4.3 Article

Heterogeneous survival between stage IIA and stage IIIA colon cancer when different numbers of lymph nodes are harvested

Journal

ANZ JOURNAL OF SURGERY
Volume 88, Issue 4, Pages 316-321

Publisher

WILEY
DOI: 10.1111/ans.13737

Keywords

colon cancer; lymph node; stage IIA; stage IIIA; survival

Categories

Ask authors/readers for more resources

BackgroundWe aim to compare the prognosis between patients with stage IIA and stage IIIA colon cancer. MethodsWe analysed patients with stage IIA or stage IIIA colon cancer based on data from the US Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) database. Survival data were generated as Kaplan-Meier curves and were compared by log-rank tests. A multivariate Cox proportional hazards model was used to analyze the risk factors. ResultsIn total, 43379 patients (38784 stage IIA and 4595 stage IIIA) were included from the SEER database. A Kaplan-Meier analysis showed no significant difference between patients with stage IIA and IIIA colon cancer (P=0.547). In the subgroup of patients with number of lymph nodes harvested (LNH) 12, a multivariate analysis showed that compared with stage IIA patients, stage IIIA patients were more likely to have a poorer cancer-specific survival (CSS) (hazard ratio (HR) 1.252, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.095-1.431, P=0.001). In the subgroup of patients with LNH <12, a multivariate analysis showed that compared with stage IIA patients, stage IIIA patients were more likely to have a better CSS (HR 0.820, 95% CI 0.731-0.919, P=0.001). ConclusionsPatients with stage IIA colon cancer had a CSS comparable with that of patients with stage IIIA disease. When adequate lymph nodes were retrieved (LNH 12), stage IIA patients had a greater CSS than stage IIIA patients. On the contrary, when inadequate lymph nodes were retrieved (LNH <12), stage IIA patients had a poorer CSS than stage IIIA patients.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.3
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available