阑尾混合性腺内分泌癌:右半结肠切除术比阑尾切除术有生存优势吗?

IF 3.5 2区 医学 Q2 ONCOLOGY Ejso Pub Date : 2024-10-30 DOI:10.1016/j.ejso.2024.109356
Yulong Hou, Zhenhua Tan
{"title":"阑尾混合性腺内分泌癌:右半结肠切除术比阑尾切除术有生存优势吗?","authors":"Yulong Hou,&nbsp;Zhenhua Tan","doi":"10.1016/j.ejso.2024.109356","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Background</h3><div>the surgical treatment and prognostic characteristics of mixed adenoneuroendocrine carcinomas (MANEC) of the appendix are not yet available. In this study, we sought to figure out the choice of surgical approach (right hemicolectomy versus appendectomy), and explore the effect of chemotherapy on appendiceal MANEC.</div></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><div>patients with appendiceal MANEC from the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results database (2000–2020) were stratified by gender, race, age group, tumor grade, and TNM stage. Logistic regression and Kaplan-Meier analyses relating TNM stage, grade, and receipt of right hemicolectomy (abbreviated as colectomy) to overall and cancer-specific survival were performed.</div></div><div><h3>Results</h3><div>455 patients with appendiceal MANEC were included, of whom 146(32 %) underwent appendectomy and 309(68 %) underwent colectomy. Patients who underwent colectomy had better cancer-specific survival (HR = 0.68, 95%CI (0.47–0.98), P = 0.041) and overall survival (HR = 0.67, 95%CI (0.48–0.93), P = 0.015) than those who underwent appendectomy alone. However, colectomy did not confer any survival advantage over appendectomy in subgroup analyses, including low-grade or high-grade tumors, T1-2N0M0 group, T3-4N0M0 group, node-positive non-metastatic tumors, and metastatic tumors. On multivariate analysis, lack of chemotherapy and high-stage (node-positive or metastatic) were associated with poorer overall survival; high-grade (grade 3–4) and high-stage were primary predictors of cancer-specific mortality. Furthermore, there was no significant association between colectomy and better survival, either overall survival or cancer specific survival, when accounting for tumor stage and grade.</div></div><div><h3>Conclusions</h3><div>Our study found that colectomy did not provide a survival benefit compared to appendectomy alone. Moreover, tumor stage and grade were independent determinants of cancer specific survival; chemotherapy and tumor stage were independent determinants of overall survival.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":11522,"journal":{"name":"Ejso","volume":"51 1","pages":"Article 109356"},"PeriodicalIF":3.5000,"publicationDate":"2024-10-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Mixed adenoneuroendocrine carcinomas of the appendix: Is there a survival advantage to right hemicolectomy over appendectomy?\",\"authors\":\"Yulong Hou,&nbsp;Zhenhua Tan\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.ejso.2024.109356\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><h3>Background</h3><div>the surgical treatment and prognostic characteristics of mixed adenoneuroendocrine carcinomas (MANEC) of the appendix are not yet available. In this study, we sought to figure out the choice of surgical approach (right hemicolectomy versus appendectomy), and explore the effect of chemotherapy on appendiceal MANEC.</div></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><div>patients with appendiceal MANEC from the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results database (2000–2020) were stratified by gender, race, age group, tumor grade, and TNM stage. Logistic regression and Kaplan-Meier analyses relating TNM stage, grade, and receipt of right hemicolectomy (abbreviated as colectomy) to overall and cancer-specific survival were performed.</div></div><div><h3>Results</h3><div>455 patients with appendiceal MANEC were included, of whom 146(32 %) underwent appendectomy and 309(68 %) underwent colectomy. Patients who underwent colectomy had better cancer-specific survival (HR = 0.68, 95%CI (0.47–0.98), P = 0.041) and overall survival (HR = 0.67, 95%CI (0.48–0.93), P = 0.015) than those who underwent appendectomy alone. However, colectomy did not confer any survival advantage over appendectomy in subgroup analyses, including low-grade or high-grade tumors, T1-2N0M0 group, T3-4N0M0 group, node-positive non-metastatic tumors, and metastatic tumors. On multivariate analysis, lack of chemotherapy and high-stage (node-positive or metastatic) were associated with poorer overall survival; high-grade (grade 3–4) and high-stage were primary predictors of cancer-specific mortality. Furthermore, there was no significant association between colectomy and better survival, either overall survival or cancer specific survival, when accounting for tumor stage and grade.</div></div><div><h3>Conclusions</h3><div>Our study found that colectomy did not provide a survival benefit compared to appendectomy alone. Moreover, tumor stage and grade were independent determinants of cancer specific survival; chemotherapy and tumor stage were independent determinants of overall survival.</div></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":11522,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Ejso\",\"volume\":\"51 1\",\"pages\":\"Article 109356\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.5000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-10-30\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Ejso\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0748798324014240\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"ONCOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Ejso","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0748798324014240","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"ONCOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景:阑尾混合性腺内分泌癌(MANEC)的手术治疗和预后特征尚不明确。在这项研究中,我们试图找出手术方法的选择(右半结肠切除术与阑尾切除术),并探讨化疗对阑尾MANEC的影响。方法:将监测、流行病学和最终结果数据库(2000-2020年)中的阑尾MANEC患者按性别、种族、年龄组、肿瘤分级和TNM分期进行分层。对TNM分期、分级和接受右半结肠切除术(简称结肠切除术)与总生存率和癌症特异性生存率进行了逻辑回归和卡普兰-梅耶分析:共纳入455名阑尾MANEC患者,其中146人(32%)接受了阑尾切除术,309人(68%)接受了结肠切除术。与单独接受阑尾切除术的患者相比,接受结肠切除术的患者癌症特异性生存率(HR = 0.68,95%CI (0.47-0.98),P = 0.041)和总生存率(HR = 0.67,95%CI (0.48-0.93),P = 0.015)更高。然而,在亚组分析中,包括低级别或高级别肿瘤、T1-2N0M0组、T3-4N0M0组、结节阳性非转移性肿瘤和转移性肿瘤,结肠切除术并不比阑尾切除术带来任何生存优势。在多变量分析中,缺乏化疗和高分期(结节阳性或转移性)与较差的总生存率有关;高级别(3-4级)和高分期是癌症特异性死亡率的主要预测因素。此外,在考虑肿瘤分期和分级的情况下,结肠切除术与总生存率或癌症特异性生存率之间没有明显的关联:我们的研究发现,与单纯阑尾切除术相比,结肠切除术并不能提高生存率。此外,肿瘤分期和分级是癌症特异性生存率的独立决定因素;化疗和肿瘤分期是总生存率的独立决定因素。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Mixed adenoneuroendocrine carcinomas of the appendix: Is there a survival advantage to right hemicolectomy over appendectomy?

Background

the surgical treatment and prognostic characteristics of mixed adenoneuroendocrine carcinomas (MANEC) of the appendix are not yet available. In this study, we sought to figure out the choice of surgical approach (right hemicolectomy versus appendectomy), and explore the effect of chemotherapy on appendiceal MANEC.

Methods

patients with appendiceal MANEC from the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results database (2000–2020) were stratified by gender, race, age group, tumor grade, and TNM stage. Logistic regression and Kaplan-Meier analyses relating TNM stage, grade, and receipt of right hemicolectomy (abbreviated as colectomy) to overall and cancer-specific survival were performed.

Results

455 patients with appendiceal MANEC were included, of whom 146(32 %) underwent appendectomy and 309(68 %) underwent colectomy. Patients who underwent colectomy had better cancer-specific survival (HR = 0.68, 95%CI (0.47–0.98), P = 0.041) and overall survival (HR = 0.67, 95%CI (0.48–0.93), P = 0.015) than those who underwent appendectomy alone. However, colectomy did not confer any survival advantage over appendectomy in subgroup analyses, including low-grade or high-grade tumors, T1-2N0M0 group, T3-4N0M0 group, node-positive non-metastatic tumors, and metastatic tumors. On multivariate analysis, lack of chemotherapy and high-stage (node-positive or metastatic) were associated with poorer overall survival; high-grade (grade 3–4) and high-stage were primary predictors of cancer-specific mortality. Furthermore, there was no significant association between colectomy and better survival, either overall survival or cancer specific survival, when accounting for tumor stage and grade.

Conclusions

Our study found that colectomy did not provide a survival benefit compared to appendectomy alone. Moreover, tumor stage and grade were independent determinants of cancer specific survival; chemotherapy and tumor stage were independent determinants of overall survival.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Ejso
Ejso 医学-外科
CiteScore
6.40
自引率
2.60%
发文量
1148
审稿时长
41 days
期刊介绍: JSO - European Journal of Surgical Oncology ("the Journal of Cancer Surgery") is the Official Journal of the European Society of Surgical Oncology and BASO ~ the Association for Cancer Surgery. The EJSO aims to advance surgical oncology research and practice through the publication of original research articles, review articles, editorials, debates and correspondence.
期刊最新文献
Response prediction for neoadjuvant treatment in locally advanced rectal cancer patients-improvement in decision-making: A systematic review. Short- and long-term outcomes following perioperative ERAS management in patients undergoing minimally invasive radical gastrectomy after neoadjuvant chemotherapy: A single-center retrospective propensity score matching study. The influence of treatment intervals on prognosis in young breast cancer patients: Insights from the French National cohort The efficacy of immediate lymphatic reconstruction after axillary lymph node dissection – A meta-analysis Establishment a nomogram model for preoperative prediction of the risk of cholangiocarcinoma with microvascular invasion
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1