Young-onset rectal cancer: Presentation, pattern of care and long-term oncologic outcomes compared to a matched older-onset cohort

Y. Nancy You, Eric Dozois, Lisa Allyn Boardman, Jeremiah Aakre, Marianne Huebner, David Larson

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

36 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Background: Recent population-based studies have highlighted a disproportionate increase in the incidence of rectal cancer among adults younger than aged 50 years. To determine whether different intervention and surveillance strategies might be needed for younger patients, the patterns of care and oncologic outcomes among adults younger than aged 50 years with rectal cancer were investigated. Methods: A cohort of 333 young (<50 years) patients with sporadic rectal cancer was compared to a contemporaneous cohort of 675 older (>65 years) patients for differences in disease pattern, treatments received, and long-term disease-free survival (DFS). Results: Patient and tumor characteristics did not differ between groups except for an increased presence of signet-ring and mucinous histology in young patients. Younger patients presented with more advanced-stage disease (stages III and IV: 59.4% vs. 46.4%; p = 0.016). More young patients received sphincter-preservation procedures (63.4 vs. 55.4%; p = 0.016), radiation (61.6 vs. 42.1%; p < 0.001), and chemotherapy (67.3 vs. 47.6%; p < 0.001). Fewer young patients were free from recurrent disease at the last follow-up (72.1 vs. 82.5%; p < 0.001). The stage-specific 5-year DFS did not differ between the young and older cohorts. Only stage and the need for chemotherapy independently predicted poor DFS. Conclusions: Young patients present at a later stage and a greater proportion develop distant disease recurrence over time. However, their stage-specific oncologic outcomes appear similar to those in older-onset patients. To have the greatest impact on long-term oncologic outcomes in patients with young-onset rectal cancer, future interventions should target strategies to diagnosis rectal cancer earlier, and once diagnosed, closer surveillance for recurrence may be warranted.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)2469-2476
Number of pages8
JournalAnnals of Surgical Oncology
Volume18
Issue number9
DOIs
StatePublished - Sep 2011

Fingerprint

Long-Term Care
Rectal Neoplasms
Disease-Free Survival
Young Adult
Recurrence
Drug Therapy
Histology
Patient Care
Radiation
Incidence

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Surgery
  • Oncology

Cite this

Young-onset rectal cancer : Presentation, pattern of care and long-term oncologic outcomes compared to a matched older-onset cohort. / You, Y. Nancy; Dozois, Eric; Boardman, Lisa Allyn; Aakre, Jeremiah; Huebner, Marianne; Larson, David.

In: Annals of Surgical Oncology, Vol. 18, No. 9, 09.2011, p. 2469-2476.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

@article{5575d28d21814aa3afb9290745ddd0d9,
title = "Young-onset rectal cancer: Presentation, pattern of care and long-term oncologic outcomes compared to a matched older-onset cohort",
abstract = "Background: Recent population-based studies have highlighted a disproportionate increase in the incidence of rectal cancer among adults younger than aged 50 years. To determine whether different intervention and surveillance strategies might be needed for younger patients, the patterns of care and oncologic outcomes among adults younger than aged 50 years with rectal cancer were investigated. Methods: A cohort of 333 young (<50 years) patients with sporadic rectal cancer was compared to a contemporaneous cohort of 675 older (>65 years) patients for differences in disease pattern, treatments received, and long-term disease-free survival (DFS). Results: Patient and tumor characteristics did not differ between groups except for an increased presence of signet-ring and mucinous histology in young patients. Younger patients presented with more advanced-stage disease (stages III and IV: 59.4{\%} vs. 46.4{\%}; p = 0.016). More young patients received sphincter-preservation procedures (63.4 vs. 55.4{\%}; p = 0.016), radiation (61.6 vs. 42.1{\%}; p < 0.001), and chemotherapy (67.3 vs. 47.6{\%}; p < 0.001). Fewer young patients were free from recurrent disease at the last follow-up (72.1 vs. 82.5{\%}; p < 0.001). The stage-specific 5-year DFS did not differ between the young and older cohorts. Only stage and the need for chemotherapy independently predicted poor DFS. Conclusions: Young patients present at a later stage and a greater proportion develop distant disease recurrence over time. However, their stage-specific oncologic outcomes appear similar to those in older-onset patients. To have the greatest impact on long-term oncologic outcomes in patients with young-onset rectal cancer, future interventions should target strategies to diagnosis rectal cancer earlier, and once diagnosed, closer surveillance for recurrence may be warranted.",
author = "You, {Y. Nancy} and Eric Dozois and Boardman, {Lisa Allyn} and Jeremiah Aakre and Marianne Huebner and David Larson",
year = "2011",
month = "9",
doi = "10.1245/s10434-011-1674-7",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "18",
pages = "2469--2476",
journal = "Annals of Surgical Oncology",
issn = "1068-9265",
publisher = "Springer New York",
number = "9",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Young-onset rectal cancer

T2 - Presentation, pattern of care and long-term oncologic outcomes compared to a matched older-onset cohort

AU - You, Y. Nancy

AU - Dozois, Eric

AU - Boardman, Lisa Allyn

AU - Aakre, Jeremiah

AU - Huebner, Marianne

AU - Larson, David

PY - 2011/9

Y1 - 2011/9

N2 - Background: Recent population-based studies have highlighted a disproportionate increase in the incidence of rectal cancer among adults younger than aged 50 years. To determine whether different intervention and surveillance strategies might be needed for younger patients, the patterns of care and oncologic outcomes among adults younger than aged 50 years with rectal cancer were investigated. Methods: A cohort of 333 young (<50 years) patients with sporadic rectal cancer was compared to a contemporaneous cohort of 675 older (>65 years) patients for differences in disease pattern, treatments received, and long-term disease-free survival (DFS). Results: Patient and tumor characteristics did not differ between groups except for an increased presence of signet-ring and mucinous histology in young patients. Younger patients presented with more advanced-stage disease (stages III and IV: 59.4% vs. 46.4%; p = 0.016). More young patients received sphincter-preservation procedures (63.4 vs. 55.4%; p = 0.016), radiation (61.6 vs. 42.1%; p < 0.001), and chemotherapy (67.3 vs. 47.6%; p < 0.001). Fewer young patients were free from recurrent disease at the last follow-up (72.1 vs. 82.5%; p < 0.001). The stage-specific 5-year DFS did not differ between the young and older cohorts. Only stage and the need for chemotherapy independently predicted poor DFS. Conclusions: Young patients present at a later stage and a greater proportion develop distant disease recurrence over time. However, their stage-specific oncologic outcomes appear similar to those in older-onset patients. To have the greatest impact on long-term oncologic outcomes in patients with young-onset rectal cancer, future interventions should target strategies to diagnosis rectal cancer earlier, and once diagnosed, closer surveillance for recurrence may be warranted.

AB - Background: Recent population-based studies have highlighted a disproportionate increase in the incidence of rectal cancer among adults younger than aged 50 years. To determine whether different intervention and surveillance strategies might be needed for younger patients, the patterns of care and oncologic outcomes among adults younger than aged 50 years with rectal cancer were investigated. Methods: A cohort of 333 young (<50 years) patients with sporadic rectal cancer was compared to a contemporaneous cohort of 675 older (>65 years) patients for differences in disease pattern, treatments received, and long-term disease-free survival (DFS). Results: Patient and tumor characteristics did not differ between groups except for an increased presence of signet-ring and mucinous histology in young patients. Younger patients presented with more advanced-stage disease (stages III and IV: 59.4% vs. 46.4%; p = 0.016). More young patients received sphincter-preservation procedures (63.4 vs. 55.4%; p = 0.016), radiation (61.6 vs. 42.1%; p < 0.001), and chemotherapy (67.3 vs. 47.6%; p < 0.001). Fewer young patients were free from recurrent disease at the last follow-up (72.1 vs. 82.5%; p < 0.001). The stage-specific 5-year DFS did not differ between the young and older cohorts. Only stage and the need for chemotherapy independently predicted poor DFS. Conclusions: Young patients present at a later stage and a greater proportion develop distant disease recurrence over time. However, their stage-specific oncologic outcomes appear similar to those in older-onset patients. To have the greatest impact on long-term oncologic outcomes in patients with young-onset rectal cancer, future interventions should target strategies to diagnosis rectal cancer earlier, and once diagnosed, closer surveillance for recurrence may be warranted.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=80052756922&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=80052756922&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1245/s10434-011-1674-7

DO - 10.1245/s10434-011-1674-7

M3 - Article

C2 - 21448750

AN - SCOPUS:80052756922

VL - 18

SP - 2469

EP - 2476

JO - Annals of Surgical Oncology

JF - Annals of Surgical Oncology

SN - 1068-9265

IS - 9

ER -