阑尾神经内分泌肿瘤局部切除与根治性切除的生存结果:一项基于人群的研究。

IF 1.7 4区 医学 Q4 ONCOLOGY
Translational cancer research Pub Date : 2025-07-30 Epub Date: 2025-07-24 DOI:10.21037/tcr-2025-23
Xia Ren, Fuli Gao, Ganhong Wang, Jian Chen, Luojie Liu
{"title":"阑尾神经内分泌肿瘤局部切除与根治性切除的生存结果:一项基于人群的研究。","authors":"Xia Ren, Fuli Gao, Ganhong Wang, Jian Chen, Luojie Liu","doi":"10.21037/tcr-2025-23","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>The optimal surgical modality for appendiceal neuroendocrine tumors (ANETs) remains undefined. This study aimed to explore the optimal surgical approach for ANETs by comparing the outcomes between local resection (LR) and radical resection (RR).</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Individuals diagnosed with ANETs during the period from 2000 to 2020 were extracted from the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) database. Propensity score matching (PSM) was used to minimize selection bias. The Kaplan-Meier method and Cox proportional hazards models were used to assess overall survival (OS) and cancer-specific survival (CSS). Additionally, multivariate Cox analysis assessed risk factors linked to OS and CSS.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The study enrolled 4,944 patients, comprising 3,804 in the LR group and 1,140 in the RR group. Patients receiving RR had higher tumor-node-metastasis (TNM) stages (P<0.001), higher age (P<0.001), and larger tumor sizes (P<0.001). Both the 5-year OS and CSS in the LR group were significantly better than those in the RR group (87.3% <i>vs.</i> 73.7%, P<0.001; 95.6% <i>vs.</i> 85.0%, P<0.001). After PSM, 896 patient pairs were matched and compared, showing no demographic and clinical characteristic differences. There was also no difference in long-term OS [hazard ratio (HR) =1.16; 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.86-1.54; P=0.33] and CSS (HR =1.61; 95% CI: 1.00-2.61; P=0.052) between the two groups. Furthermore, multivariate Cox analysis delineated age, diagnosis year, and chemotherapy as independent prognostic risk factors for both OS and CSS, while surgical modality was excluded.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>This study indicated that, for patients with ANETs, there was no survival advantage observed for RR when compared to LR, implying that LR might suffice as a treatment for these patients.</p>","PeriodicalId":23216,"journal":{"name":"Translational cancer research","volume":"14 7","pages":"4142-4159"},"PeriodicalIF":1.7000,"publicationDate":"2025-07-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12335721/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Survival outcomes of local versus radical resection for appendiceal neuroendocrine tumors: a population-based study.\",\"authors\":\"Xia Ren, Fuli Gao, Ganhong Wang, Jian Chen, Luojie Liu\",\"doi\":\"10.21037/tcr-2025-23\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>The optimal surgical modality for appendiceal neuroendocrine tumors (ANETs) remains undefined. This study aimed to explore the optimal surgical approach for ANETs by comparing the outcomes between local resection (LR) and radical resection (RR).</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Individuals diagnosed with ANETs during the period from 2000 to 2020 were extracted from the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) database. Propensity score matching (PSM) was used to minimize selection bias. The Kaplan-Meier method and Cox proportional hazards models were used to assess overall survival (OS) and cancer-specific survival (CSS). Additionally, multivariate Cox analysis assessed risk factors linked to OS and CSS.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The study enrolled 4,944 patients, comprising 3,804 in the LR group and 1,140 in the RR group. Patients receiving RR had higher tumor-node-metastasis (TNM) stages (P<0.001), higher age (P<0.001), and larger tumor sizes (P<0.001). Both the 5-year OS and CSS in the LR group were significantly better than those in the RR group (87.3% <i>vs.</i> 73.7%, P<0.001; 95.6% <i>vs.</i> 85.0%, P<0.001). After PSM, 896 patient pairs were matched and compared, showing no demographic and clinical characteristic differences. There was also no difference in long-term OS [hazard ratio (HR) =1.16; 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.86-1.54; P=0.33] and CSS (HR =1.61; 95% CI: 1.00-2.61; P=0.052) between the two groups. Furthermore, multivariate Cox analysis delineated age, diagnosis year, and chemotherapy as independent prognostic risk factors for both OS and CSS, while surgical modality was excluded.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>This study indicated that, for patients with ANETs, there was no survival advantage observed for RR when compared to LR, implying that LR might suffice as a treatment for these patients.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":23216,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Translational cancer research\",\"volume\":\"14 7\",\"pages\":\"4142-4159\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.7000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-07-30\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12335721/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Translational cancer research\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.21037/tcr-2025-23\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2025/7/24 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q4\",\"JCRName\":\"ONCOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Translational cancer research","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.21037/tcr-2025-23","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/7/24 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"ONCOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景:阑尾神经内分泌肿瘤(ANETs)的最佳手术方式尚不明确。本研究旨在通过比较局部切除(LR)和根治性切除(RR)的结果,探讨ANETs的最佳手术入路。方法:从监测、流行病学和最终结果(SEER)数据库中提取2000年至2020年期间诊断为ANETs的个体。倾向评分匹配(PSM)用于最小化选择偏差。采用Kaplan-Meier法和Cox比例风险模型评估总生存期(OS)和癌症特异性生存期(CSS)。此外,多变量Cox分析评估了与OS和CSS相关的危险因素。结果:本研究共纳入4944例患者,其中LR组3804例,RR组1140例。接受RR治疗的患者有更高的肿瘤-淋巴结-转移(TNM)分期(Pvs. 73.7%, Pvs. 85.0%)。结论:本研究表明,对于ANETs患者,与LR相比,RR没有观察到生存优势,这意味着LR可能足以作为这些患者的治疗方法。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Survival outcomes of local versus radical resection for appendiceal neuroendocrine tumors: a population-based study.

Background: The optimal surgical modality for appendiceal neuroendocrine tumors (ANETs) remains undefined. This study aimed to explore the optimal surgical approach for ANETs by comparing the outcomes between local resection (LR) and radical resection (RR).

Methods: Individuals diagnosed with ANETs during the period from 2000 to 2020 were extracted from the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) database. Propensity score matching (PSM) was used to minimize selection bias. The Kaplan-Meier method and Cox proportional hazards models were used to assess overall survival (OS) and cancer-specific survival (CSS). Additionally, multivariate Cox analysis assessed risk factors linked to OS and CSS.

Results: The study enrolled 4,944 patients, comprising 3,804 in the LR group and 1,140 in the RR group. Patients receiving RR had higher tumor-node-metastasis (TNM) stages (P<0.001), higher age (P<0.001), and larger tumor sizes (P<0.001). Both the 5-year OS and CSS in the LR group were significantly better than those in the RR group (87.3% vs. 73.7%, P<0.001; 95.6% vs. 85.0%, P<0.001). After PSM, 896 patient pairs were matched and compared, showing no demographic and clinical characteristic differences. There was also no difference in long-term OS [hazard ratio (HR) =1.16; 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.86-1.54; P=0.33] and CSS (HR =1.61; 95% CI: 1.00-2.61; P=0.052) between the two groups. Furthermore, multivariate Cox analysis delineated age, diagnosis year, and chemotherapy as independent prognostic risk factors for both OS and CSS, while surgical modality was excluded.

Conclusions: This study indicated that, for patients with ANETs, there was no survival advantage observed for RR when compared to LR, implying that LR might suffice as a treatment for these patients.

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
CiteScore
2.10
自引率
0.00%
发文量
252
期刊介绍: Translational Cancer Research (Transl Cancer Res TCR; Print ISSN: 2218-676X; Online ISSN 2219-6803; http://tcr.amegroups.com/) is an Open Access, peer-reviewed journal, indexed in Science Citation Index Expanded (SCIE). TCR publishes laboratory studies of novel therapeutic interventions as well as clinical trials which evaluate new treatment paradigms for cancer; results of novel research investigations which bridge the laboratory and clinical settings including risk assessment, cellular and molecular characterization, prevention, detection, diagnosis and treatment of human cancers with the overall goal of improving the clinical care of cancer patients. The focus of TCR is original, peer-reviewed, science-based research that successfully advances clinical medicine toward the goal of improving patients'' quality of life. The editors and an international advisory group of scientists and clinician-scientists as well as other experts will hold TCR articles to the high-quality standards. We accept Original Articles as well as Review Articles, Editorials and Brief Articles.
×
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