameter estimation, and internal and external validation are described in detail. To illustrate the use of the model, three example strategies were evaluated in which allocation of treatment was based on (A) 100% adherence to the Dutch guidelines, (B) observed adherence to guideline recommendations and (C) a biomarker-driven strategy. Results Overall, the model showed good internal and external validity. Age, tumor growth, tumor sidedness, evaluated lymph nodes, and biomarker status were included as covariates. For the example strategies, the model predicted 83, 87 and 77 CC deaths after 5 years in a cohort of 1000 patients for strategies A, B and C, respectively. Conclusion This model can be used to evaluate strategies for the allocation of adjuvant chemotherapy in stage II CC patients. In future studies, the model will be used to estimate population-level long-term health gain and cost-effectiveness of biomarker-based selection strategies.Financial support for this study was provided by a grant from ZonMw (Grant number: 848015007). ZonMw had no role in designing the study, interpreting the data, writing the manuscript, and publishing the report

Modeling Personalized Adjuvant TreaTment in EaRly stage coloN cancer (PATTERN)

Aim: To develop a decision model for the population-level evaluation of strategies to improve the selection of stage II colon cancer (CC) patients who benefit from adjuvant chemotherapy. Methods: A Markov cohort model with a one-month cycle length and a lifelong time horizon was developed. Five health states were included; diagnosis, 90-day mortality, death other causes, recurrence and CC death. Data from the Netherlands Cancer Registry were used to parameterize the model. Transition probabilities were estimated using parametric survival models including relevant clinical and pathological covariates. Subsequently, biomarker status was implemented using external data. Treatment effect was incorporated using pooled trial data. Model development, data sources used, parameter estimation, and internal and external validation are described in detail. To illustrate the use of the model, three example strategies were evaluated in which allocation of treatment was based on (A) 100% adherence to the Dutch guidelines, (B) observed adherence to guideline recommendations and (C) a biomarker-driven strategy. Results: Overall, the model showed good internal and external validity. Age, tumor growth, tumor sidedness, evaluated lymph nodes, and biomarker status were included as covariates. For the example strategies, the model predicted 83, 87 and 77 CC deaths after 5 years in a cohort of 1000 patients for strategies A, B and C, respectively. Conclusion: This model can be used to evaluate strategies for the allocation of adjuvant chemotherapy in stage II CC patients. In future studies, the model will be used to estimate population-level long-term health gain and cost-effectiveness of biomarker-based selection strategies

Association of the location of pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (head, body, tail) with tumor stage, treatment, and survival: a population-based analysis

Background: The association between pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) location (head, body, tail) and tumor stage, treatment and overall survival (OS) is unclear. Methods: Patients with PDAC diagnosed between 2005 and 2015 were included from the population-based Netherlands Cancer Registry. Patient, tumor and treatment characteristics were compared with the tumor locations. Multivariable logistic and Cox regression analyses were used. Results: Overall, 19,023 patients were included. PDAC locations were 13,451 (71%) head, 2429 (13%) body and 3143 (16%) tail. Differences were found regarding metastasized disease (head 42%, body 69%, tail 84%, p 4 cm: 21%, 40%, 51%, p <.001) and resection rate (17%, 4%, 7%, p <.001). For patients without metastases, median OS did not differ between head, body, tail (after resection: 16.8, 15.0, 17.3 months, without resection: 5.2, 6.1, 4.6 months, respectively). For patients with metastases, median OS differed slightly (2.6, 2.4, 1.9 months, respectively, adjusted HR body versus head 1.17 (95%CI 1.10–1.23), tail versus head 1.35 (95%CI 1.29–1.41)). Conclusions: PDAC locations in body and tail are larger, more often metastasized and less often resectable than in the pancreatic head. Whereas survival is similar after resection, survival in metastasized disease is somewhat less for PDAC in the pancreatic body and tail