4.6 Article

Deficient mismatch repair as a prognostic marker in stage II colon cancer patients

Journal

EJSO
Volume 45, Issue 10, Pages 1854-1861

Publisher

ELSEVIER SCI LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.ejso.2019.05.023

Keywords

dMMR; Prognostic factors; Colon cancer; Stage II

Funding

  1. Cancer Research Foundation in Northern Sweden
  2. Visare Norr Science Foundation in Sweden

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Background: A number of reports have evaluated the relationship between deficient DNA mismatch repair (dMMR) and colorectal cancer prognosis. Unfortunately, the exact prognostic role of dMMR has not been clearly established due to contradictory results. This study aims to determine the prognostic impact of dMRR in stage 11 colon cancer patients only. The appropriate identification of high-risk stage II colon cancers is of paramount importance in the selection of patients who may benefit from adjuvant treatment after surgery. Methods: Four hundred and fifty-two patients with curative resection of stage II colon cancer were included. Hospital records were used as data source, providing clinical, surgical, pathology, oncology and follow-up information for statistical analysis focusing on overall survival (OS) and time to progression (TIP). Mismatch repair status was determined by immunohistochemistry. Patient survival was followed-up for a mean of 7735 months. Results: dMMR was detected in 93 of 452 patients (20.6%). No impact on overall survival (Log-Rank, p = 0.583, 95% CI 0.76-1.67). However, the hazard ratio 0.50 for TIP was highly significant (Log-Rank, p = 0.012, 95% CI 0.28-0.87) in patients with dMMR compared with those with mismatch repair proficient tumours (pMMR). Conclusions: Patients with dMMR tumours have a lower risk for recurrence compared to those with pMMR tumours, but this finding did not correlate to better overall survival. (C) 2019 Published by Elsevier Ltd.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available