切换至 "中华医学电子期刊资源库"

中华结直肠疾病电子杂志 ›› 2020, Vol. 09 ›› Issue (04) : 355 -362. doi: 10.3877/cma.j.issn.2095-3224.2020.04.006

所属专题: 文献

论著

老年与非老年直肠黏液腺癌患者对不同放疗策略的受益可能不同:一项基于SEER数据库的回顾性研究
刘恒昌1, 李春香2, 魏然1, 刘正1, 陈海鹏1, 关旭1, 赵志勋1, 姜争1,(), 王锡山1,()   
  1. 1. 100021 北京,国家癌症中心/国家肿瘤临床医学研究中心/中国医学科学院北京协和医学院肿瘤医院结直肠外科
    2. 100021 北京,国家癌症中心/国家肿瘤临床医学研究中心/中国医学科学院北京协和医学院肿瘤医院胸外科
  • 收稿日期:2020-03-28 出版日期:2020-08-25
  • 通信作者: 姜争, 王锡山
  • 基金资助:
    中国医学科学院医学与健康科技创新工程项目(No.2016-I2M-1-001); 北京市科技计划(No.D171100002617004)

Elderly and non-elderly patients with rectal mucinous adenocarcinoma may benefit from different radiotherapy strategies differently: a retrospective study based on SEER database

Hengchang Liu1, Chunxiang Li2, Ran Wei1, Zheng Liu1, Haipeng Chen1, Xu Guan1, Zhixun Zhao1, Zheng Jiang1,(), Xishan Wang1,()   

  1. 1. Department of Colorectal Surgery, National Cancer Center/National Clinical Research Center for Cancer/Cancer Hospital, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences and Peking Union Medical College, Beijing 100021, China
    2. Department of Thoracic Surgery, National Cancer Center/National Clinical Research Center for Cancer/Cancer Hospital, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences and Peking Union Medical College, Beijing 100021, China
  • Received:2020-03-28 Published:2020-08-25
  • Corresponding author: Zheng Jiang, Xishan Wang
  • About author:
    Corresponding author: Wang Xishan, Email: ;
    Jiang Zheng, Email:
引用本文:

刘恒昌, 李春香, 魏然, 刘正, 陈海鹏, 关旭, 赵志勋, 姜争, 王锡山. 老年与非老年直肠黏液腺癌患者对不同放疗策略的受益可能不同:一项基于SEER数据库的回顾性研究[J/OL]. 中华结直肠疾病电子杂志, 2020, 09(04): 355-362.

Hengchang Liu, Chunxiang Li, Ran Wei, Zheng Liu, Haipeng Chen, Xu Guan, Zhixun Zhao, Zheng Jiang, Xishan Wang. Elderly and non-elderly patients with rectal mucinous adenocarcinoma may benefit from different radiotherapy strategies differently: a retrospective study based on SEER database[J/OL]. Chinese Journal of Colorectal Diseases(Electronic Edition), 2020, 09(04): 355-362.

目的

探讨老年与非老年直肠黏液腺癌患者对于新辅助放疗、辅助放疗的受益情况,并分析影响直肠黏液腺癌患者预后的因素。

方法

应用美国国家癌症研究所的监测、流行病学和结果数据库(SEER),收集2000~2016年,病理诊断为直肠黏液腺癌的患者共3 997例,根据年龄分为老年组(≥60岁)和非老年组(<60岁),分析比较两组接受新辅助放疗联合手术、单纯手术和术后辅助放疗患者的预后情况,对两组患者的三种治疗方式分别进行倾向得分匹配,比较不同治疗方法对预后的影响,应用Kaplan-Meier法分别绘制生存曲线,应用Log-rank检验分析各组生存差异,应用COX比例风险模型分析影响直肠黏液腺癌患者预后的因素。

结果

三种治疗方案的总生存率,新辅助放疗总生存率最高,其次为术后放疗,最后为单纯手术组,组间比较差异有统计学意义(χ2=13.117,22.541;P<0.05)。但三种治疗方案的肿瘤特异性生存,仅新辅助放疗显著高于术后放疗(χ2=4.023,P=0.045)。对各种治疗方案进行倾向得分匹配后,老年患者新辅助放疗的总体生存率显著高于单纯手术(χ2=4.874,P=0.027),非老年患者单纯手术的总体生存率(χ2=5.530,P=0.019)和肿瘤特异性生存率(χ2=4.825,P=0.028)均显著高于术后放疗。高龄(≥60岁)、男性、未化疗和高TNM分期是直肠黏液腺癌患者总生存率较差的影响因素,其HR分别为1.689(95% CI=1.524~1.871)、1.110(95% CI=1.007~1.223)和1.549(95% CI=1.338~1.792),Ⅱ期HR=2.675(95% CI=1.191~6.008),Ⅲ期HR=3.617(95% CI=1.612~8.115),Ⅳ期HR=10.835(95% CI=4.797~24.474);高龄(≥60岁)、未化疗和高TNM分期是直肠黏液腺癌患者肿瘤特异性生存率较差的影响因素,其HR分别为1.297(95% CI=1.156~1.456),1.344(95% CI=1.129~1.601),Ⅲ期HR=6.365(95% CI=1.582~25.614),Ⅳ期HR=20.957(95% CI=5.189~84.637)。

结论

老年直肠黏液腺癌患者可能从新辅助放疗中获益,而对于非老年患者,放疗的预后并不优于单纯手术治疗。

Objective

To investigate the benefit of neoadjuvant radiotherapy and adjuvant radiotherapy in elderly and non-elderly patients with rectal mucinous adenocarcinoma, and to analyze the factors influencing the prognosis of patients with rectal mucinous adenocarcinoma.

Methods

Based on the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Result s database (SEER) of the National Cancer Institute of the United States, 3 997 patients with rectal mucinous adenocarcinoma diagnosed pathologically from 2000 to 2016 were collected. According to the patient′s age, the patients were divided into the elderly group (≥ 60 years old) and the non-elderly group (< 60 years old). The prognosis of the two groups was analyzed and compared. Three treatment methods of the two groups were matched by the propensity score matching method, and the influence of different treatment methods on the prognosis was compared. Kaplan-Meier method was used to draw the survival curve, Log rank test was used to analyze the survival difference of each group, and Cox proportional risk model was used to analyze the factors affecting the prognosis of patients with rectal mucinous adenocarcinoma.

Results

The overall survival (OS) rate of neoadjuvant radiotherapy was the highest, followed by postoperative radiotherapy, and finally by operation only, there were significant differences between each two groups (χ2=13.117, 22.541; P<0.05). However, the cancer-specific survival rate of the neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy was significantly higher than that of postoperative radiotherapy (χ2=4.023, P=0.045). After propensity score matching for all data, the overall survival rate of neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy was significantly higher than that of surgery only (χ2=4.874, P=0.027). The OS (χ2=5.530, P=0.019) and CSS (χ2=4.825, P=0.028) of non-elderly patients after surgery alone were significantly higher than those of postoperative radiotherapy. Elder (≥60 y), male, unchemotherapy, and high TNM stage are the influencing factors of poor OS of patients with rectal mucinous adenocarcinoma. Their HRs are 1.689 (95% CI=1.524~1.871), 1.110 (95% CI=1.007~1.223), 1.549 (95% CI=1.338~1.792), StageⅡ HR=2.675 (95% CI=1.191~6.008), StageⅢ HR=3.617 (95% CI=1.612~8.115), PhaseⅣ HR=10.835(95% CI=4.797~24.474); elder (≥60 y), unchemotherapy, and high TNM stage are the influencing factors of poor CSS in patients with rectal mucinous adenocarcinoma, and their HRs are 1.297 (95% CI=1.156~1.456), 1.344 (95% CI=1.129~1.601), stageⅢ HR=6.365 (95% CI=1.582~25.614), stageⅣ HR=20.957 (95% CI=5.189~84.637).

Conclusion

Elderly patients with rectal mucinous adenocarcinoma may benefit from neoadjuvant radiochemotherapy. For non-elderly patients, the prognosis of radiotherapy is not better than that of surgery alone.

表1 所有纳入研究的三组患者基线资料比较[例(%)]
图1 三种治疗方案的疗效比较。1A:三种治疗方案的总体生存率;1B:三种治疗方案的肿瘤特异性生存率
图2 年龄分层后三种治疗方案的生存率。2A:总体生存率;2B:肿瘤特异性生存率
图3 倾向得分匹配处理后不同年龄患者不同放疗时机的总体生存率。3A:老年组新辅助放疗和单纯手术比较;3B:老年术后放疗和单纯手术比较;3C:非老年组新辅助放疗和单纯手术比较;3D:非老年术后放疗和单纯手术比较
图4 倾向得分匹配处理后不同年龄患者不同放疗时机的肿瘤特异性生存率。4A:老年组新辅助放疗和单纯手术比较;4B:老年术后放疗和单纯手术比较;4C:非老年组新辅助放疗和单纯手术比较;4D:非老年术后放疗和单纯手术比较
表2 影响直肠黏液腺癌预后的COX多因素回归分析
[1]
中华人民共和国卫生和计划生育委员会医政医管局, 中华医学会肿瘤学分会. 中国结直肠癌诊疗规范(2017版)[J]. 中华胃肠外科杂志, 2018, 21(1): 92-106.
[2]
Sung H, Siegel RL, Rosenberg PS, et al. Emerging cancer trends among young adults in the USA: analysis of a population-based cancer registry[J]. Lancet Public Health, 2019, 4(3): e137-e147.
[3]
Kang H, O′Connell JB, Maggard MA, et al. A 10-year outcomes evaluation of mucinous and signet-ring cell carcinoma of the colon and rectum[J]. Dis Colon Rectum, 2005, 48(6): 1161-1168.
[4]
McCawley N, Clancy C, O′Neill BDP, et al. Mucinous rectal adenocarcinoma is associated with a poor response to neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy: a systematic review and meta-analysis[J]. Dis Colon Rectum, 2016, 59(12): 1200-1208.
[5]
Kim TG, Park W, Choi DH, et al. Clinical significance of mucinous rectal adenocarcinoma following preoperative chemoradiotherapy and curative surgery[J]. Tumori, 2016, 102(1): 114-121.
[6]
Sengul N, Wexner SD, Woodhouse S, et al. Effects of radiotherapy on different histopathological types of rectal carcinoma[J]. Colorectal Dis, 2006, 8(4): 283-288.
[7]
Grillo-Ruggieri F, Mantello G, Berardi R, et al. Mucinous rectal adenocarcinoma can be associated to tumor downstaging after preoperative chemoradiotherapy[J]. Dis Colon Rectum, 2007, 50(10): 1594-1603.
[8]
Glynne-Jones R, Hall M. Radiotherapy and locally advanced rectal cancer[J]. Br J Surg, 2015, 102(12): 1443-1445.
[9]
Kakar S, Aksoy S, Burgart LJ, et al. Mucinous carcinoma of the colon: correlation of loss of mismatch repair enzymes with clinicopathologic features and survival[J]. Mod Pathol, 2004, 17(6): 696-700.
[10]
Sengnl N, Wexner SD, Woodhouse S, et al. Effects of radiotherapy on different histopathologieal types of rectal carcinoma[J]. Colorectal Dis, 2006, 8(4): 283-288.
[11]
NCCN Clinical Practice Guidelines in Oncology. Colon Cancer. Version 3.2017[EB/OL]. (2020-02-18).

URL    
[12]
Shahir MA, Lemmens VE, van de Poll-Franse LV, et al. Elderly patients with rectal cancer have a higher risk of treatment-related complications and a poorer prognosis than younger patients: A population-based study[J]. Eur J Cancer, 2006, 42(17): 3015-3021.
[13]
孙艳武, 池畔, 林惠铭, 等. 新辅助放化疗联合手术治疗直肠黏液腺癌的疗效分析[J]. 中华消化外科杂志, 2017, 16(1): 77-82.
[14]
Servagi VS, Guilbert P, Bouché G, et al. Hypofractionated radiotherapy in rectal cancer for elderly patients[J]. Cancer Radiother, 2018, 22(6-7): 644-646.
[15]
张悦仪, 王枭杰, 池畔, 等. 放疗联合手术治疗局部进展期直肠黏液腺癌的疗效分析:一项基于SEER数据库的回顾性研究[J]. 中华胃肠外科杂志, 2019, 22(1): 85-93.
[16]
Li Q, Li Y, Dai W, et al. Adjuvant radiotherapy improves cause specific survival in stage Ⅱ, not stage Ⅲ mucinous carcinoma of the rectum[J]. BMC Cancer, 2017, 17(1): 80.
[1] 汪洪斌, 张红霞, 何文, 杜丽娟, 程令刚, 张雨康, 张萌. 低级别阑尾黏液性肿瘤与阑尾黏液腺癌超声及超声造影特征分析[J/OL]. 中华医学超声杂志(电子版), 2024, 21(09): 865-871.
[2] 许杰, 李亚俊, 韩军伟. 两种入路下腹腔镜根治性全胃切除术治疗超重胃癌的效果比较[J/OL]. 中华普外科手术学杂志(电子版), 2025, 19(01): 19-22.
[3] 赵丽霞, 王春霞, 陈一锋, 胡东平, 张维胜, 王涛, 张洪来. 内脏型肥胖对腹腔镜直肠癌根治术后早期并发症的影响[J/OL]. 中华普外科手术学杂志(电子版), 2025, 19(01): 35-39.
[4] 吴晖, 佴永军, 施雪松, 魏晓为. 两种解剖入路下行直肠癌侧方淋巴结清扫的效果比较[J/OL]. 中华普外科手术学杂志(电子版), 2025, 19(01): 40-43.
[5] 周世振, 朱兴亚, 袁庆港, 刘理想, 王凯, 缪骥, 丁超, 汪灏, 管文贤. 吲哚菁绿荧光成像技术在腹腔镜直肠癌侧方淋巴结清扫中的应用效果分析[J/OL]. 中华普外科手术学杂志(电子版), 2025, 19(01): 44-47.
[6] 高杰红, 黎平平, 齐婧, 代引海. ETFA和CD34在乳腺癌中的表达及与临床病理参数和预后的关系研究[J/OL]. 中华普外科手术学杂志(电子版), 2025, 19(01): 64-67.
[7] 徐逸男. 不同术式治疗梗阻性左半结直肠癌的疗效观察[J/OL]. 中华普外科手术学杂志(电子版), 2025, 19(01): 72-75.
[8] 李代勤, 刘佩杰. 动态增强磁共振评估中晚期低位直肠癌同步放化疗后疗效及预后的价值[J/OL]. 中华普外科手术学杂志(电子版), 2025, 19(01): 100-103.
[9] 关小玲, 周文营, 陈洪平. PTAAR在乙肝相关慢加急性肝衰竭患者短期预后中的预测价值[J/OL]. 中华肝脏外科手术学电子杂志, 2024, 13(06): 841-845.
[10] 张润锦, 阳盼, 林燕斯, 刘尊龙, 刘建平, 金小岩. EB病毒相关胆管癌伴多发转移一例及国内文献复习[J/OL]. 中华肝脏外科手术学电子杂志, 2024, 13(06): 865-869.
[11] 陈晓鹏, 王佳妮, 练庆海, 杨九妹. 肝细胞癌VOPP1表达及其与预后的关系[J/OL]. 中华肝脏外科手术学电子杂志, 2024, 13(06): 876-882.
[12] 韩加刚, 王振军. 梗阻性左半结肠癌的治疗策略[J/OL]. 中华结直肠疾病电子杂志, 2024, 13(06): 450-458.
[13] 梁轩豪, 李小荣, 李亮, 林昌伟. 肠梗阻支架置入术联合新辅助化疗治疗结直肠癌急性肠梗阻的疗效及其预后的Meta 分析[J/OL]. 中华结直肠疾病电子杂志, 2024, 13(06): 472-482.
[14] 王景明, 王磊, 许小多, 邢文强, 张兆岩, 黄伟敏. 腰椎椎旁肌的研究进展[J/OL]. 中华临床医师杂志(电子版), 2024, 18(09): 846-852.
[15] 郭曌蓉, 王歆光, 刘毅强, 何英剑, 王立泽, 杨飏, 汪星, 曹威, 谷重山, 范铁, 李金锋, 范照青. 不同亚型乳腺叶状肿瘤的临床病理特征及预后危险因素分析[J/OL]. 中华临床医师杂志(电子版), 2024, 18(06): 524-532.
阅读次数
全文


摘要