Background Emergency treatment of perforated colon cancer has traditionally been linked with dismal outcomes due to the double jeopardy of a septic insult combined with a malignant disease, leaving unclear how aggressive emergency surgical procedures should be. We aimed to define short-and long-term outcomes in the current era of critical care support and oncologic advances, to provide updated data for decision making. Study Design Patients with perforations associated with a primary colon cancer were identified. Peri-operative and longterm survival were compared among free (FP; n=41) and contained perforations (CP; n=45) and to age-, stage-, and resection status case-matched, non-perforated (NP; n=85), controls. Results Tumors were completely resected in 67% of FP but fewer lymph nodes were harvested (median, 11 vs. 11 and 16 in CP and NP; p=0.21 and p<0.001). Peri-operative mortality was highest in FP: 19% vs. 0% and 5% in CP and NP (p=0.038), respectively. After adjusting for peri-operative mortality, 5-year overall survival was comparable: 55%, 59%, and 54% for FP, CP, and NP, respectively. Advanced age, higher ASA class, presence of residual disease, and advanced stage, but not perforation, were independent predictors of poorer long-term overall survival. Conclusions Patients with malignant colonic perforation face high risk of peri-operative death, making septic source control the priority in the acute setting. Pursuit of an oncologically oriented resection and long-term cancer-directed treatments, however, may lead to improved long-term outcomes.
We noticed an increased number of patients diagnosed with colorectal cancer (CRC) in their 20s, 30s, and 40s. We analyzed all CRC patients aged < 50 at our institutions from 1972 to 2017 and found increasing trends as well as a propensity for more distal location-findings that are hypothesis generating, given the embryologic origin of these tumors. This finding may have implications for screening guidelines. Background: Recent trends have identified increasing number of young individuals with rectal and colon cancers. These individuals, who are younger than 50 years old, in most instances would not meet screening guidelines. We aimed to report the characteristics and trend of the rising proportion of young individuals being diagnosed with rectal and colon cancers at our institutions. Patients and Methods: This study included 3381 rectal and colon cancer patients from the Mayo Clinic cancer registry from 1972 to 2017 who were diagnosed with rectal or colon cancer and who were < 50 years old. Patient and cancer characteristics are described. The Cochran-Armitage trend test was used to see if the change in percentage diagnosed at age < 50 years had a significant trend over the years. A linear regression model was fit to estimate the percentage change per year when the trend was approximately linear. Results: The percentage of patients diagnosed with rectal or colon cancer in different age categories over the years showed a rising trend for individuals aged < 50. Most of these tumors were distal (rectum, left-sided colon, and rightsided colon were 49.8%, 28.8%, and 21.4%, respectively). This was more so for patients < 50 diagnosed with rectal cancer, which showed a linear increase at a rate of 0.26% per year (P < .001). Conclusion: Our study affirms the rising proportion of colorectal cancers found in young individuals, with a linear ongoing rise of rectal cancers in particular. This may have implications for the current screening recommendations for colorectal cancers, which are already being revised.
Background: The association between body mass index (BMI) and colorectal cancer is unique. There are several patient- and tumor-related factors that affect this and associations are not entirely clear. The primary aim of this study is to examine the association between BMI and survival after colorectal cancer diagnosis.Methods: Among 26,908 Mayo Clinic patients diagnosed with colorectal cancer between 1972 and 2017, 3,799 patients had information on BMI within 6 months prior to cancer diagnosis. Multivariable Cox regression models were used to assess the differences in overall survival between BMI groups in each cancer stage, controlling for age, gender, year of diagnosis, and cancer location. The impact of change of BMI at 30, 60, and 90 days on survival afterwards were also analyzed.Results: Among 3,799 patients included in the study, there were 29% normal weight, 2% underweight, 36% overweight, and 33% obese patients. With all stages combined together, the overall 5-years survival rates for underweight, normal weight, overweight, and obese patients were 33, 56, 60, and 65%, respectively (p < 0.001). The results show that, the difference in overall survival was not statistically significant when underweight, overweight, and obese patients were compared to normal weight patients in stage 1 and stage 2, although there was a trend that overweight patients had better survival than normal weight group in stage 2 cancer patients (HR = 0.8, p = 0.086). In stage 3 and 4 patients combined, underweight group demonstrated a significant disadvantage (HR = 1.96, p = 0.007) for overall survival compared to the normal weight group. Additionally, post-diagnosis BMI drop more than 10% from either a previous time (HR = 1.88, p = 0.002) or pre-diagnosis time (HR = 1.61, p < 0.001) was associated with worse overall survival after adjusting for baseline variables.Conclusions: BMI is an important consideration in patients with colorectal cancer. Outcomes are stage-dependent where in some situations obesity maybe an advantage. More importantly, being underweight is a significant negative predictor of outcome. The impact of drop in BMI or weight, on survival of CRC patients, needs to be studied further since this is potentially an actionable variable and a dynamic biomarker that may help improve outcome in these patients.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
customersupport@researchsolutions.com
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.