The Impact of Delays to Definitive Surgical Care on Survival in Colorectal Cancer Patients

Three-Year Analysis of the Rectal Cancer Care Trajectory after the COVID-19 Pandemic

The global pandemic period from 2020 to 2022 caused important alterations in oncology care. This study aimed to describe the trends and variations in patient characteristics, comorbidities, and treatment approaches during this time in Romania. We conducted a retrospective database search to identify patients with rectal cancer who underwent surgical intervention between 2020 and 2022 and the year 2019, which served as a pre-pandemic period control. This study included 164 patients, with a yearly increase of approximately 10% in surgical interventions noted from 2020 (1709 interventions) to 2022 (2118 interventions), but an overall 34.4% decrease compared with the pre-pandemic period. Notable shifts were observed in the type of surgeries performed, with laparoscopic procedures doubling from 2020 (25%) to 2022 (47.5%), confirming the decrease in emergency presentations during the last year of the COVID-19 pandemic and a recovery to normality with planned, elective interventions. Elective interventions increased significantly in 2022 (79.7%) compared with the previous years (p = 0.043), with a concurrent rise in neoadjuvant therapy uptake in 2022 (35.6%). However, significant alterations in the TNM staging, from 12.5% stage IV cases in 2020 to 25.4% in 2022 (p = 0.039), indicated an increased diagnosis of advanced stages of rectal cancer as the years progressed. There was a significant difference in albumin levels over the years (p = 0.019) and in the American Society of Anesthesiology (ASA) scores (from 6.2% ASA stage IV in 2020 to 16.9% in 2022), denoting an increase in case complexity (p = 0.043). This study reveals a trend of increasing surgical interventions and the prevalence of more advanced stages of rectal cancer during the pandemic years. Despite the subtle fluctuations in various patient characteristics and treatment approaches, notable shifts were documented in the severity at diagnosis and surgery types, pointing toward more advanced disease presentations and changes in surgical strategies over the period studied. Nevertheless, the trends in ICU admission rates and mortality did not alter significantly during the pandemic period.

The effect of time before diagnosis and treatment on colorectal cancer outcomes: systematic review and dose-response meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to evaluate existing evidence on the relationship between diagnostic and treatment intervals and outcomes for colorectal cancer.

METHODS

Four databases were searched for English language articles assessing the role of time before initial treatment in colorectal cancer on any outcome, including stage and survival. Two reviewers independently screened articles for inclusion and data were synthesised narratively. A dose-response meta-analysis was performed to examine the association between treatment interval and survival.

RESULTS

One hundred and thirty papers were included in the systematic review, eight were included in the meta-analysis. Forty-five different intervals were considered in the time from first symptom to treatment. The most common finding was of no association between the length of intervals on any outcome. The dose-response meta-analysis showed a U-shaped association between the treatment interval and overall survival with the nadir at 45 days.

CONCLUSION

The review found inconsistent, but mostly a lack of, association between interval length and colorectal cancer outcomes, but study design and quality were heterogeneous. Meta-analysis suggests survival becomes increasingly poorer for those commencing treatment more than 45 days after diagnosis.

REGISTRATION

This review was registered, and the protocol is available, in PROSPERO, the international database of systematic reviews, with the registration ID CRD42021255864.

Survival in relation to time to start of curative treatment of colon cancer: A national register-based observational noninferiority study

AIM

There are ample discussions regarding the timing of treatment, especially in the era after Covid that caused delay to treatment. The aim of this study was to determine whether a delayed start to curative treatment, within 29-56 days after a diagnosis of colon cancer, was noninferior to starting treatment within 28 days, with regard to all-cause mortality.

METHOD

This is a national register-based observational noninferiority study, with a noninferiority margin of hazard ratio (HR) 1.1, including all patients treated with curative intent for colon cancer in Sweden between 2008 and 2016. The primary outcome was all-cause mortality. Secondary outcomes were length of hospital stay, readmissions and reoperations within 1 year after surgery. Exclusion criteria were emergency surgery, disseminated disease at diagnosis, missing diagnosis date and treatment for another cancer 5 years before colon cancer diagnosis.

RESULTS

A total of 20 836 individuals were included. A period of 29-56 days from diagnosis to start of curative treatment was noninferior versus starting treatment within 28 days for the primary outcome of all-cause mortality (HR 0.95, 95% CI 0.89-1.00). Starting treatment within 29-56 days was associated with a shorter length of stay (average 9.2 vs. 10 days) but a higher risk of reoperation compared to within 28 days. Post hoc analyses demonstrated that surgical modality was driving survival rather than time to treatment. Overall survival was greater after laparoscopic surgery (HR 0.78, 95% CI 0.69-0.88).

CONCLUSION

For patients with colon cancer, a period of up to 56 days from diagnosis to the start of curative treatment did not lead to worse overall survival.

A systematic review of methodological considerations in time to diagnosis and treatment in colorectal cancer research

Research focusing on timely diagnosis and treatment of colorectal cancer is necessary to improve outcomes for people with cancer. Previous attempts to consolidate research on time to diagnosis and treatment have noted varied methodological approaches and quality, limiting the comparability of findings. This systematic review was conducted to comprehensively assess the scope of methodological issues in this field and provide recommendations for future research. Eligible articles had to assess the role of any interval up to treatment, on any outcome in colorectal cancer, in English, with no limits on publication time. Four databases were searched (Ovid Medline, EMBASE, EMCARE and PsycInfo). Papers were screened by two independent reviewers using a two-stage process of title and abstract followed by full text review. In total, 130 papers were included and had data extracted on specific methodological and statistical features. Several methodological problems were identified across the evidence base. Common issues included arbitrary categorisation of intervals (n = 107, 83%), no adjustment for potential confounders (n = 65, 50%), and lack of justification for included covariates where there was adjustment (n = 40 of 65 papers that performed an adjusted analysis, 62%). Many articles introduced epidemiological biases such as immortal time bias (n = 37 of 80 papers that used survival as an outcome, 46%) and confounding by indication (n = 73, 56%), as well as other biases arising from inclusion of factors outside of their temporal sequence. However, determination of the full extent of these problems was hampered by insufficient reporting. Recommendations include avoiding artificial categorisation of intervals, ensuring bias has not been introduced due to out-of-sequence use of key events and increased use of theoretical frameworks to detect and reduce bias. The development of reporting guidelines and domain-specific risk of bias tools may aid in ensuring future research can reliably contribute to recommendations regarding optimal timing and strengthen the evidence base.

Effect of comprehensive geriatric assessment for frail elderly patients operated for colorectal cancer—the colorectal cancer frailty study: study protocol for a randomized, controlled, multicentre trial

Background

Colorectal cancer (CRC) is the third most common cancer worldwide, with a median age of 72–75 years at diagnosis. Curative treatment usually involves surgery; if left untreated, symptoms may require emergency surgery. Therefore, most patients will be accepted for surgery, despite of high age or comorbidity. It is known that elderly patients suffer higher risks after surgery than younger patients, in terms of complications and mortality. Assessing frailty and offering frail elderly patients individualized treatment according to the comprehensive geriatric assessment (CGA) and care concept has been shown to improve the outcome for frail elderly patients in other clinical contexts.

Methods

This randomized controlled multicentre trial aims to investigate if CGA and care prior to curatively intended surgery for CRC in frail elderly patients will improve postoperative outcome. All patients ≥ 70 years with surgically curable CRC will be screened for frailty using the Clinical Frailty Scale (CFS-9). Frail patients will be offered inclusion. Randomization is stratified for colon or rectal cancer. Patients in the intervention group are, in addition to standard protocol, treated according to CGA and care. This consists of individualized assessments and interventions, established by a multiprofessional team. Patients in the control group are treated according to best known practice as stipulated by Swedish colorectal cancer treatment guidelines, within an enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) setting. The primary outcome is 90-day mortality. Secondary outcomes are the length of hospital stay and total number of hospital days within 3 months, discharge destination, 30-day readmission, ADL, safe medication assessment, CFS-9 score, complications, Health-Related Quality of Life (HRQoL) at 2-month follow-up in comparison to baseline measurements, health economical calculations including cost-effectiveness analysis based on costs of hospital care and primary care, mortality and HRQoL at baseline, 2- and 12-month follow-up and all-cause 1-year mortality.

Discussion

The trial is the first of its size and extent to investigate intervention with CGA and care prior to surgery for CRC in frail elderly patients. If this addition proves to be favourable, it could have implications on future care of frail elderly patients with CRC.

Trial registration

ClinicalTrials.gov NCT04358328. Registered on 4 February 2020

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s13063-022-06883-9.

The Challenges of Colorectal Cancer Surgery during the COVID-19 Pandemic in Romania: A Three-Year Retrospective Study

The predictions on the influence of the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic on access to medical services in Romania predicted a 35% drop in oncological hospitalizations in 2020 compared to the previous decade, raising the hypothesis that patients with colorectal cancer can become indirect victims of the ongoing pandemic. Therefore, the aim of the current research was to observe how the COVID-19 pandemic influenced colorectal cancer surgery in Romania, to determine the level of addressability towards specialized care, to compare the cancer staging between the pandemic and pre-pandemic periods, and to observe the risk factors for disease progression. This retrospective study was spread over three years, respectively, from March 2019 to March 2022, and included a total of 198 patients with a history of colorectal cancer surgery. It was decided to perform a parallel comparison of 2019, 2020, and 2021 to observe any significant changes during the pandemic. Our clinic encountered a significant decrease in all interventions during the pandemic; although the number of CRC surgeries remained constant, the cases were more difficult, with significantly more patients presenting in emergency situations, from 31.3% in 2019 to 50.0% in 2020 and 57.1% in 2021. Thus, the number of elective surgeries decreased significantly. The proportion of TNM (tumor-node-metastasis) staging was, however, statistically significant between the pre-pandemic and pandemic period. In 2019, 13.3% of patients had stage IIa, compared with 28.8% in 2020 and 13.1% in 2021. Similarly, the proportion of very advanced colorectal cancer was higher during the pandemic period of 2020 and 2021 (12.0% in 2019 vs. 12.5% in 2020 and 25.0% in 2021), which was represented by a significantly higher proportion of patients with bowel perforation. Patients with an advanced TNM stage had a 6.28-fold increased risk of disease progression, followed by lymphovascular invasion (HR = 5.19). However, the COVID-19 pandemic, represented by admission years 2020 and 2021, did not pose a significant risk for disease progression and mortality. In-hospital mortality during the pandemic also did not change significantly. After the pandemic restrictions have been lifted, it would be advisable to conduct a widespread colorectal cancer screening campaign in order to identify any instances of the disease that went undetected during the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic.

Applying Latent Class Analysis on Cancer Registry Data to Identify and Compare Health Disparity Profiles in Colorectal Cancer Surgical Treatment Delay

CONTEXT

Colorectal cancer (CRC) surgical treatment delay (TD) has been associated with mortality and morbidity; however, disparities by TD profiles are unknown.

OBJECTIVES

This study aimed to identify CRC patient profiles of surgical TD while accounting for differences in sociodemographic, health insurance, and geographic characteristics.

DESIGN

We used latent class analysis (LCA) on 2005-2015 Tennessee Cancer Registry data of CRC patients and observed indicators that included sex/gender, age at diagnosis, marital status (single/married/divorced/widowed), race (White/Black/other), health insurance type, and geographic residence (non-Appalachian/Appalachian).

SETTING

The state of Tennessee in the United States that included both Appalachian and non-Appalachian counties.

PARTICIPANTS

Adult (18 years or older) CRC patients (N = 35 412) who were diagnosed and surgically treated for in situ (n = 1286) and malignant CRC (n = 34 126).

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE

The distal outcome of TD was categorized as 30 days or less and more than 30 days from diagnosis to surgical treatment.

RESULTS

Our LCA identified a 4-class solution and a 3-class solution for in situ and malignant profiles, respectively. The highest in situ CRC patient risk profile was female, White, aged 75 to 84 years, widowed, and used public health insurance when compared with respective profiles. The highest malignant CRC patient risk profile was male, Black, both single/never married and divorced/separated, resided in non-Appalachian county, and used public health insurance when compared with respective profiles. The highest risk profiles of in situ and malignant patients had a TD likelihood of 19.3% and 29.4%, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

While our findings are not meant for diagnostic purposes, we found that Blacks had lower TD with in situ CRC. The opposite was found in the malignant profiles where Blacks had the highest TD. Although TD is not a definitive marker of survival, we observed that non-Appalachian underserved/underrepresented groups were overrepresented in the highest TD profiles. The observed disparities could be indicative of intervenable risk.

Delay to elective colorectal cancer surgery and implications for survival: a systematic review and meta-analysis

AIM

The Covid-19 pandemic has delayed elective colorectal cancer (CRC) surgery. The aim of this study was to see whether or not this may affect overall survival (OS) and disease-free survival (DFS).

METHOD

A systematic review was carried out according to PRISMA guidelines (PROSPERO ID: CRD42020189158). Medline, EMBASE and Scopus were interrogated. Patients aged over 18 years with a diagnosis of colon or rectal cancer who received elective surgery as their primary treatment were included. Delay to elective surgery was defined as the period between CRC diagnosis and the day of surgery. Meta-analysis of the outcomes OS and DFS were conducted. Forest plots, funnel plots and tests of heterogeneity were produced. An estimated number needed to harm (NNH) was calculated for statistically significant pooled hazard ratios (HRs).

RESULTS

Of 3753 articles identified, seven met the inclusion criteria. Encompassing 314 560 patients, three of the seven studies showed that a delay to elective resection is associated with poorer OS or DFS. OS was assessed at a 1 month delay, the HR for six datasets was 1.13 (95% CI 1.02-1.26, p = 0.020) and at 3 months the pooled HR for three datasets was 1.57 (95% CI 1.16-2.12, p = 0.004). The estimated NNH for a delay at 1 month and 3 months was 35 and 10 respectively. Delay was nonsignificantly negatively associated with DFS on meta-analysis.

CONCLUSION

This review recommends that elective surgery for CRC patients is not postponed longer than 4 weeks, as available evidence suggests extended delays from diagnosis are associated with poorer outcomes. Focused research is essential so patient groups can be prioritized based on risk factors in future delays or pandemics.

Could diagnostic and therapeutic delay affect the prognosis of gastrointestinal primary malignancies in the COVID-19 pandemic era? A literature review

BACKGROUND

Emergency situations, as the Covid-19 pandemic that is striking the world nowadays, stress the national health systems which are forced to rapidly reorganizing their sources. Therefore, many elective diagnostic and surgical procedures are being suspended or significantly delayed. Moreover, patients might find it difficult to refer to physicians and delay the diagnostic and even the therapeutic procedures because of emotional or logistic problems. The effect of diagnostic and therapeutic delay on survival in patients affected by gastrointestinal malignancies is still unclear.

METHODS

We carried out a review of the available literature, in order to determine whether the delay in performing diagnosis and curative-intent surgical procedures affects the oncological outcomes in patients with oesophageal, gastric, colorectal cancers, and colorectal liver metastasis.

RESULTS

The findings indicate that for oesophageal, gastric and colon cancers delaying surgery up to 2 months after the end of the staging process does not worsen the oncological outcomes. Oesophageal cancer should undergo surgery within 7-8 weeks after the end of neoadjuvant chemoradiation. Rectal cancers should undergo surgery within 31 days after the diagnostic process and within 12 weeks after neoadjuvant therapy. Adjuvant therapy should start within 4 weeks after surgery, especially in gastric cancer; a delay up to 42 days may be allowed for oesophageal cancer undergoing adjuvant radiotherapy.

CONCLUSIONS

Gastrointestinal malignancies can be safely managed taking into account that reasonable delays of planned treatments appear a generally safe approach, not having a significant impact on long-term oncological outcome.

Interhospital referral of colorectal cancer patients: a Dutch population-based study

PURPOSE

Interhospital referral is a consequence of centralization of complex oncological care but might negatively impact waiting time, a quality indicator in the Netherlands. This study aims to evaluate characteristics and waiting times of patients with primary colorectal cancer who are referred between hospitals.

METHODS

Data were extracted from the Dutch ColoRectal Audit (2015-2019). Waiting time between first tumor-positive biopsy until first treatment was compared between subgroups stratified for referral status, disease stage, and type of hospital.

RESULTS

In total, 46,561 patients were included. Patients treated for colon or rectal cancer in secondary care hospitals were referred in 12.2% and 14.7%, respectively. In tertiary care hospitals, corresponding referral rates were 43.8% and 66.4%. Referred patients in tertiary care hospitals were younger, but had a more advanced disease stage, and underwent more often multivisceral resection and simultaneous metastasectomy than non-referred patients in secondary care hospitals (p<0.001). Referred patients were more often treated within national quality standards for waiting time compared to non-referred patients (p<0.001). For referred patients, longer waiting times prior to MDT were observed compared to non-referred patients within each hospital type, although most time was spent post-MDT.

CONCLUSION

A large proportion of colorectal cancer patients that are treated in tertiary care hospitals are referred from another hospital but mostly treated within standards for waiting time. These patients are younger but often have a more advanced disease. This suggests that these patients are willing to travel more but also reflects successful centralization of complex oncological patients in the Netherlands.

Gastrointestinal Malignancies and the COVID-19 Pandemic: Evidence-Based Triage to Surgery

BACKGROUND

The COVID-19 pandemic has led to widespread cancelation of electively scheduled surgeries, including for colorectal, pancreatic, and gastric cancer. The American College of Surgeons and the Society of Surgical Oncology have released guidelines for triage of these procedures. We seek to synthesize available evidence on delayed resection and oncologic outcomes, while also providing a critical assessment of the released guidelines.

METHODS

A systematic review was conducted to identify literature between 2005 and 2020 investigating the impact of time to surgery on oncologic outcomes in colorectal, pancreatic, and gastric cancer.

RESULTS

For colorectal cancer, 1066 abstracts were screened and 43 papers were included. In primarily resected colon cancer, delay over 30 to 40 days is associated with lower survival. In rectal cancer, time to surgery over 7 to 8 weeks following neoadjuvant therapy is associated with decreased survival. Three hundred ninety-four abstracts were screened for pancreatic cancer and nine studies were included. Two studies demonstrate increased unexpected progression with delayed surgery over 30 days. Out of 633 abstracts screened for gastric cancer, six studies were included. No identified study demonstrated worse survival with increased time to surgery.

CONCLUSION

Moderate evidence suggests that delayed resection of colorectal cancer worsens survival; the impact of time to surgery on gastric and pancreatic cancer outcomes is uncertain. Early resection of gastrointestinal malignancies provides the best chance for curative therapy. During the COVID-19 pandemic, prioritization of procedures should account for available evidence on time to surgery and oncologic outcomes.