Peritoneal metastases in elderly patients with colorectal cancer.

BACKGROUND: With the introduction of cytoreductive surgery with intraperitoneal chemotherapy and the development of new systemic anti-cancer agents, the treatment of colorectal cancer (CRC) patients with peritoneal metastases has changed. Real-world data on the treatment of elderly patients and their clinical outcomes is lacking. METHODS: All CRC patients diagnosed with synchronous peritoneal metastases (SPM) during 2008-2019 (n = 7,748) were identified from the Netherlands Cancer Registry. Trends in treatment and postoperative mortality were described by age category (<70, 70-74, 75-79, ≥80 years) and period of diagnosis (2008-2013, 2014-2019). Kaplan-Meier curves were constructed, and log-rank tests were performed to evaluate differences in overall survival (OS). RESULTS: With increasing age, less patients received multimodality treatment and systemic treatment. Of the patients aged <70 years, 38% underwent multimodality treatment and 35% palliative systemic therapy, declining to 4% and 12% in patients ≥80 years. A large and increasing proportion of elderly patients did not receive cancer-directed treatment, this increased from 32% in 2008-2013 to 41% in 2014-2019 in 75-79 years old patients and from 52% to 65% in ≥80 years old. Postoperative mortality decreased in all age categories over time, OS remained stable. The median OS of elderly patients ranged from 8 months in 70-74 years old to 3 months in patients aged ≥80 years. DISCUSSION: Age strongly affects treatment of patients with SPM, with a large and increasing proportion of elderly patients not receiving cancer-directed treatment. Their prognosis remains very poor. There is a need for therapeutic options that are well tolerable for elderly patients.

Extensive diagnostic work-up for patients with carcinoma of unknown primary.

Patients with carcinoma of unknown primary (CUP) present with metastatic disease without an identified primary tumour. The unknown site of origin makes the diagnostic work-up and treatment challenging. Since little information is available regarding diagnostic work-up and treatment in daily practice, we collected and analysed these in a patient cohort with regard to the recommendations of the national CUP guideline. Data of 161 patients diagnosed with CUP in 2014 or 2015 were extracted from the Netherlands Cancer Registry (NCR) and supplemented with diagnostic work-up information from patient files and analysed. Patients underwent an average of five imaging studies during the diagnostic phase (range 1-17). From the tests as recommended in the national guideline on CUP, a chest X-ray was most commonly performed (73%), whereas a PET-CT was done in one out of four patients (24%). Biopsies were taken in 86% of the study population, with Cytokeratin 7 being the most frequently tested histopathological marker (73%). Less than half of patients received therapy (42%). CUP patients undergo extensive diagnostic work-up. The performance status did not influence the extent of the diagnostic work-up in CUP patients, but it was an important factor for receiving treatment.

Analysis of 105.000 patients with cancer: have they been discussed in oncologic multidisciplinary team meetings? A nationwide population-based study in the Netherlands.

INTRODUCTION: For optimal oncological care, it is recommended to discuss every patient with cancer in a multidisciplinary team meeting (MDTM). This is a time consuming and expensive practice, leading to a growing demand to change the current workflow. We aimed to investigate the number of patients discussed in MDTMs and to identify characteristics associated with not being discussed. METHODS: Data of patients with a newly diagnosed solid malignant tumour in 2015 and 2016 were analysed through the nationwide population-based Netherlands Cancer Registry (NCR). We clustered tumour types in groups that were frequently discussed within a tumour-specific MDTM. Tumour types without information about MDTMs in the NCR were excluded. Multivariable logistic regression analyses were used to analyse factors associated with not being discussed. RESULTS: Out of 105.305 patients with cancer, 91% were discussed in a MDTM, varying from 74% to 99% between the different tumour groups. Significantly less frequently discussed were patients aged ≥75 years (odds ratio [OR] = 0.7, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.6-0.7), patients diagnosed with disease stage I (OR = 0.5, 95% CI = 0.5-0.6), IV (OR = 0.4, 95% CI = 0.4-0.4) or unknown (OR = 0.2, 95% CI = 0.2-0.2) and patients who received no treatment (OR = 0.3, 95% CI = 0.3-0.3). Patients who received a multidisciplinary treatment were more likely to be discussed in contrary to a monodisciplinary treatment (OR = 4.6, 95% CI = 4.2-5.1). CONCLUSION: In general, most patients with cancer were actually discussed in a MDTM, although differences were observed between tumour groups. Factors associated with not being discussed may, at least partially, reflect the absence of a multidisciplinary question. These results form a starting point for debate on a more durable and efficient new MDTM strategy.

Inter-hospital variation in resection rates of colon cancer in the Netherlands: A nationwide study.

INTRODUCTION: Hospital of diagnosis is shown to have an impact on the probability of undergoing a resection in different types of gastrointestinal cancer. The aim of this study was to investigate the inter-hospital variation in resection rates and its impact on survival among patients with non-metastatic colon cancer. METHODS: All patients diagnosed with non-metastatic colon cancer between 2009 and 2014 were selected from the Netherlands Cancer Registry. Multilevel logistic regression was used to examine the variation in resection rates among hospitals. The effect of variation in surgical resection on overall survival was assessed using Cox regression analyses. Relative survival was used as an estimate for disease-specific survival. RESULTS: 38164 patients, treated in 95 different hospitals, were included in the analysis. After adjustments, resection rates varied between hospitals from 88 to 99%. This variation increased among patients older than 75 years, from 79 to 98%. Crude overall 5-year survival was 64%. After adjustment, no significant difference in overall or relative survival between hospitals with higher and lower resection rates was observed. CONCLUSION: Resection rates are important to consider when interpreting hospital outcomes. There is a significant variation in resection rates in patients with non-metastatic colon cancer among hospitals in the Netherlands. This variation increases in the elderly. No significant effect on survival was found. This could imply that undertreatment may play a role as well as that some patients might not benefit from surgery.

Postoperative mortality in elderly patients with colorectal cancer: The impact of age, time-trends and competing risks of dying.

BACKGROUND: Worse prognosis in elderly colorectal cancer (CRC) patients may be cancer or treatment related, or death from other causes. This population-based study aimed to compare survival among non-metastatic CRC patients between age groups and notice time trends in mortality rates. METHODS: Primary stage I-III CRC patients who underwent resection between 2008 and 2013 were selected from the Netherlands Cancer Registry. Patients were divided into three equally distributed age groups and a separated group including the oldest old (<65, 65-74, 75-84 and ≥ 85 years). Survival rates were calculated by age groups and tumour localization. Relative excess risks of death, 30-day, 1-year mortality and 1-year excess mortality were calculated. RESULTS: 52296 patients were included. Age-related differences in 5-year overall survival were observed (colon cancer: 82%, 73%, 56% and 35%; rectal cancer: 82%, 74%, 56% and 38%; p < 0.0001). Age-related differences were less prominent in relative survival and disappeared in conditional relative survival (condition of surviving 1 year). Thirty-day mortality rates decreased over time (colon cancer: 4.9%-3.4%; rectal cancer: 3.0%-1.7%); 1-year mortality rates decreased from 11.9% to 9.6% in colon cancer and from 8.0% to 6.4% in rectal cancer. One-year excess mortality increased with age (17.3% and 12.9% in patients with colon or rectal cancer aged ≥85 years). CONCLUSION: One-year mortality rates remain high in elderly patients. Age-related differences in survival disappeared after adjustment for expected death from other causes and first-year mortality. Beneficial time trends in 1-year mortality rates underline that survival in elderly after CRC surgery is modifiable.

Time trends of short-term mortality for octogenarians undergoing a colorectal resection in North Europe.

BACKGROUND: Decreased cancer specific survival in older colorectal patients is mainly due to mortality in the first year, emphasizing the importance of the first postoperative year. This study aims to gain an overview and time trends of short-term mortality in octogenarians (≥80 years) with colorectal cancer across four North European countries. METHODS: Patients of 80 years or older, operated for colorectal cancer (stage I-III) between 2005 and 2014, were included. Population-based cohorts from Belgium, Denmark, the Netherlands, and Sweden were collected. Separately for colon- and rectal cancer, 30-day, 90-day, one-year, and excess one-year mortality were calculated. Also, short-term mortality over three time periods (2005-2008, 2009-2011, 2012-2014) was analyzed. RESULTS: In total, 35,158 colon cancer patients and 10,144 rectal cancer patients were included. For colon cancer, 90-day mortality rate was highest in Denmark (15%) and lowest in Sweden (8%). For rectal cancer, 90-day mortality rate was highest in Belgium (11%) and lowest in Sweden (7%). One-year excess mortality rate of colon cancer patients decreased from 2005 to 2008 to 2012-2014 for all countries (Belgium: 17%-11%, Denmark: 21%-15%, the Netherlands: 18%-10%, and Sweden: 10%-8%). For rectal cancer, from 2005 to 2008 to 2012-2014 one-year excess mortality rate decreased in the Netherlands from 16% to 7% and Sweden: 8%-2%). CONCLUSIONS: Short-term mortality rates were high in octogenarians operated for colorectal cancer. Short-term mortality rates differ across four North European countries, but decreased over time for both colon and rectal cancer patients in all countries.

Nationwide Outcome of Gastrectomy with En-Bloc Partial Pancreatectomy for Gastric Cancer.

BACKGROUND: Radical gastrectomy is the cornerstone of the treatment of gastric cancer. For tumors invading the pancreas, en-bloc partial pancreatectomy may be needed for a radical resection. The aim of this study was to evaluate the outcome of gastrectomies with partial pancreatectomy for gastric cancer. METHODS: Patients who underwent gastrectomy with or without partial pancreatectomy for gastric or gastro-oesophageal junction cancer between 2011 and 2015 were selected from the Dutch Upper GI Cancer Audit (DUCA). Outcomes were resection margin (pR0) and Clavien-Dindo grade ≥ III postoperative complications and survival. The association between partial pancreatectomy and postoperative complications was analyzed with multivariable logistic regression. Overall survival of patients with partial pancreatectomy was estimated using the Kaplan-Meier method. RESULTS: Of 1966 patients that underwent gastrectomy, 55 patients (2.8%) underwent en-bloc partial pancreatectomy. A pR0 resection was achieved in 45 of 55 patients (82% versus 85% in the group without additional resection, P = 0.82). Clavien-Dindo grade ≥ III complications occurred in 21 of 55 patients (38% versus 17%, P < 0.001). Median overall survival [95% confidence interval] was 15 [6.8-23.2] months. For patients with and without perioperative systemic therapy, median survival was 20 [12.3-27.7] and 10 [5.7-14.3] months, and for patients with pR0 and pR1 resection, it was 20 [11.8-28.3] and 5 [2.4-7.6] months, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Gastrectomy with partial pancreatectomy is not only associated with a pR0 resection rate of 82% but also with increased postoperative morbidity. It should only be performed if a pR0 resection is feasible.

Impact of Age and Comorbidity on Choice and Outcome of Two Different Treatment Options for Patients with Potentially Curable Esophageal Cancer.

PURPOSE: This study was designed to assess the impact of age and comorbidity on choice and outcome of definitive chemoradiotherapy (dCRT) or neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy plus surgery. METHODS: In this population-based study, all patients with potentially curable EC (cT1N+/cT2-3, TX, any cN, cM0) diagnosed in the South East of the Netherlands between 2004 and 2014 were included. Kaplan-Meier method with log-rank tests and multivariable Cox regression analysis were used to compare overall survival (OS). RESULTS: A total of 702 patients was included. Age ≥ 75 years and multiple comorbidities were associated with a higher probability for dCRT (odds ratio [OR] 8.58; 95% confidence interval [CI] 4.72-15.58; and OR 3.09; 95% CI 1.93-4.93). The strongest associations were found for the combination of hypertension plus diabetes (OR 3.80; 95% CI 1.97-7.32) and the combination of cardiovascular with pulmonary comorbidity (OR 3.18; 95% CI 1.57-6.46). Patients with EC who underwent dCRT had a poorer prognosis than those who underwent nCRT plus surgery, irrespective of age, number, and type of comorbidities. In contrast, for patients with squamous cell carcinoma with ≥ 2 comorbidities or age ≥ 75 years, OS was comparable between both groups (hazard ratio [HR] 1.52; 95% CI 0.78-2.97; and HR 0.73; 95% CI 0.13-4.14). CONCLUSIONS: Histological tumor type should be acknowledged in treatment choices for patients with esophageal cancer. Neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy plus surgery should basically be advised as treatment of choice for operable esophageal adenocarcinoma patients. For patients with esophageal squamous cell carcinoma with ≥ 2 comorbidities or age ≥ 75 years, dCRT may be the preferred strategy.

Timing of postoperative chemotherapy in patients undergoing perioperative chemotherapy and gastrectomy for gastric cancer.

BACKGROUND: For patients who qualify for perioperative chemotherapy and gastrectomy for gastric cancer, the optimal timing of the postoperative chemotherapy (PC) seems equivocal. The aim of this study was to evaluate the influence of timing of PC on overall survival (OS) in patients receiving perioperative chemotherapy. METHODS: Patients undergoing perioperative chemotherapy and gastrectomy with curative intent (2010-2014) were extracted from the nationwide population-based Netherlands Cancer Registry. Timing of PC was analyzed as a linear and categorical variable (<6 weeks, 6-8 weeks, and >8 weeks). Risk factors for a late start of PC (≥6 weeks), and the association between timing of PC and OS were assessed by multivariable regression analyses. RESULTS: Among 1066 patients who underwent perioperative chemotherapy and gastrectomy, 463 (43%) patients started PC. PC was administered within 6 weeks in 208 (45%) patients, within 6-8 weeks in 155 (33%) patients, and after 8 weeks in 100 (22%) patients. A total of 419 (91%) and 351 (76%) patients finished all cycles of preoperative and PC, respectively. A late start of PC was associated with a longer hospital stay (+1 hospital day: OR 1.15, 95% CI [1.08-1.23], p < 0.001). Timing of PC was not associated with OS (6-8 weeks vs. <6 weeks, HR 1.14, 95% CI [0.79-1.65], p = 0.471; >8 weeks vs. <6 weeks, HR 1.04, 95% CI [0.79-1.65], p = 0.872). CONCLUSION: Timing of postoperative chemotherapy does not influence survival in patients receiving perioperative chemotherapy for gastric cancer. The results suggest that the early postoperative period may be safely used for recovery and optimizing patients for the start of PC.

Overall survival before and after centralization of gastric cancer surgery in the Netherlands.

BACKGROUND: Centralization of surgery has been shown to improve outcomes for oesophageal and pancreatic cancer, and has been implemented for gastric cancer since 2012 in the Netherlands. This study evaluated the impact of centralizing gastric cancer surgery on outcomes for all patients with gastric cancer. METHODS: Patients diagnosed with non-cardia gastric adenocarcinoma in the intervals 2009-2011 and 2013-2015 were selected from the Netherlands Cancer Registry. Clinicopathological data, treatment characteristics and mortality were assessed for the periods before (2009-2011) and after (2013-2015) centralization. Cox regression analyses were used to assess differences in overall survival between these intervals. RESULTS: A total of 7204 patients were included. Resection rates increased slightly from 37·6 per cent before to 39·6 per cent after centralization (P = 0·023). Before centralization, 50·1 per cent of surgically treated patients underwent gastrectomy in hospitals that performed fewer than ten procedures annually, compared with 9·2 per cent after centralization. Patients who had gastrectomy in the second interval were younger and more often underwent total gastrectomy (29·3 per cent before versus 41·2 per cent after centralization). Thirty-day postoperative mortality rates dropped from 6·5 to 4·1 per cent (P = 0·004), and 90-day mortality rates decreased from 10·6 to 7·2 per cent (P = 0·002). Two-year overall survival rates increased from 55·4 to 58·5 per cent among patients who had gastrectomy (P = 0·031) and from 27·1 to 29·6 per cent for all patients (P = 0·003). Improvements remained after adjustment for case mix; however, adjustment for hospital volume attenuated this association for surgically treated patients. CONCLUSION: Centralization of gastric cancer surgery was associated with reduced postoperative mortality and improved survival.

Unknown primary carcinoma in the Netherlands: decrease in incidence and survival times remain poor between 2000 and 2012.

BACKGROUND/AIM: Unknown primary tumour (UPT) is the term applied to metastatic cancer, the origin of which remains unidentified. Since cancer treatment is primarily based on the tumour site of origin, treatment of UPT patients is challenging. The number of reports on incidence, treatment and survival of UPT is limited. We hereby report data on patients (2000-2012) with UPT in the Netherlands. METHODS: The age-standardised rate (ASR) of 'other and unspecified' malignancies in the Netherlands was compared with other European countries. Patients diagnosed with UPT between 2000 and 2012 were selected from the Netherlands Cancer Registry (NCR) to calculate incidence rates. Patient characteristics, treatment and survival rates were assessed. RESULTS: The ASR of 'other and unspecified' malignancies in the Netherlands did not differ from the European average ASRs (2008-2012). A total of 29,784 patients with an unknown primary tumour were selected from the NCR (2000-2012). The incidence decreased from 14 per 100,000 person years (European standardised rate) in 2000 to 7.0 in 2012. The most common metastatic sites were liver, lymph nodes, bone and lung (42%, 22%, 16% and 14%, respectively), and approximately two-thirds of patients were diagnosed with metastases at a single site. One-third of the patients were treated; these were mainly younger patients. The overall median survival for all patients was 1.7 months. The median survival of untreated patients was 1.0 month and of treated patients 6.3 months. CONCLUSION: The incidence of UPT between 2000 and 2012 is decreasing in the Netherlands, and one-third of these patients received treatment. Survival after diagnosis is limited to months rather than years.

Oncologic treatment strategies and relative survival of patients with stage I-III rectal cancer - A EURECCA international comparison between the Netherlands, Belgium, Denmark, Sweden, England, Ireland, Spain, and Lithuania.

INTRODUCTION: The aim of this EURECCA international comparison is to compare oncologic treatment strategies and relative survival of patients with stage I-III rectal cancer between European countries. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Population-based national cohort data from the Netherlands (NL), Belgium (BE), Denmark (DK), Sweden (SE), England (ENG), Ireland (IE), Spain (ES), and single-centre data from Lithuania (LT) were obtained. All operated patients with (y)pTNM stage I-III rectal cancer diagnosed between 2004 and 2009 were included. Oncologic treatment strategies and relative survival were calculated and compared between neighbouring countries. RESULTS: We included 57,120 patients. Treatment strategies differed between NL and BE (p < 0.001), DK and SE (p < 0.001), and ENG and IE (p < 0.001). More preoperative radiotherapy as single treatment before surgery was administered in NL compared with BE (59.7% vs. 13.1%), in SE compared with DK (55.1% vs. 10.4%), and in ENG compared with IE (15.2% vs. 9.6%). Less postoperative chemotherapy was given in NL (9.6% vs. 39.1%), in SE (7.9% vs. 14.1%), and in IE (12.6% vs. 18.5%) compared with their neighbouring country. In ES, 55.1% of patients received preoperative chemoradiation and 62.3% postoperative chemotherapy. There were no significant differences in relative survival between neighbouring countries. CONCLUSION: Large differences in oncologic treatment strategies for patients with (y)pTNM I-III rectal cancer were observed across European countries. No clear relation between oncologic treatment strategies and relative survival was observed. Further research into selection criteria for specific treatments could eventually lead to individualised and optimal treatment for patients with non-metastasised rectal cancer.

Morbidity and mortality according to age following gastrectomy for gastric cancer.

BACKGROUND: This study investigated age-related differences in surgically treated patients with gastric cancer, and aimed to identify factors associated with outcome. METHODS: Data from the Dutch Upper Gastrointestinal Cancer Audit were used. All patients with non-cardia gastric cancer registered between 2011 and 2015 who underwent surgery were selected. Patients were analysed by age group (less than 70 years versus 70 years or more). Multivariable logistic regression was used to assess the influence of clinicopathological factors on morbidity and mortality. RESULTS: A total of 1109 patients younger than 70 years and 1206 aged 70 years or more were included. Patients aged at least 70 years had more perioperative or postoperative complications (41·2 versus 32·5 per cent; P < 0·001) and a higher 30-day mortality rate (7·9 versus 3·2 per cent; P < 0·001) than those younger than 70 years. In multivariable analysis, age 70 years or more was associated with a higher risk of complications (odds ratio 1·29, 95 per cent c.i. 1·05 to 1·59). Postoperative mortality was not significantly associated with age. In the entire cohort, morbidity and mortality were influenced most by ASA grade, neoadjuvant chemotherapy and type of resection. CONCLUSION: ASA grade, neoadjuvant chemotherapy and type of resection are independent predictors of morbidity and death in patients with gastric cancer, irrespective of age.

Long-term survival improvement in oesophageal cancer in the Netherlands.

BACKGROUND: Treatment for oesophageal cancer has evolved due to developments including the centralisation of surgery and introduction of neoadjuvant treatment. Therefore, this study evaluated trends in stage distribution, treatment and survival of oesophageal cancer patients in the last 26 years in the Netherlands. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients with oesophageal cancer diagnosed in the period 1989-2014 were selected from the Netherlands Cancer Registry. Patients were divided into two groups: non-metastatic (M0) and metastatic (M1). Trends in stage distribution, treatment and relative survival rates were evaluated according to histology. RESULTS: Among all 35,760 patients, the percentage of an unknown tumour stage decreased from 34% to 10% during the study period, whereas the percentage of patients with metastatic disease increased from 21% to 34%. Among surgically treated patients 32% underwent a resection in a high-volume hospital in 2005 which increased to 92% in 2014. Use of neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy increased in non-metastatic oesophageal adenocarcinoma (OAC) and squamous cell carcinoma (OSCC) patients from respectively 4% and 2% in 2000-2004 to 43% and 26% in 2010-2014. Five-year relative survival increased from 8% to 22% for all patients; from 12% to 36% for non-metastatic OAC and from 9% to 27% for non-metastatic OSCC over 26 years. Median overall survival of metastatic patients improved from 18 to 22 weeks. CONCLUSION: In the Netherlands, survival for oesophageal cancer patients improved significantly, especially in the period 2005-2014 which might be the result of better treatment related to the centralisation of surgery and introduction of neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy.

Definitive chemoradiation or surgery in elderly patients with potentially curable esophageal cancer in the Netherlands: a nationwide population-based study on patterns of care and survival.

BACKGROUND: The aim of our study was to describe treatment patterns and the impact on overall survival among elderly patients (75 years and older) with potentially curable esophageal cancer. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Between 2003 and 2013, 13,244 patients from the nationwide population-based Netherlands Cancer Registry (NCR) were diagnosed with potentially curable esophageal cancer (cT2-3, X, any cN, cM0, X) of which 34% were elderly patients (n = 4501). RESULTS: Surgical treatment with or without neoadjuvant treatment remained stable among elderly patients (around the 16% between 2003 and 2013). However, among younger patients, surgical treatment increased from 60.2 to 67.0%. The use of definitive chemoradiation (dCRT) increased in elderly patients from 1.9 to 19.5% and in younger patients from 5.2 to 17.2%. Due to the increase in dCRT, treatment with curative intent doubled in the elderly from 17 to 37.1%. Multivariable Cox regression revealed that elderly patients with an adenocarcinoma receiving surgery alone or dCRT had a significantly worse overall survival compared to those receiving surgery with neoadjuvant chemo (radio) therapy (nCRT/CT) (HR: 1.7 95% CI 1.4-2.0 and HR: 1.9 95% CI 1.5-2.3). However, among elderly with squamous cell carcinoma overall survival was comparable between dCRT, surgery alone and surgery with nCRT/CT. CONCLUSIONS: Survival was comparable among elderly patients with squamous cell carcinoma who underwent surgery with nCRT/CT, surgery alone or received dCRT, while elderly patients with an adenocarcinoma who underwent surgery with nCRT/CT had a better overall survival when compared with surgery alone or dCRT. Therefore, dCRT can be considered as a reasonable alternative for surgery among potentially curable elderly patients with esophageal squamous cell carcinoma. However, in elderly patients with esophageal adenocarcinoma surgery with nCRT/CT is still preferable regarding overall survival.

A Population-based Study on Lymph Node Retrieval in Patients with Esophageal Cancer: Results from the Dutch Upper Gastrointestinal Cancer Audit.

BACKGROUND: For esophageal cancer, the number of retrieved lymph nodes (LNs) is often used as a quality indicator. The aim of this study is to analyze the number of retrieved LNs in The Netherlands, assess factors associated with LN yield, and explore the association with short-term outcomes. This is a population-based study on lymph node retrieval in patients with esophageal cancer, presenting results from the Dutch Upper Gastrointestinal Cancer Audit. STUDY DESIGN: For this retrospective national cohort study, patients with esophageal carcinoma who underwent esophagectomy between 2011 and 2016 were included. The primary outcome was the number of retrieved LNs. Univariable and multivariable regression analyses were used to test for association with ≥ 15 LNs. PATIENTS AND RESULTS: 3970 patients were included. Between 2011 and 2016, the median number of LNs increased from 15 to 20. Factors independently associated with ≥ 15 LNs were: 0-10 kg preoperative weight loss (versus: unknown weight loss, odds ratio [95% confidence interval]: 0.71 [0.57-0.88]), Charlson score 0 (versus: Charlson score 2: 0.76 [0.63-0.92]), cN2 category (reference: cN0, 1.32 [1.05-1.65]), no neoadjuvant therapy and neoadjuvant chemotherapy (reference: neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy, 1.73 [1.29-2.32] and 2.15 [1.54-3.01]), minimally invasive transthoracic (reference: open transthoracic, 1.46 [1.15-1.85]), open transthoracic (versus open and minimally invasive transhiatal, 0.29 [0.23-0.36] and 0.43 [0.32-0.59]), hospital volume of 26-50 or > 50 resections/year (reference: 0-25, 1.94 [1.55-2.42] and 3.01 [2.36-3.83]), and year of surgery [reference: 2011, odds ratios (ORs) 1.48, 1.53, 2.28, 2.44, 2.54]. There was no association of ≥ 15 LNs with short-term outcomes. CONCLUSIONS: The number of LNs retrieved increased between 2011 and 2016. Weight loss, Charlson score, cN category, neoadjuvant therapy, surgical approach, year of resection, and hospital volume were all associated with increased LN yield. Retrieval of ≥ 15 LNs was not associated with increased postoperative morbidity/mortality.

[National population screening for colorectal carcinoma in the Netherlands: results of the first years since the implementation in 2014]. / Landelijk bevolkingsonderzoek naar colorectaal carcinoom.

OBJECTIVE: To describe the effect of population screening for colorectal carcinoma (CRC) with the faecal immunochemical test, introduced in 2014, on the incidence of CRC in the Netherlands and to analyse differences between patient and tumour characteristics, stage distribution and treatment of carcinomas that were screening-detected and were not detected by screening (non-screening-detected). DESIGN: Retrospective observational study. METHOD: We analysed data from the Netherlands Cancer Registry. We selected all CRCs diagnosed in the 2010-2016 period and calculated incidence rates standardised for the European population. For comparison between screening-detected and non-screening-detected carcinomas, we selected all CRCs diagnosed in 2015. RESULTS: The number of newly diagnosed CRCs rose from 13,028 in 2013 to 15,185 in 2014 and to 15,807 in 2015. This increase could only be seen for the birth years of people who had been invited for population screening during that particular year. The percentage of men was higher for screening-detected carcinomas than for non-screening-detected carcinomas (62% vs 55%). Screening-detected carcinomas were also more often in the left side of the colon (76% vs 64%). The percentage of patients with stage I CRC was higher in the group with screening-detected carcinomas (48% vs 16%). Patients with screening-detected carcinomas more often underwent local treatment or only resection without adjuvant or neoadjuvant treatment than the patients with non-screening-detected carcinomas. CONCLUSION: During the first years after the introduction of population screening, the incidence of CRC has increased as the result of earlier detection. Screening-detected carcinomas have a more favourable stage distribution and these patients are undergoing less-invasive treatment more often.

Treatment and outcome of elderly patients with advanced stage ovarian cancer: A nationwide analysis.

OBJECTIVE: To provide an overview of treatment strategies for elderly patients with advanced stage epithelial ovarian cancer (EOC) in daily practice, evaluate changes over time and relate this to surgical mortality and survival. METHODS: All women diagnosed with advanced stage (FIGO IIB and higher) EOC between 2002 and 2013 were selected from the Netherlands Cancer Registry (n=10,440) and stratified by age, stage and period of diagnosis. Elderly patients were defined as aged ≥70years. Time trends in treatment patterns and postoperative mortality were described by age category and tested using multivariable logistic regression. Relative survival was calculated. RESULTS: With advancing age, less patients received ((neo-)adjuvant) treatment. Over time, elderly patients were less often treated (OR 2002-2004 versus 2011-2013: 0.73; 95%CI:0.58-0.92). But if treated, more often standard treatment was provided and 30-day postoperative mortality decreased from 4.5% to 1.9% between 2005 and 2007 and 2011-2013. In all age categories treatment shifted from primary surgery towards primary chemotherapy, in patients aged 70-79years combination therapy increased (+5%) between 2002 and 2004 and 2011-2013. Five-year relative survival for patients diagnosed in 2008-2010 aged <70years was 34% compared to 18% for elderly patients. CONCLUSION: Large treatment differences exist between younger and elderly patients. Over time, selection of elderly patients eligible for curative surgical treatment may have improved. More elderly patients were treated with neoadjuvant chemotherapy while less patients underwent surgery and simultaneously postoperative mortality decreased. However, the large and increasing number of elderly patients without treatment and the large survival gap suggests opportunities for further improvements in the care for elderly EOC patients.