Young-onset colorectal cancer: Insights from an English population-based study.

AIM: Young colorectal cancer (CRC) patients are reported to have more aggressive disease, an advanced stage at diagnosis and conflicting survival outcomes. The aim of this study was to analyse the demographics, clinicopathological features and prognosis of young CRC at a population-based level in England. METHOD: This is a retrospective review of all CRC patients using data from Public Health England collated from regional cancer registries in England between 2010 and 2014. Those aged 40 years and below were classified as young and those over 40 were classified as older. RESULTS: Overall, 167,501 patients had CRC. Of these, 3757 patients (2.2%) were young. Right-sided cancers were more common in younger patients (48.2% vs. 32.9%, p < 0.001). Favourable histological grade (well or moderately differentiated) was present in 83.1% and 73.5% of young and older patients, respectively. The percentage of young and older patients being diagnosed at an early stage (Stages 1 and 2) was similar at 40.6% vs. 42.9%. The 5-year age- and gender-adjusted relative survival (cancer specific) was significantly better for young patients when compared with older patients diagnosed with CRC. Additionally, overall 5-year survival was better for younger patients (71.6% and 47.2%, p < 0.001 in young and older CRC patients respectively). CONCLUSION: The increased right-sided colon cancer in young CRC patients in England warrants attention. Contrary to previous reports, they do not present at later stage. Young CRC patients have better overall and relative survival than older patients with CRC.

Extended Lymphadenectomy in Locally Advanced Rectal Cancers: A Systematic Review.

PURPOSE: The surgical treatment of advanced low rectal cancer remains controversial. Extended lymphadenectomy (EL) is the preferred option in the East, especially in Japan, while neoadjuvant radiotherapy is the treatment of choice in the West. This review was undertaken to review available evidence supporting each of the therapies. METHODS: All studies looking at EL were included in this review. A comprehensive search was conducted as per PRISMA guidelines. Primary outcome was defined as 5-year overall survival, with secondary outcomes including 3-year overall survival, 3- and 5-year disease-free survival, length of operation, and number of complications. RESULTS: Thirty-one studies met the inclusion criteria. There was no significant publication bias. There was statistically significant difference in 5-year survival for patient who underwent EL (odds ratio, 1.34; 95 confidence interval, 0.09-0.5; P=0.006). There were no differences noted in secondary outcomes except for length of the operations. CONCLUSION: There is evidence supporting EL in rectal cancer; however, it is difficult to interpret and not easily transferable to a Western population. Further research is necessary on this important topic.