Search

Background: Young adults and other working‐age adults with cancer are at risk for cancer‐related financial toxicity (FT), including material hardships, depletion of coping resources, and psychological burden. This study compares FT domains in young adults (18‐39 years old) (YAs), other working‐age adults (40‐64 years old), and older adults (≥65 years old) receiving cancer care. Methods: A total of 311 adults were surveyed using the multi‐domain Economic Strain and Resilience in Cancer instrument measuring FT (0‐10 score indicating least to greatest FT; score ≥5 severe FT). Participants were receiving ambulatory care from March‐September 2019. Associations of age with overall FT and material hardship, coping resource depletion, and psychological burden FT domains were tested using Kruskal‐Wallis and χ2 tests and multivariable generalized linear models with gamma distribution. Results: YAs (median age, 31.5 years) comprised 9.6% of the sample; other working‐age adults comprised 56.9%. Overall, material, coping, and psychological FT scores were worse in younger age adults versus older adults (P <.001 in all multivariable models). Compared with older adults, younger age adults demonstrated worse material hardship (median scores, 3.70 vs 4.80 vs 1.30 for YAs, other working‐age, and older adults, respectively; P <.001), coping resource depletion (4.50 vs 3.40 vs 0.80; P <.001), and psychological burden (6.50 vs 7.00 vs 1.00; P <.001). Fifty percent of YAs had severe overall FT versus 40.7% of other working‐age adults and 9.6% of older adults (P <.001). Conclusions: Younger age adults with cancer bore disproportionate FT. Interventions to address unmet needs are critical components for addressing FT in this population. Young adults (18‐39 years old) and other working‐age adults (40‐64 years old) with cancer experienced disproportionately greater financial toxicity compared with older adult (≥65 years old) counterparts. These younger adults faced not only severe material hardships but also severe depletion of their coping resources as well as psychological burden from their cancer‐related financial stressors. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

BACKGROUND Although the safety of combination chemotherapy without primary tumor resection (PTR) in patients with stage IV colon cancer has been established, questions remain regarding a potential survival benefit with PTR. The objective of this study was to compare mortality rates in patients who had colon cancer with unresectable metastases who did and did not undergo PTR. METHODS An observational cohort study was conducted among patients with unresectable metastatic colon cancer identified from the National Cancer Data Base (2003-2005). Multivariate Cox regression analyses with and without propensity score weighting (PSW) were performed to compare survival outcomes. Instrumental variable analysis, using the annual hospital-level PTR rate as the instrument, was used to account for treatment selection bias. To account for survivor treatment bias, in situations in which patients might die soon after diagnosis from different reasons, a landmark method was used. RESULTS In the total cohort, 8641 of 15,154 patients (57%) underwent PTR, and 73.8% of those procedures (4972 of 6735) were at landmark. PTR was associated with a significant reduction in mortality using Cox regression (hazard ratio [HR], 0.45; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.44-0.47) or PSW (HR, 0.46; 95% CI, 0. 44-0.49). However, instrumental variable analysis revealed a much smaller effect (relative mortality rate, 0.91; 95% CI, 0.87-0.96). Although a smaller benefit was observed with the landmark method using Cox regression (HR, 0.6; 95% CI, 0.55-0.64) and PSW (HR, 0.59; 95% CI, 0.54-0.64), instrumental variable analysis revealed no survival benefit (relative mortality rate, 0.97; 95% CI, 0.87-1.06). CONCLUSIONS Among patients with unresectable metastatic colon cancer, after adjustment for confounder effects, PTR was not associated with improved survival compared with systemic chemotherapy; therefore, routine noncurative PTR is not recommended. Cancer 2017;123:1124-1133. © 2016 American Cancer Society. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

BACKGROUND Neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy followed by tumor resection and postoperative chemotherapy is the standard of care for patients with clinical stage II or III adenocarcinoma of the rectum. Significant variation exists in the receipt of postoperative chemotherapy after resection in this population. The objective of this study was to determine the demographic and clinicopathologic factors associated with the initiation of postoperative chemotherapy in elderly patients with rectal cancer and to identify potential targets for reducing treatment variation. METHODS A retrospective cohort study was performed of patients with rectal cancer ages 66 to 80 years who received neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy and underwent radical resection in the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results-linked Medicare database (1998-2007). Multivariate logistic regression was used to assess chemotherapy use in relation to patient, tumor, and treatment response characteristics. RESULTS Among 1492 patients who met the study criteria, 61.5% received adjuvant therapy with 5-fluorouracil. Pathologic stage was the strongest determinant of whether patients received postoperative chemotherapy (48.3% of patients with stage I disease, 59.6% of patients with stage II disease, and 77.6% of patients with stage III disease). Increasing age and postoperative readmission also were associated significantly with a decreased rate of adjuvant therapy initiation. CONCLUSIONS Although standard treatment guidelines for locally advanced rectal cancer include postoperative chemotherapy for all patients after neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy and radical resection, greater than 1 in 3 patients failed to receive adjuvant therapy. Despite the absence of established evidence, treatment decisions appear to be influenced by the findings at surgical pathology. Cancer 2014;120:1162-1170. © 2014 American Cancer Society. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

BACKGROUND The current study was conducted to determine whether quantified pathologic response assessed as a percentage of residual tumor cells is predictive of recurrence-free survival (RFS) in patients with rectal cancer. METHODS The authors studied 251 patients with rectal adenocarcinoma who were treated with neoadjuvant chemoradiation and radical resection. Quantified pathologic response was defined as an estimated percentage of residual cancer cells in relation to the tumor bed: complete, no residual cancer cells; near-complete, ≤ 5% residual cancer cells; major, > 5%, and < 50% residual cancer cells; and minor, ≥ 50% residual cancer cells. The reproducibility of quantified pathologic response between 2 pathologists was assessed using tumors from 55 randomly selected patients who did not demonstrate a complete response. RESULTS Pathologic response was complete in 21% of patients, near-complete in 20% of patients, major in 37% of patients, and minor in 22% of patients. Nineteen percent of patients had ypT0N0 disease, 27% had ypT1-2N0 disease, 21% had ypT3-4N0 disease, and 33% had N+ disease. The 5-year RFS rates by category of quantified pathologic response were as follows: complete, 95%; near-complete, 88%; major, 69%; and minor, 61% ( P < .001). Major and minor response, high histologic grade, and perineural invasion were found to be significant predictors of decreased RFS on multivariate analysis. The 5-year RFS rates for patients with ypT3-4 or N+ disease were better for those with a near-complete response (94%) compared with those with a major (64%) or minor (61%) response ( P < .02). Moderate to substantial agreement was observed between the 2 pathologists (κ = 0.72). CONCLUSIONS Quantified pathologic response is a predictor of RFS in patients with rectal adenocarcinoma and stratifies patients with high pathologic stage disease. Cancer 2013;119:4231-4241. © 2013 American Cancer Society. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

BACKGROUND Weekly or daily cisplatin and 5-fluorouracil (5-FU)-based chemoradiation was evaluated for patients with locally advanced squamous cell carcinoma (SCC) of the anal canal treated at a single institution over a 20-year period. METHODS A retrospective, single-institution analysis was conducted of patients receiving concurrent 5-FU/cisplatin and radiotherapy for locally advanced SCC from 1989 to 2009. Endpoints included clinical complete response rate, local recurrence rate, colostomy-free survival, disease-free survival (DFS), overall survival, and treatment-related toxicity. RESULTS A total of 197 patients were evaluable. The majority had American Joint Committee on Cancer stage II (41%) or stage III (46%) disease; most were T2 (44%) or T3 (27%); bulky nodal disease (N2-N3) was noted in 24% of patients. Patients received weekly (20 mg/m2) or daily (4 mg/m2) cisplatin during radiotherapy. Median radiation dose was 55 Gy. Clinical complete response was observed in 185 patients (94%). After a median follow-up of 8.6 years, local recurrence rate was 11%. Sixteen patients (8%) developed distant metastases. The 5-year DFS was 81%, the 5-year overall survival was 86%, and the 5-year colostomy-free survival was 88%. By univariate analysis, N-stage was a poor prognostic indicator for 5-year DFS ( P = .02, 95% confidence interval = 1.17-2.01) and distant metastases ( P = .046, 95% confidence interval = 1.09-2.13). Increased T-stage correlated with the necessity for salvage surgery ( P = .01). CONCLUSIONS The combination of weekly/daily cisplatin and 5-FU-based chemotherapy with concurrent radiotherapy is an effective regimen, and our long-term results indicate that cisplatin is an alternative to mitomycin C and may be considered for the treatment of locally advanced SCC of the anal canal. Cancer 2013;119:3769-3775. © 2013 American Cancer Society. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

BACKGROUND: The objective of the current study was to examine the impact of adherence to guidelines on stage-specific survival outcomes in patients with stage III and high-risk stage II colon cancer. The National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN) has established working, expert consensus, and evidence-based guidelines for organ-specific cancer care, including care of patients with colon cancer. METHODS: Patients who were diagnosed with colon adenocarcinoma between 1998 and 2002 were selected from within the National Cancer Data Base. The cohort was limited to patients who received their first course of treatment at the reporting facility. Pathologic variables, including tumor depth, lymph node status, and evidence of metastatic disease, were used to restage patients, and the patients were divided into low-risk and high-risk categories on the basis of criteria defined by the NCCN. Relative survival rates were calculated for the entire cohort, stratified according to adherence versus nonadherence to NCCN treatment guidelines. RESULTS: In univariate analysis of treatment adherence patterns for both patient subgroups (high-risk stage II and stage III), several factors were associated with a higher rate of nonadherence in both groups, including older age ( P < .001); Medicaid, Medicare, or uninsured status versus private insurance ( P < .001); and subsequent treatment at a facility other than the facility at which the cancer was first diagnosed ( P < .001). In multivariate analysis, multiple factors were associated with differences in relative survival, although analyses that included the year of diagnosis did not demonstrate significant differences over time. CONCLUSIONS: The current study documented practice patterns in a heterogeneous population of patients with colon cancer and demonstrated a survival benefit for patients with stage III and high-risk stage II colon cancer who received treatment that adhered to NCCN guidelines. These data validate the current NCCN practice guidelines for colon cancer and support the concept of guideline-based metrics that can be compared across institutions to assess the quality of cancer care and to compare the quality of cancer care among institutions. Cancer 2013. © 2012 American Cancer Society. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

ABSTRACT Background Methods Results Conclusions The identification of tumor deposits (TD) currently plays a limited role in staging for colorectal cancer (CRC) aside from N1c lymph node designation. The objective of this study was to determine the prognostic impact, beyond American Joint Committee on Cancer N1c designation, of TDs among patients with primary CRC.Patients who had resected stage I–III primary CRC diagnosed between 2010 and 2019 were identified from the National Cancer Institute's Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results database. Cancer‐specific survival (CSS) stratified by TD status and lymph node (N) status was calculated using the Kaplan–Meier method and multivariable Cox proportional hazards regression analyses.In total, 147,783 patients with primary CRC were identified. TDs were present in 15,444 patients (10.5%). The presence of TDs was significantly associated with adverse tumor characteristics, including advanced pathologic stage, nodal status, and metastasis status. The presence of TDs was associated with worse CSS (hazard ratio [HR], 3.12; 95% confidence interval [CI], 3.02–3.22), as it was for each given N category (e.g., N2a and TD‐negative [HR, 2.50; 95% CI, 2.37–2.64] vs. N2a and TD‐positive [HR, 3.75; 95% CI, 3.49–4.03]). The presence of multiple TDs was also associated with decreased CSS for each given N category compared with a single TD (e.g. N2a with one TD [HR, 3.09; 95% CI, 2.65–3.61] vs. N2a with two or more TDs [HR, 4.32; 95% CI, 3.87–4.82]).TDs were identified as an independent predictor of a worse outcome in patients with CRC. The presence of TDs confers distinctly different CSS and provides important prognostic information among patients with CRC and warrants further investigation as a unique variable in future iterations of CRC staging. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Although the safety of combination chemotherapy without primary tumor resection (PTR) in patients with stage IV colon cancer has been established, questions remain regarding a potential survival benefit with PTR. The objective of this study was to compare mortality rates in patients who had colon cancer with unresectable metastases who did and did not undergo PTR.Methods: An observational cohort study was conducted among patients with unresectable metastatic colon cancer identified from the National Cancer Data Base (2003-2005). Multivariate Cox regression analyses with and without propensity score weighting (PSW) were performed to compare survival outcomes. Instrumental variable analysis, using the annual hospital-level PTR rate as the instrument, was used to account for treatment selection bias. To account for survivor treatment bias, in situations in which patients might die soon after diagnosis from different reasons, a landmark method was used.Results: In the total cohort, 8641 of 15,154 patients (57%) underwent PTR, and 73.8% of those procedures (4972 of 6735) were at landmark. PTR was associated with a significant reduction in mortality using Cox regression (hazard ratio [HR], 0.45; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.44-0.47) or PSW (HR, 0.46; 95% CI, 0. 44-0.49). However, instrumental variable analysis revealed a much smaller effect (relative mortality rate, 0.91; 95% CI, 0.87-0.96). Although a smaller benefit was observed with the landmark method using Cox regression (HR, 0.6; 95% CI, 0.55-0.64) and PSW (HR, 0.59; 95% CI, 0.54-0.64), instrumental variable analysis revealed no survival benefit (relative mortality rate, 0.97; 95% CI, 0.87-1.06).Conclusions: Among patients with unresectable metastatic colon cancer, after adjustment for confounder effects, PTR was not associated with improved survival compared with systemic chemotherapy; therefore, routine noncurative PTR is not recommended. Cancer 2017;123:1124-1133. © 2016 American Cancer Society. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]