Sanne J K F Pluimers, Pieter H A Wisse, Monique E van Leerdam, Evelien Dekker, Iris van Lansdorp-Vogelaar, Pieter J Tanis, Marloes A G Elferink, Caroline M den Hoed, Manon C W Spaander
{"title":"筛查与非筛查发现的结直肠癌患者的复发风险。","authors":"Sanne J K F Pluimers, Pieter H A Wisse, Monique E van Leerdam, Evelien Dekker, Iris van Lansdorp-Vogelaar, Pieter J Tanis, Marloes A G Elferink, Caroline M den Hoed, Manon C W Spaander","doi":"10.1016/j.cgh.2024.08.033","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background and aims: </strong>Patients with screen-detected colorectal cancer (CRC) have a better stage-specific overall survival than non-screen-detected CRC. Currently, it is unknown if recurrence rates differ between screen-detected and non-screen-detected CRCs, and whether this could explain the observed difference in overall survival. Therefore, we aimed to assess the disease-free survival (DFS) rates in screen-detected and non-screen-detected CRCs and if recurrence affects overall survival.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Dutch CRC (stage I-III) patients, diagnosed by screening or not in the first 6 months of 2015, were included from the Netherlands Cancer Registry. DFS and survival data were retrieved and analyzed by Kaplan-Meier method. The association between mode of detection and recurrence and overall survival was evaluated with a Cox regression model.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A total of 3725 CRC patients were included, 2073 (55.7%) non-screen detected and 1652 (44.3%) screen detected. Three-year DFS was significantly higher in screen-detected CRC compared with non-screen-detected CRC (87.8% vs 77.2%; P < .001). Stage-specific DFS rates for screen-detected vs non-screen-detected CRC were 94.7% vs 92.3% for stage I (P = .45), 84.3% vs 81.4% for stage II (P = .17), and 77.9% vs 66.7% for stage III (P < .001), respectively. Detection by screening was independently associated with a lower risk of recurrence (hazard ratio, 0.67; 95% confidence interval, 0.55-0.81; P < .001) when adjusted for age, sex, tumor location, stage and treatment. Recurrence independently predicted overall survival (hazard ratio, 15.90; 95% confidence interval, 13.28-19.04; P < .001).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>DFS was significantly better in screen-detected compared with non-screen-detected CRCs independent of age, sex, tumor location, stage and treatment, and was associated with an overall survival benefit.</p>","PeriodicalId":10347,"journal":{"name":"Clinical Gastroenterology and Hepatology","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":11.6000,"publicationDate":"2024-09-24","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Risk of Recurrence in Screen-Detected vs Non-Screen-Detected Colorectal Cancer Patients.\",\"authors\":\"Sanne J K F Pluimers, Pieter H A Wisse, Monique E van Leerdam, Evelien Dekker, Iris van Lansdorp-Vogelaar, Pieter J Tanis, Marloes A G Elferink, Caroline M den Hoed, Manon C W Spaander\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.cgh.2024.08.033\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background and aims: </strong>Patients with screen-detected colorectal cancer (CRC) have a better stage-specific overall survival than non-screen-detected CRC. Currently, it is unknown if recurrence rates differ between screen-detected and non-screen-detected CRCs, and whether this could explain the observed difference in overall survival. Therefore, we aimed to assess the disease-free survival (DFS) rates in screen-detected and non-screen-detected CRCs and if recurrence affects overall survival.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Dutch CRC (stage I-III) patients, diagnosed by screening or not in the first 6 months of 2015, were included from the Netherlands Cancer Registry. DFS and survival data were retrieved and analyzed by Kaplan-Meier method. The association between mode of detection and recurrence and overall survival was evaluated with a Cox regression model.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A total of 3725 CRC patients were included, 2073 (55.7%) non-screen detected and 1652 (44.3%) screen detected. Three-year DFS was significantly higher in screen-detected CRC compared with non-screen-detected CRC (87.8% vs 77.2%; P < .001). Stage-specific DFS rates for screen-detected vs non-screen-detected CRC were 94.7% vs 92.3% for stage I (P = .45), 84.3% vs 81.4% for stage II (P = .17), and 77.9% vs 66.7% for stage III (P < .001), respectively. Detection by screening was independently associated with a lower risk of recurrence (hazard ratio, 0.67; 95% confidence interval, 0.55-0.81; P < .001) when adjusted for age, sex, tumor location, stage and treatment. Recurrence independently predicted overall survival (hazard ratio, 15.90; 95% confidence interval, 13.28-19.04; P < .001).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>DFS was significantly better in screen-detected compared with non-screen-detected CRCs independent of age, sex, tumor location, stage and treatment, and was associated with an overall survival benefit.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":10347,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Clinical Gastroenterology and Hepatology\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":11.6000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-09-24\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Clinical Gastroenterology and Hepatology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cgh.2024.08.033\",\"RegionNum\":1,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"GASTROENTEROLOGY & HEPATOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Clinical Gastroenterology and Hepatology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cgh.2024.08.033","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"GASTROENTEROLOGY & HEPATOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
Risk of Recurrence in Screen-Detected vs Non-Screen-Detected Colorectal Cancer Patients.
Background and aims: Patients with screen-detected colorectal cancer (CRC) have a better stage-specific overall survival than non-screen-detected CRC. Currently, it is unknown if recurrence rates differ between screen-detected and non-screen-detected CRCs, and whether this could explain the observed difference in overall survival. Therefore, we aimed to assess the disease-free survival (DFS) rates in screen-detected and non-screen-detected CRCs and if recurrence affects overall survival.
Methods: Dutch CRC (stage I-III) patients, diagnosed by screening or not in the first 6 months of 2015, were included from the Netherlands Cancer Registry. DFS and survival data were retrieved and analyzed by Kaplan-Meier method. The association between mode of detection and recurrence and overall survival was evaluated with a Cox regression model.
Results: A total of 3725 CRC patients were included, 2073 (55.7%) non-screen detected and 1652 (44.3%) screen detected. Three-year DFS was significantly higher in screen-detected CRC compared with non-screen-detected CRC (87.8% vs 77.2%; P < .001). Stage-specific DFS rates for screen-detected vs non-screen-detected CRC were 94.7% vs 92.3% for stage I (P = .45), 84.3% vs 81.4% for stage II (P = .17), and 77.9% vs 66.7% for stage III (P < .001), respectively. Detection by screening was independently associated with a lower risk of recurrence (hazard ratio, 0.67; 95% confidence interval, 0.55-0.81; P < .001) when adjusted for age, sex, tumor location, stage and treatment. Recurrence independently predicted overall survival (hazard ratio, 15.90; 95% confidence interval, 13.28-19.04; P < .001).
Conclusion: DFS was significantly better in screen-detected compared with non-screen-detected CRCs independent of age, sex, tumor location, stage and treatment, and was associated with an overall survival benefit.
期刊介绍:
Clinical Gastroenterology and Hepatology (CGH) is dedicated to offering readers a comprehensive exploration of themes in clinical gastroenterology and hepatology. Encompassing diagnostic, endoscopic, interventional, and therapeutic advances, the journal covers areas such as cancer, inflammatory diseases, functional gastrointestinal disorders, nutrition, absorption, and secretion.
As a peer-reviewed publication, CGH features original articles and scholarly reviews, ensuring immediate relevance to the practice of gastroenterology and hepatology. Beyond peer-reviewed content, the journal includes invited key reviews and articles on endoscopy/practice-based technology, health-care policy, and practice management. Multimedia elements, including images, video abstracts, and podcasts, enhance the reader's experience. CGH remains actively engaged with its audience through updates and commentary shared via platforms such as Facebook and Twitter.