4.5 Article

Surgical Delay Is Associated with Improved Survival in Hepatocellular Carcinoma: Results of the National Cancer Database

期刊

JOURNAL OF GASTROINTESTINAL SURGERY
卷 23, 期 5, 页码 933-943

出版社

SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1007/s11605-018-3925-4

关键词

Hepatocellular carcinoma; National Cancer Database; Surgical delay; Wait time; Cancer survival

向作者/读者索取更多资源

BackgroundHepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) is one of the fastest growing causes of cancer-related death in the USA. Studies that investigated the impact of HCC therapeutic delays are limited to single centers, and no large-scale database research has been conducted. This study investigated the association of surgical delay and survival in HCC patients.MethodsPatients underwent local tumor destruction and hepatic resection for stages I-III HCC were identified from the 2004 to 2013 Commission on Cancer's National Cancer Database. Surgical delay was defined as >60days from the date of diagnosis to surgery. Generalized linear-mixed model assessed the demographic and clinical factors associated with delay, and frailty Cox proportional hazard analysis examined the prognostic factors for overall survival.ResultsA total of 12,102 HCC patients met the eligibility criteria. Median wait time to surgery was 50days (interquartile range, 29-86), and 4987 patients (41.2%) had surgical delay. Delayed patients demonstrated better 5-year survival for local tumor destruction (29.1 vs. 27.6%; P=.001) and resection (44.1 vs. 41.0%; P=.007). Risk-adjusted model indicated that delayed patients had a 7% decreased risk of death (HR, 0.93; 95% CI, 0.87-0.99; P=.027). Similar findings were also observed using other wait time cutoffs at 50, 70, 80, 90, and 100days.ConclusionsA plausible explanation of this finding may be case prioritization, in which patients with more severe and advanced disease who were at higher risk of death received earlier surgery, while patients with less-aggressive tumors were operated on later and received more comprehensive preoperative evaluation.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.5
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据