Real-World Long-Term Outcomes of Operated and Non-Operated Rectal Cancer in the Elderly: A 14-Year Retrospective Multicentre Study

IF 1.4 4区 医学 Q2 RADIOLOGY, NUCLEAR MEDICINE & MEDICAL IMAGING
Harun Demir, Gül Kanyılmaz, İbrahim Babalıoğlu, Bedriye Doğan, Meryem Aktan, Berrin Benli Yavuz, Ayşe Sümeyye Safi
{"title":"Real-World Long-Term Outcomes of Operated and Non-Operated Rectal Cancer in the Elderly: A 14-Year Retrospective Multicentre Study","authors":"Harun Demir,&nbsp;Gül Kanyılmaz,&nbsp;İbrahim Babalıoğlu,&nbsp;Bedriye Doğan,&nbsp;Meryem Aktan,&nbsp;Berrin Benli Yavuz,&nbsp;Ayşe Sümeyye Safi","doi":"10.1111/1754-9485.13872","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div>\n \n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Objective</h3>\n \n <p>Surgical resection is the cornerstone of rectal cancer treatment. Following neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy (nCRT), many patients undergo surgery. Another group of patients may not undergo surgery for various reasons, regardless of nCRT response. This study investigates the differences in clinical characteristics and long-term oncological outcomes of operated and non-operated elderly rectal cancer patients.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Methods</h3>\n \n <p>This multicentre observational retrospective cohort analysis included 296 elderly patients (169 surgery, 127 non-surgical) treated at three tertiary cancer centres in Turkey between January 2010 and April 2024. Clinicopathologic features and survival outcomes were compared between groups.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Results</h3>\n \n <p>Patients in the surgery group were younger (<i>p</i> &lt; 0.000) and had better performance scores (<i>p</i> &lt; 0.000). There were no differences in initial clinical (c) T stages or cM stages; however, cN2 patients were more prevalent in the surgical group and cN1 patients were more prevalent in the non-surgical group (<i>p</i> = 0.010). No differences in radiotherapy treatment schedules were observed among the groups. The surgical group received more concurrent (<i>p</i> = 0.046) and adjuvant (<i>p</i> &lt; 0.000) chemotherapy. Patient refusal (63.8%) was the most common reason among non-surgical patients. The surgery group showed better overall survival (OS) (median, 99 vs. 33 months) (<i>p</i> &lt; 0.000), local recurrence-free survival (LRFS) (97.8% vs. 65.8% at 3 years, <i>p</i> &lt; 0.000), and distant metastasis-free survival (DMFS) (80.3% vs. 73.3% at 3 years, <i>p</i> = 0.022).</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Conclusion</h3>\n \n <p>This study shows that elderly rectal cancer patients without surgery had poor survival and tumour control. Surgical resection in rectal cancer is very important and should be strongly recommended for all medically suitable elderly patients.</p>\n </section>\n </div>","PeriodicalId":16218,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Medical Imaging and Radiation Oncology","volume":"69 5","pages":"586-592"},"PeriodicalIF":1.4000,"publicationDate":"2025-06-09","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Medical Imaging and Radiation Oncology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/1754-9485.13872","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"RADIOLOGY, NUCLEAR MEDICINE & MEDICAL IMAGING","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objective

Surgical resection is the cornerstone of rectal cancer treatment. Following neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy (nCRT), many patients undergo surgery. Another group of patients may not undergo surgery for various reasons, regardless of nCRT response. This study investigates the differences in clinical characteristics and long-term oncological outcomes of operated and non-operated elderly rectal cancer patients.

Methods

This multicentre observational retrospective cohort analysis included 296 elderly patients (169 surgery, 127 non-surgical) treated at three tertiary cancer centres in Turkey between January 2010 and April 2024. Clinicopathologic features and survival outcomes were compared between groups.

Results

Patients in the surgery group were younger (p < 0.000) and had better performance scores (p < 0.000). There were no differences in initial clinical (c) T stages or cM stages; however, cN2 patients were more prevalent in the surgical group and cN1 patients were more prevalent in the non-surgical group (p = 0.010). No differences in radiotherapy treatment schedules were observed among the groups. The surgical group received more concurrent (p = 0.046) and adjuvant (p < 0.000) chemotherapy. Patient refusal (63.8%) was the most common reason among non-surgical patients. The surgery group showed better overall survival (OS) (median, 99 vs. 33 months) (p < 0.000), local recurrence-free survival (LRFS) (97.8% vs. 65.8% at 3 years, p < 0.000), and distant metastasis-free survival (DMFS) (80.3% vs. 73.3% at 3 years, p = 0.022).

Conclusion

This study shows that elderly rectal cancer patients without surgery had poor survival and tumour control. Surgical resection in rectal cancer is very important and should be strongly recommended for all medically suitable elderly patients.

老年人手术和非手术直肠癌的实际长期预后:一项14年回顾性多中心研究
目的:手术切除是直肠癌治疗的基石。在新辅助放化疗(nCRT)后,许多患者接受手术。另一组患者可能由于各种原因而不接受手术,而不管nCRT反应如何。本研究探讨高龄直肠癌手术与非手术患者临床特征及远期肿瘤预后的差异。方法:这项多中心观察性回顾性队列分析纳入了2010年1月至2024年4月在土耳其三家三级癌症中心接受治疗的296例老年患者(169例手术,127例非手术)。比较两组患者的临床病理特征和生存结局。结论:未经手术治疗的老年直肠癌患者生存率和肿瘤控制较差。手术切除直肠癌是非常重要的,应强烈推荐所有医学上适合的老年患者。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
3.30
自引率
6.20%
发文量
133
审稿时长
6-12 weeks
期刊介绍: Journal of Medical Imaging and Radiation Oncology (formerly Australasian Radiology) is the official journal of The Royal Australian and New Zealand College of Radiologists, publishing articles of scientific excellence in radiology and radiation oncology. Manuscripts are judged on the basis of their contribution of original data and ideas or interpretation. All articles are peer reviewed.
×
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
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
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 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信