Resection of colorectal cancer (CRC) metastases in routine practice.
599 Background: The optimal management of metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) involves a multimodality approach. Complete resection of limited metastatic disease is a critical, potentially curative intervention for a minority of patients (pts). Data on resection rates and outcomes in routine clinical practice are limited. Methods: Analysis of pts prospectively entered onto the TRACC (Treatment of Recurrent and Advanced Colorectal Cancer) database, a multisite Australian mCRC registry. Data collection commenced in July 2009 and is ongoing at 14 centres. Treatment intent was recorded at initial pt review as curative, potentially curative or palliative. Results: At median follow-up of 20.9 months, 213 (21%) of 1,012 pts have undergone metastasectomy, including 179 (84%) R0 resections. Liver (55.4%) and lung (20.2%) were the commonest resected disease sites. For 26 (12.2%) pts the initial treatment intent had been palliative. Pts who had metastases resected were younger (median age 63 vs. 70 years, p<0.0001), of better performance status (PS0-1: 97.7 vs. 75.5%, p<0.0001), had fewer comorbidities (Charlson Index ≤3: 75.1 vs. 55.9%, p<0.0001) and fewer sites of disease (single site: 79.8% vs. 52.5%, p<0.0001). A significantly higher proportion of pts treated in private than public hospitals underwent resections: 143/548 (26.1%) vs. 70/459 (15.3%), p<0.0001. At initial presentation, more private pts had PS0-1 (82.8% vs. 77.8%, p=0.0459) and single disease site (61.3% vs. 54.5%, p=0.0291) than public pts, but the median age of private pts was higher (70 vs. 67 years, p=0.041). Overall survival was equivalent for resected pts in both groups (median not reached, HR 0.96, 95% CI 0.45-2.06, p=0.9189). Conclusions: A substantial proportion of mCRC pts in routine practice undergo resection of distant metastases, including some pts initially considered incurable. Significant variation between sites has been noted, which may relate to differences in pt population and/or a more aggressive treatment approach. Multivariate analyses and review of individual centre data are planned to explore reasons for potential underutilization of this critical intervention.