Clinical colorectal cancer · 2015
Outcomes of Young Patients With Rectal Cancer From a Tertiary Cancer Care Centre in India.
СтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Haresh K P, Benson Rony, Mallick Supriya, Gupta Subhash, Sharma Dayanand, Pandey Rambha, Julka Pramod Kumar, Rath Goura Kishor
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: Carcinoma of the rectum is the fourth most common cancer in the world. The peak age of diagnosis is around the seventh decade. Rectal cancer presenting in those < 35 years old are very peculiar in that they present with adverse histologic features and more advanced stage compared with rectal cancer presenting in older patients.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: We retrospectively evaluated the patient records of young patients with rectal cancer (aged < 35 years) treated in our unit at the All India Institute from 2007 to 2013.
RESULTS: A total of 60 young patients with rectal cancer were registered in our unit during the study period. A family history of cancer was present in 3 patients. The median age at presentation was 27.5 years (range, 15-34 years). The male-to-female ratio was 1.5:1. Of the 60 patients, 52 (86.6%) presented with advanced-stage disease (stage III and IV). Mucinous, signet, papillary, and other poor-risk histologic features were seen in 33 patients (55%). The treatment intention was radical for 50 patients (83.3%). The median follow-up period was 7.3 months. Eighteen patients had documented disease progression. Distant metastasis was the most common type of failure, seen in 14 of 18 patients (77%). The median progression-free survival (PFS) was 1.4 years. The 1- and 3-year PFS rates were 66.5% and 42.0%, respectively. On univariate analysis, the Karnofsky performance status and histologic type were significant prognostic factors for PFS.
CONCLUSION: A greater proportion of poor histologic subtypes was found among young patients with rectal cancer. The high incidence of poor histologic subtypes confers a poor prognosis in these patients.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: We retrospectively evaluated the patient records of young patients with rectal cancer (aged < 35 years) treated in our unit at the All India Institute from 2007 to 2013.
RESULTS: A total of 60 young patients with rectal cancer were registered in our unit during the study period. A family history of cancer was present in 3 patients. The median age at presentation was 27.5 years (range, 15-34 years). The male-to-female ratio was 1.5:1. Of the 60 patients, 52 (86.6%) presented with advanced-stage disease (stage III and IV). Mucinous, signet, papillary, and other poor-risk histologic features were seen in 33 patients (55%). The treatment intention was radical for 50 patients (83.3%). The median follow-up period was 7.3 months. Eighteen patients had documented disease progression. Distant metastasis was the most common type of failure, seen in 14 of 18 patients (77%). The median progression-free survival (PFS) was 1.4 years. The 1- and 3-year PFS rates were 66.5% and 42.0%, respectively. On univariate analysis, the Karnofsky performance status and histologic type were significant prognostic factors for PFS.
CONCLUSION: A greater proportion of poor histologic subtypes was found among young patients with rectal cancer. The high incidence of poor histologic subtypes confers a poor prognosis in these patients.