Log odds of positive lymph nodes show better predictive performance on the prognosis of early-onset colorectal cancer.

BACKGROUND: As the incidence of colorectal cancer tends to be younger, early-onset colorectal cancer (EOCRC) has attracted more attention in recent years. We aimed to assess the optimal lymph node staging system among EOCRC patients, and then, establish informative assessment models for prognosis prediction. METHODS: Data of EOCRC were retrieved from the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results database. Survival prediction ability of three lymph node staging systems including N stage of the tumor node metastasis (TNM) staging system, lymph node ratio (LNR), and log odds of positive lymph nodes (LODDS) was assessed and compared using Akaike information criterion (AIC), Harrell's concordance index (C-index), and likelihood ratio (LR) test. Univariate and multivariate Cox regression analyses were conducted to identify the prognostic predictors for overall survival (OS) and cancer-specific survival (CSS). Effectiveness of the model was demonstrated by receiver operative curve and decision curve analysis. RESULTS: A total of 17,535 cases were finally included in this study. All three lymph node staging systems showed significant performance in survival prediction (p < 0.001). Comparatively, LODDS presented a better ability of prognosis prediction with lower AIC (OS: 70,510.99; CSS: 60,925.34), higher C-index (OS: 0.6617; CSS: 0.6799), and higher LR test score (OS: 998.65; CSS: 1103.09). Based on independent factors identified from Cox regression analysis, OS and CSS nomograms for EOCRC were established and validated. CONCLUSIONS: LODDS shows better predictive performance than N stage or LNR among patients with EOCRC. Novel validated nomograms based on LODDS could effectively provide more prognostic information than the TNM staging system.

Prognostic value of final pathological stage in colon adenocarcinoma after neoadjuvant chemotherapy: A propensity score-matched study.

Background: Neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NAC) could improve local tumor control of locally advanced colon cancer (LACC), but the prognostic value of yp stage in colon cancer remains unknown. Here, we aimed to ascertain yp stage as an indicator for LACC prognosis after NAC. Methods: The data of patients diagnosed with colon adenocarcinoma between 2004 and 2015 were extracted from the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results database. After 1:2 propensity score matching, cancer-specific survival (CSS) and overall survival (OS) were compared between the NAC and Non-NAC groups of different stage classifications. The correlation between clinical and pathological factors and CSS was identified. Results: A total of 49, 149, and 81 matched pairs of stage 0-I, II, and III patients, respectively, were generated for analysis. For stage 0-I (p = 0.011) and III (p = 0.015), only CSS in the NAC groups were inferior. Receiving NAC was an independent prognostic risk factor for patients with stage 0-I (hazard ratio, 7.70; 95% confidence interval, 1.820-32.5; p = 0.006) and stage III (hazard ratio, 1.73; 95% confidence interval, 1.11-2.68; p = 0.015). Conclusions: The CSS was poorer among LACC patients who underwent NAC than among those who did not. The yp stage of colon cancer after NAC has distinctive significance, which may contribute to predicting the prognosis and guiding the treatment of LACC patients after NAC.

The role of neoadjuvant chemotherapy in patients with locally advanced colon cancer: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

Background: Controversy persists about neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NAC) within the field of locally advanced colon cancer (LACC). The purpose of this study was to assess the existing and latest literature with high quality to determine the role of NAC in various aspects. Methods: A comprehensive literature search of the PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, and the Cochrane Library databases was conducted from inception to April 2022. Review Manager 5.3 was applied for meta-analyses with a random-effects model whenever possible. Results: Overall, 8 studies were included in this systematic review and meta-analysis, comprising 4 randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and 4 retrospective studies involving 40,136 participants. The 3-year overall survival (OS) (HR: 0.90, 95% CI: 0.66-1.23, P = 0.51) and 5-year OS (HR: 0.89, 95% CI: 0.53-1.03, P = 0.53) were comparable between two groups. Mortality in 30 days was found less frequent in the NAC group (OR: 0.43, 95% CI: 0.20-0.91, P = 0.03), whereas no significant differences were detected concerning other perioperative complications, R0 resection, or adverse events. In terms of subgroup analyses for RCTs, less anastomotic leak (OR: 0.51, 95% CI: 0.31-0.86, P = 0.01) and higher R0 resection rate (OR: 2.35, 95% CI: 1.04-5.32, P = 0.04) were observed in the NAC group. Conclusions: NAC is safe and feasible for patients with LACC, but no significant survival benefit could be demonstrated. The application of NAC still needs to be prudent until significant evidence supporting the oncological outcomes is presented. Systematic review registration: https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero, identifier (CRD42022333306).

Effects of Preoperative Radiotherapy on Long-Term Bowel Function in Patients With Rectal Cancer Treated With Anterior Resection: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.

Background: Anterior resection is a common surgical approach used in rectal cancer surgery; however, this procedure is known to cause bowel injury and dysfunction. Neoadjuvant therapy is widely used in patients with locally advanced rectal cancer. In this study, we determined the effect of preoperative radiotherapy on long-term bowel function in patients who underwent anterior resection for treatment of rectal cancer. Methods: We performed a comprehensive literature search of the PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, and the Cochrane Library databases. A random-effects model was used in the meta-analysis by the Review Manager software, version 5.3. Results: This systematic review and meta-analysis included 12 studies, which used low anterior resection syndrome score with a total of 2349 patients. Based on them, we concluded that low anterior resection syndrome was significantly more common in the preoperative radiotherapy group (odds ratio 3.59, 95% confidence interval 2.68-4.81, P < .00001) and that major low anterior resection syndrome also occurred significantly more frequently in the preoperative radiotherapy group (odds ratio 3.28, 95% confidence interval 2.05-5.26, P < .00001). Subgroup analyses of long-course radiation, total mesorectal excision, and non-metastatic tumors were performed, and the results met the conclusions of the primary outcomes. Conclusions: Preoperative radiotherapy negatively affects long-term bowel function in patients who undergo anterior resection for rectal cancer.

The role of upfront primary tumor resection in asymptomatic patients with unresectable stage IV colorectal cancer: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

Background: Controversy exists over the role of upfront primary tumor resection (PTR) in asymptomatic patients with unresectable stage IV colorectal cancer (CRC). The purpose of this study was to evaluate the effect of upfront PTR on survival outcomes and adverse outcomes. Methods: Searches were conducted on PubMed, EMBASE, Web of Science, and Cochrane Library from inception to August 2021. Studies comparing survival outcomes with or without adverse outcomes between PTR and non-PTR treatments were included. Review Manager 5.3 was applied for meta-analyses with a random-effects model whenever possible. Results: Overall, 20 studies with 3,088 patients were finally included in this systematic review. Compared with non-PTR, upfront PTR was associated with better 3-year (HR: 0.69, 95% CI, 0.57-0.83, P = 0.0001) and 5-year overall survival (OS) (HR: 0.77, 95% CI, 0.62-0.95, P = 0.01), while subgroup analysis indicated that there was no significant difference between upfront PTR and upfront chemotherapy (CT) group. In addition, grade 3 or higher adverse effects due to CT were more frequent in the PTR group with marginal significance (OR: 1.74, 95% CI, 0.99-3.06, P = 0.05), and other adverse outcomes were comparable. Conclusions: PTR might be related to improved OS for asymptomatic patients with unresectable stage IV CRC, whereas receiving upfront CT is a rational alternative without detrimental influence on survival or adverse outcomes compared with upfront PTR. Systematic Review Registration: https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/display_record.php?RecordID=272675.

Survival outcome of palliative primary tumor resection for colorectal cancer patients with synchronous liver and/or lung metastases: A retrospective cohort study in the SEER database by propensity score matching analysis.

BACKGROUND: There is a great matter of controversies whether some of these synchronous metastatic colorectal cancer patients can benefit from palliative primary tumor resection (pPTR) and there is still no reported randomized control trial to address this issue. METHODS: Patients with microscopically proven metastatic colorectal cancer were identified within the SEER database (2010-2016). Patients were propensity matched 1:1 into pPTR and non-surgery groups and among the matched cohort, the univariable and multivariable Cox proportional hazards regression models were performed to identify predictors of survival. Median survival was calculated by using the Kaplan-Meier method. RESULTS: Of 21,405 colorectal cancer patients diagnosed with synchronous liver and/or lung metastases, 7386 were identified in the matched cohort. The median overall survival was 12.0 months, 22.0 months in the non-surgery, surgery groups, respectively (p < 0.001) and the corresponding median cancer-specific survival was 13.0 months, 22.0 months, respectively (p < 0.001). Multivariable Cox regression analysis demonstrated that surgery was independently associated with improved overall survival (hazard ratio, 0.531) as well as cancer-specific survival (hazard ratio, 0.516). In stratified analyses by primary site and patterns of distant metastases, those patients with pPTR had better prognosis. In addition, stratified analysis revealed that trimodality therapy was linked with the greatest therapeutic effect followed by addition of chemotherapy to pPTR. CONCLUSIONS: pPTR may offer some therapeutic benefits among carefully selected patients, and surgery-based multimodality therapy was associated with better survival.