4.6 Article

The association of time between diagnosis and major resection with poorer colorectal cancer survival: a retrospective cohort study

期刊

BMC CANCER
卷 14, 期 -, 页码 -

出版社

BMC
DOI: 10.1186/1471-2407-14-642

关键词

Colorectal cancer; Cancer survival; Waiting times; Inequalities; England

类别

资金

  1. Cancer Research UK [C41354/A13273]
  2. Cancer Research UK [13273] Funding Source: researchfish

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Background: Colorectal cancer survival in the UK is lower than in other developed countries, but the association of time interval between diagnosis and treatment on excess mortality remains unclear. Methods: Using data from cancer registries in England, we identified 46,511 patients with localised colorectal cancer between 1996-2009, who were 15 years and older, and who underwent a major surgical resection within 62 days of diagnosis. We used relative survival and excess risk modeling to investigate the association of time between diagnosis and major resection (exposure) with survival (outcome). Results: Compared to patients who had major resection within 25-38 days of diagnosis, patients with a shorter time interval between diagnosis and resection and those waiting longer for resection had higher excess mortality (Excess Hazards Ratio, EHR <25 vs 25-38 days: 1.50; 95% Confidence Interval, CI: 1.37 to 1.66; EHR 39-62 vs 25-38 days : 1.16; 95% CI: 1.04 to 1.29). Excess mortality was associated with age (EHR 75+ vs. 15-44 year olds: 2.62; 95% CI: 2.00 to 3.42) and deprivation (EHR most vs. least deprived: 1.27; 95% CI: 1.12 to 1.45), but time between diagnosis and resection did not explain these differences. Conclusion: Within 62 days of diagnosis, a U-shaped association of time between diagnosis and major resection with excess mortality for localised colorectal cancer was evident. This indicates a complicated treatment pathway, particularly for patients who had resection earlier than 25 days, and requires further investigation.

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

4.6
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