scholarly journals Inoperable de novo metastatic colorectal cancer with primary tumour in situ: Evaluating discordant responses to upfront systemic therapy of the primary tumours and metastatic sites and complications arising from primary tumours (experiences from an Irish Cancer Centre)

2021 ◽  
Vol 16 (2) ◽  
Author(s):  
Ruba Hamed ◽  
Sam Marks ◽  
Helen Mcelligott ◽  
Roshni Kalachand ◽  
Hawa Ibrahim ◽  
...  
2020 ◽  
Vol 16 (5) ◽  
pp. e425-e432 ◽  
Author(s):  
Todd A. Yezefski ◽  
Dan Le ◽  
Leo Chen ◽  
Caroline H. Speers ◽  
Shasank Chennupati ◽  
...  

PURPOSE: Few studies have directly compared health care utilization, costs, and outcomes between patients treated in the US multipayer health system and Canada’s single-payer system. Using cancer registry and claims data, we assessed treatment types, costs, and survival for patients with metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) in Western Washington State (WW) and British Columbia (BC). MATERIALS AND METHODS: Patients age ≥ 18 years diagnosed with mCRC in 2010 and later were identified from the BC Cancer database and a regional database linking WW SEER to claims from Medicare and two large commercial insurers. Demographics, treatment characteristics, costs of systemic therapy, and survival data were obtained from these databases and compared between the two regions. RESULTS: A total of 1,592 patients from BC and 901 from WW were included in the study. Median age was similar (BC, 66 years; WW, 63 years), but patients in BC were more likely to be male (57.1% v 51.2%; P ≤ .01) and to have de novo metastatic disease (61.0% v 38.3%; P ≤ .01). The use of radiation therapy was similar between regions (BC, 31.2%; WW, 33.9%; P = .18), but primary tumor resection was more common in BC (74.1% v 66.3%; P ≤ .01) as was hepatic metastasectomy (12.4% v 2.3%; P ≤ .01). Similar percentages of patients received systemic therapy (BC, 68.8%; WW, 67.1%; P = .40), but costs were significantly higher for first-line systemic therapy in WW ($6,226 v $15,792 per patient per month; P ≤ .01). Median overall survival was similar (BC, 16.9 months; WW, 18 months). CONCLUSION: Cost of systemic therapy for mCRC was significantly higher for patients in WW than in BC, but this did not translate to a difference in overall survival.


2009 ◽  
Vol 27 (15_suppl) ◽  
pp. e17559-e17559
Author(s):  
M. D. Seal ◽  
G. R. Pond ◽  
T. Wilkieson ◽  
S. J. Hotte

e17559 Background: There is little data on whether geographic distance from patient residence to a treatment facility is a predictor of systemic therapy utilization or clinical trial (CT) enrollment. Therefore a retrospective chart review was undertaken to investigate this variable. Methods: Consecutive patients with metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) assessed by a medical oncologist at the Juravinski Cancer Centre (JCC), Ontario during 2006 were selected. Patients with pathology other than adenocarcinoma and those with complete surgical resection of metastases were excluded. Distance and time to JCC were calculated using online mapping software. The study received full ethics approval. Results: 276 patients were included with full data available on 169 patients. Median travel time and distance to JCC were 23.0 minutes (min) and 19.2 kilometers (km), respectively. The maximum travel time was 120 min and 87% of patients lived within 60 min of JCC. Distance and time were highly correlated (p<0.0001). Overall, 43% of patients had discussed a CT with their oncologist and 20% enrolled in a CT. Patients living >50 km from JCC were less likely to discuss a CT (38%) or participate in a CT (15%) than patients who lived 25–50 km (39% and 19%) or <25 km (47% and 23%) from JCC. These trends did not attain statistical significance (odds ratio [OR] = 0.88, 95% CI = 0.66–1.17, p = 0.39 for CT discussion, OR = 0.76, 95% CI = 0.54–1.08, p = 0.13 for CT enrollment). Distance was not a statistically significant (p = 0.42) predictor of number of treatment regimens, however, 44% of patients <25 km from JCC received 3 or more lines of treatment compared with 33% of patients ≥25 km away. No association with survival was observed. Conclusions: Patients with mCRC living ≥25 km from JCC received fewer systemic regimens and were less likely to discuss or enter a CT. These trends were not statistically significant. Data collection is ongoing to increase the power of this study. No significant financial relationships to disclose.


2017 ◽  
Vol 35 (4_suppl) ◽  
pp. 738-738
Author(s):  
Rachel Lee Delahunty ◽  
Margaret Lee ◽  
Hui-Li Wong ◽  
Joseph James McKendrick ◽  
Belinda Lee ◽  
...  

738 Background: In the treatment of metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC), exposure to all three active cytotoxic agents; 5-fluorouracil/capecitabine (FP), irinotecan (Ir) and oxaliplatin (Ox), and the biologic agents, bevacizumab (Bev) and cetuximab and panitumumab (EGFR-I) improves outcomes. The current uptake of systemic agents for mCRC in a community setting in Australia is poorly described. Methods: The ACCORD database was interrogated to determine demographics, treatments and outcomes for all patients diagnosed with mCRC between 1/01/2011 and 1/01/2015 at 6 Melbourne centres (3 public and 3 private). Results: 865 patients were identified: median age was 68 years. 68% were ECOG 0-1, 60% had de novo metastatic disease. RAS status was known in 59%, of whom 48% were RAS wild-type (WT). At the time of analysis 69% of all patients had received systemic treatment with 51% receiving treatment second line and beyond; 65% RAS WT, 57% RASm, 16% RAS-Unk. See Table. Metastasectomy was performed in 29% of patients of whom 38% remain disease-free. With a median follow-up of 31.3 months 46% of patients remain alive. The median overall survival was 25 months for all patients(unresected;17.6 months, resected: not reached). Conclusions: A high proportion of patients receiving routine clinical care in the community setting do not receive any systemic therapy and few patients receive all available active agents. Despite this, the overall survival of patients with mCRC in this community-based cohort was 25 months and in-line with clinical trial data. [Table: see text]


2017 ◽  
Vol 105 (7) ◽  
pp. 784-796 ◽  
Author(s):  
U. Nitsche ◽  
C. Stöß ◽  
L. Stecher ◽  
D. Wilhelm ◽  
H. Friess ◽  
...  

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document