11
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Quality of life and functional outcome of rectal cancer patients: A prospective cohort study

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Aim

          In the last decade, the Netherlands has implemented various diagnostic and treatment strategies to enhance rectal cancer outcomes. This study, using data from the Prospective Dutch ColoRectal Cancer (PLCRC) cohort, investigates whether these multidisciplinary advancements have translated into improved health‐related quality of life (HRQoL) and functional outcomes for the general Dutch rectal cancer population.

          Methods

          Patients with Stage I–III rectal cancer enrolled in the PLCRC cohort were included. HRQoL and functional outcomes were assessed 1 and 2 years after diagnosis using the European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Questionnaire Core 30 (EORTC QLQ‐C30), EORTC QLQ Colorectal Cancer 29 and the Low Anterior Resection Syndrome score. HRQoL and functional outcomes were compared based on year of diagnosis (2014–2019).

          Results

          A total of 1294 patients were included. Two years after diagnosis, patients diagnosed in 2019 ( n = 392) had a clinically relevant higher score on physical (8.2, 95% CI 4.1–12.3), role (13.5, 95% CI 7.3–19.7) and social functioning (5.8, 95% CI 0.3–11.2) compared to those diagnosed in 2014 ( n = 65). Additionally, patients diagnosed in 2019 experienced less fatigue 2 years after diagnosis compared to those diagnosed in 2014 (−8.6, 95% CI −14.1 to −3.0). The Low Anterior Resection Syndrome score showed no differences.

          Conclusion

          The findings of this study suggest that over the past decade rectal cancer patients in the Netherlands have witnessed improvements in HRQoL across various domains. Most probably, the improvement is due to a combination of implementation of population screening, a more restrictive neoadjuvant radiotherapy policy and advances in minimally invasive surgery and organ preserving treatment options.

          Related collections

          Most cited references49

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: not found
          • Article: not found

          The European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer QLQ-C30: A Quality-of-Life Instrument for Use in International Clinical Trials in Oncology

            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            Laparoscopic versus open surgery for rectal cancer (COLOR II): short-term outcomes of a randomised, phase 3 trial.

            Laparoscopic surgery as an alternative to open surgery in patients with rectal cancer has not yet been shown to be oncologically safe. The aim in the COlorectal cancer Laparoscopic or Open Resection (COLOR II) trial was to compare laparoscopic and open surgery in patients with rectal cancer. A non-inferiority phase 3 trial was undertaken at 30 centres and hospitals in eight countries. Patients (aged ≥18 years) with rectal cancer within 15 cm from the anal verge without evidence of distant metastases were randomly assigned to either laparoscopic or open surgery in a 2:1 ratio, stratified by centre, location of tumour, and preoperative radiotherapy. The study was not masked. Secondary (short-term) outcomes-including operative findings, complications, mortality, and results at pathological examination-are reported here. Analysis was by modified intention to treat, excluding those patients with post-randomisation exclusion criteria and for whom data were not available. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT00297791. The study was undertaken between Jan 20, 2004, and May 4, 2010. 1103 patients were randomly assigned to the laparoscopic (n=739) and open surgery groups (n=364), and 1044 were eligible for analyses (699 and 345, respectively). Patients in the laparoscopic surgery group lost less blood than did those in the open surgery group (median 200 mL [IQR 100-400] vs 400 mL [200-700], p<0·0001); however, laparoscopic procedures took longer (240 min [184-300] vs 188 min [150-240]; p<0·0001). In the laparoscopic surgery group, bowel function returned sooner (2·0 days [1·0-3·0] vs 3·0 days [2·0-4·0]; p<0·0001) and hospital stay was shorter (8·0 days [6·0-13·0] vs 9·0 days [7·0-14·0]; p=0·036). Macroscopically, completeness of the resection was not different between groups (589 [88%] of 666 vs 303 [92%] of 331; p=0·250). Positive circumferential resection margin (<2 mm) was noted in 56 (10%) of 588 patients in the laparoscopic surgery group and 30 (10%) of 300 in the open surgery group (p=0·850). Median tumour distance to distal resection margin did not differ significantly between the groups (3·0 cm [IQR 2·0-4·8] vs 3·0 cm [1·8-5·0], respectively; p=0·676). In the laparoscopic and open surgery groups, morbidity (278 [40%] of 697 vs 128 [37%] of 345, respectively; p=0·424) and mortality (eight [1%] of 699 vs six [2%] of 345, respectively; p=0·409) within 28 days after surgery were similar. In selected patients with rectal cancer treated by skilled surgeons, laparoscopic surgery resulted in similar safety, resection margins, and completeness of resection to that of open surgery, and recovery was improved after laparoscopic surgery. Results for the primary endpoint-locoregional recurrence-are expected by the end of 2013. Ethicon Endo-Surgery Europe, Swedish Cancer Foundation, West Gothia Region, Sahlgrenska University Hospital. Copyright © 2013 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Long-term outcomes of clinical complete responders after neoadjuvant treatment for rectal cancer in the International Watch & Wait Database (IWWD): an international multicentre registry study

              The strategy of watch and wait (W&W) in patients with rectal cancer who achieve a complete clinical response (cCR) after neoadjuvant therapy is new and offers an opportunity for patients to avoid major resection surgery. However, evidence is based on small-to-moderate sized series from specialist centres. The International Watch & Wait Database (IWWD) aims to describe the outcome of the W&W strategy in a large-scale registry of pooled individual patient data. We report the results of a descriptive analysis after inclusion of more than 1000 patients in the registry.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Contributors
                (View ORCID Profile)
                (View ORCID Profile)
                Journal
                Colorectal Disease
                Colorectal Disease
                Wiley
                1462-8910
                1463-1318
                November 2024
                October 02 2024
                November 2024
                : 26
                : 11
                : 1892-1902
                Affiliations
                [1 ] Department of Surgery Maastricht University Medical Centre Maastricht The Netherlands
                [2 ] GROW School for Oncology and Reproduction Maastricht University Maastricht The Netherlands
                [3 ] Department of Research and Development Netherlands Comprehensive Cancer Organisation (IKNL) Utrecht The Netherlands
                [4 ] Department of Medical Oncology, University Medical Centre Utrecht Utrecht University Utrecht The Netherlands
                [5 ] Department of Clinical Epidemiology and Medical Technology Assessment Maastricht University Medical Centre Maastricht The Netherlands
                [6 ] Department of Surgery Netherlands Cancer Institute‐Antoni van Leeuwenhoek Amsterdam The Netherlands
                [7 ] Department of Epidemiology, Julius Center for Health Sciences and Primary Care, University Medical Center Utrecht Utrecht University Utrecht The Netherlands
                [8 ] NUTRIM School of Nutrition and Translational Research in Metabolism Maastricht University Maastricht The Netherlands
                Article
                10.1111/codi.17181
                dd9d910c-9477-4099-9564-6df83283bced
                © 2024

                http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/

                History

                Comments

                Comment on this article