Current treatment strategies and patterns of recurrence in locally advanced colon cancer.
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
e15171 Background: Locally advanced colon cancer (LACC) is a frequent presentation and has a high rate of recurrence. The aim of this study was to evaluate current population-based strategies in LACC patients, and to analyze patterns of recurrence. Methods: We conducted a retrospective review of all patients treated at a regional cancer agency with a diagnosis of LACC between 2005 and 2015 treated with curative intent resection. Inclusion criteria were adults with T4 colon cancer, 16 cm above the anal verge, with no evidence of distant metastases. Descriptive statistics were used to define the study population. Kaplan-Meier and Cox-proportional hazards modeling were used for survival analysis. Results: 1394 patients with LACC were reviewed. Median age was 69 [IQR 60-77] and 49.3% were female. Primary tumor location was right-sided in 57.1% of cases. Most tumors were T4a (69.4%) and 39.4% were node positive. A total of 35.4% had urgent/emergent surgery, 46.4% were at least partially obstructed, 22.0% were perforated and 1.9% had a diverting ostomy as an initial operation. En-bloc multi-visceral resection occurred in 23.5% of cases. Positive margins were present in 14.3%. Only 1.6% had neoadjuvant chemotherapy and 0.8% had neoadjuvant chemoradiation. Adjuvant chemotherapy was delivered in 59.8% and adjuvant chemoradiation in 2.8%. Median follow up was 37 months. During follow up 681 (48.9%) patients died and 584 (41.9%) patients developed recurrence. In the entire cohort, rates of recurrences were local-regional (14.7%) and distant metastatic (35.1%). Overall survival for the entire cohort was 63 months [95% CI 55.7-70.3] and recurrence-free survival was 61 months [95% CI 38.8-83.2]. Multivariate analysis identified age (HR 1.03, 95% CI [1.02-1.05] p < 0.001), node negative status (HR 0.62, 95% CI [0.45-0.84] p = 0.002) and positive margin (HR 1.79, 95% CI [1.24-2.57] p = 0.002) as predictive of overall survival after adjusting for confounding factors. Predictive factors for recurrence-free survival were node negative status (HR 0.55, 95% CI [0.39-0.77] p < 0.001) and positive margin (HR 1.51, 95% CI [1.02-2.23] p = 0.038). Conclusions: Recurrence after curative intent treatment for LACC is common. Recurrence and survival patterns are significantly influenced by tumor nodal status and margin positivity.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».