Use of surgical procedures and adjuvant therapy in rectal cancer treatment: a population-based study
- PMID: 11685027
- PMCID: PMC1422088
- DOI: 10.1097/00000658-200111000-00009
Use of surgical procedures and adjuvant therapy in rectal cancer treatment: a population-based study
Abstract
Objective: To assess the use of surgical procedures by tumor location and compliance with adjuvant therapy recommendations by tumor stage. The study was conducted in a population-based setting to identify target patient groups for improved care.
Summary background data: Rectal cancer therapy potentially involves similar patients receiving different treatments. Low anterior resection (LAR), sparing the anal sphincter, and abdominoperineal resection (APR), ablating the anal sphincter, offer equivalent local recurrence and survival rates but may differ in quality of life measurements. The 1990 NIH Consensus Conference recommended that patients with stage II and III rectal cancer receive radiation and chemotherapy in conjunction with surgical resection, but this is not uniformly applied. To interpret the use of these therapies, information on tumor location in the rectum, which is rarely known in population-based studies, is necessary. Patient, hospital, or surgeon characteristics may influence which procedure is performed and whether adjuvant therapy is given.
Methods: Information about primary, invasive rectal adenocarcinomas diagnosed between 1994 to 1996 in 13 California counties was obtained from the regional cancer registry. Tumor location, determined from abstracted medical text, was divided into the upper, middle, and lower rectum. Hospitals were characterized by teaching status, number of beds, and cancer center designation. Surgeons were categorized as general or colorectal surgeons. Factors associated with a higher use of LAR versus APR in patients with middle and lower rectum tumors and factors associated with a higher use of NIH-recommended therapy in patients with stage II and III disease were separately analyzed.
Results: Among 637 eligible patients, APR was used in 22% of those with middle rectum tumors and 55% of those with lower rectum tumors. Factors significantly associated with a higher use of LAR included female gender, middle rectum location, and treatment in a major teaching hospital versus a nonteaching hospital. Recommended therapy was received by 44% of patients with stage II disease and 60% of those with stage III disease. Factors significantly associated with higher compliance with NIH recommendations included age younger than 60 versus older than 75, age 60 to 75 years versus older than 75, tumor location in the middle or lower rectum versus the upper rectum, stage III disease, and treatment at a teaching hospital versus a nonteaching hospital.
Conclusions: Patients with similar rectal cancers receive different treatments independent of tumor stage or location. This may result in more APRs performed for middle and lower rectum tumors than necessary and less adequate treatment for stage II and III tumors than recommended.
Similar articles
-
Comparison of abdominoperineal resection and low anterior resection in lower and middle rectal cancer.J Egypt Natl Canc Inst. 2013 Sep;25(3):151-60. doi: 10.1016/j.jnci.2013.06.001. Epub 2013 Jul 17. J Egypt Natl Canc Inst. 2013. PMID: 23932752
-
Surgical treatment of adenocarcinoma of the rectum.Ann Surg. 1998 Jun;227(6):800-11. doi: 10.1097/00000658-199806000-00003. Ann Surg. 1998. PMID: 9637543 Free PMC article.
-
Surgeon-related factors and outcome in rectal cancer.Ann Surg. 1998 Feb;227(2):157-67. doi: 10.1097/00000658-199802000-00001. Ann Surg. 1998. PMID: 9488510 Free PMC article.
-
Using a Lymph Node Count Metric to Identify Underperforming Hospitals After Rectal Cancer Surgery.J Surg Res. 2019 Apr;236:216-223. doi: 10.1016/j.jss.2018.11.040. Epub 2018 Dec 20. J Surg Res. 2019. PMID: 30694758 Review.
-
[Quality standards in rectal cancer surgery].Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2005 Aug-Sep;28(7):417-25. doi: 10.1157/13077763. Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2005. PMID: 16137477 Review. Spanish.
Cited by
-
Magnetic resonance imaging based rectal cancer classification: landmarks and technical standardization.World J Gastroenterol. 2015 Jan 14;21(2):423-31. doi: 10.3748/wjg.v21.i2.423. World J Gastroenterol. 2015. PMID: 25593457 Free PMC article. Review.
-
Sex-specific aspects of tumor therapy.Radiat Environ Biophys. 2009 Apr;48(2):115-24. doi: 10.1007/s00411-009-0216-1. Epub 2009 Feb 26. Radiat Environ Biophys. 2009. PMID: 19242712 Review.
-
Proctocolectomy for colorectal cancer--is the ileal pouch anal anastomosis a safe alternative to permanent ileostomy?Int J Colorectal Dis. 2014 Dec;29(12):1485-91. doi: 10.1007/s00384-014-2027-3. Epub 2014 Oct 17. Int J Colorectal Dis. 2014. PMID: 25319934
-
Radiation Oncologists' Approach to Rectosigmoid Junction Tumors in Turkey: The Turkish Society for Radiation Oncology Gastrointestinal Group Survey Study (TROD 02-007).Turk J Gastroenterol. 2023 Sep;34(9):911-917. doi: 10.5152/tjg.2023.22597. Turk J Gastroenterol. 2023. PMID: 37458391 Free PMC article.
-
Multilevel Associations Between Patient- and Hospital-Level Factors and In-Hospital Mortality Among Hospitalized Patients With Head and Neck Cancer.JAMA Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg. 2020 May 1;146(5):444-454. doi: 10.1001/jamaoto.2020.0132. JAMA Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg. 2020. PMID: 32191271 Free PMC article.
References
-
- National Cancer Institute Cancer Statistics. Cancer Cancer J Clin 1998; 48:6–29.
-
- Kodner IJ, Fry RD, Fleshman JW, et al, eds. Colon, rectum, and anus, 6th ed. Principles of Surgery, Vol. 2. New York: McGraw-Hill; 1994:1191–1306.
-
- Stearns MJ. The choice among anterior resection, the pull-through, and abdominoperineal resection of the rectum. Cancer 1974; 34: 969–971. - PubMed
-
- Williams NS, Durdey P, Johnston D. The outcome following sphincter-saving resection and abdominoperineal resection for low rectal cancer. Br J Surg 1985; 72: 595–598. - PubMed
Publication types
MeSH terms
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources
Miscellaneous