Evaluating Surveillance Patterns after Chemoradiation-Only Compared with Conventional Management for Older Patients with Rectal Cancer - 25/04/19
, Ashley L. Cole, PhD, MPH b, c, Hanna K. Sanoff, MD, MPH d, Sharon Hinton, MPA f, Stacie B. Dusetzina, PhD g, h, Karyn B. Stitzenberg, MD, MPH, FACS a, eAbstract |
Background |
Upfront chemoradiation with omission of surgery (CR-only) is increasingly being used to treat rectal cancer. When CR-only is used with curative intent, intense surveillance is recommended. We hypothesized that in practice, few patients treated with CR-only receive intensive post-treatment surveillance.
Study Design |
Using Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER)-Medicare, all nonmetastatic rectal cancer patients (≥66 years old) diagnosed from 2004 to 2012, who received upfront chemoradiation, were included. Patients who received CR-only were compared with patients receiving neoadjuvant therapy plus proctectomy. In the 24 months after treatment, markers of surveillance, including carcinoembryonic antigen testing (CEA), endoscopy, and imaging, were compared between groups.
Results |
A total of 2,482 individuals met the inclusion criteria: 21% (n = 514) had CR-only and 79% had conventional treatment (ie chemoradiation plus proctectomy). Only 2.5% and 3.4% of those in the CR-only and conventional treatment groups, respectively, were in complete compliance with National Comprehensive Cancer Network surveillance guidelines during the first 2 years post-treatment (p < 0.01). The CR-only group was less likely than the conventional treatment group to receive: CEA (adjusted risk ratio [aRR] 0.57; 95% CI 0.50 to 0.65), endoscopy (aRR 0.76; 95% CI 0.66 to 0.87), and office visits (aRR 0.88; 95% CI 0.84 to 0.92), respectively. However, there were similar rates of cross-sectional imaging between groups (aRR 1.31; 95% CI 0.93 to 1.85).
Conclusions |
Adherence to guideline-recommended surveillance was poor for all Medicare patients with rectal cancer. Despite recommendations for closer follow-up, patients treated with CR-only were less likely to receive surveillance than those treated with conventional treatment. Efforts should be made to increase adherence to surveillance guidelines for all rectal cancer patients treated with curative intent, but particularly for those with higher risk of recurrence, such as those treated with CR-only.
Le texte complet de cet article est disponible en PDF.Abbreviations and Acronyms : aRR, CEA, CR, SEER, Epidemiology, NCCN
Plan
| Disclosure Information: Nothing to disclose. |
|
| Disclosures outside the scope of this work: Dr Cole is an employee of Truven Health Analytics, an IBM Company. Dr Sanoff has received research funding from Novartis, Bayer, and Merck. |
|
| Support: Funding for this project was supported by the North Carolina Translational and Clinical Sciences Institute via the National Center for Advancing Translational Sciences, NIH (grant award no. UL1TR001111). Dr Cole was partially supported by a National Research Service Award Pre-Doctoral/Post-Doctoral Traineeship from the AHRQ sponsored by The Cecil G Sheps Center for Health Services Research, University of North Carolina (UNC) at Chapel Hill, grant no. T32-HS000032. The database infrastructure used for this project was funded by Department of Epidemiology, UNC Gillings School of Global Public Health; the Cecil G Sheps Center for Health Services Research, UNC; the CER Strategic Initiative of UNC's Clinical & Translational Science Award (UL1TR001111); and the UNC School of Medicine. |
|
| Disclaimer: The ideas and opinions expressed herein are those of the author(s) and endorsement by the National Cancer Institute is not intended nor should be inferred. |
Vol 228 - N° 5
P. 782 - mai 2019 Retour au numéroBienvenue sur EM-consulte, la référence des professionnels de santé.
L’accès au texte intégral de cet article nécessite un abonnement.
Déjà abonné à cette revue ?
