Dataset Information

Symptom Experiences in Colorectal Cancer Survivors After Cancer Treatments: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.

ABSTRACT:

Background

With improved survivorship rates for colorectal cancer (CRC), more CRC survivors are living with long-term disease and treatment side effects. Little research exists on CRC symptoms or symptom management guidelines to support these individuals after cancer treatments.

Objectives

The aims of this study were to systematically review symptom experiences, risk factors, and the impact of symptoms and to examine the pooled frequency and severity of symptoms via meta-analyses in CRC survivors after cancer treatments.

Methods

Relevant studies were systematically searched in 7 databases from 2009 to 2019. Meta-analysis was conducted for pooled estimates of symptom frequency and severity.

Results

Thirty-five studies met the inclusion criteria. Six studies assessed multiple CRC symptoms, whereas 29 focused on a single symptom, including peripheral neuropathy, psychological distress, fatigue, body image distress, cognitive impairment, and insomnia. The pooled mean frequency was highest for body image distress (78.5%). On a scale of 0 to 100, the pooled mean severity was highest for fatigue (50.1). Gastrointestinal and psychological symptoms, peripheral neuropathy, and insomnia were also major problems in CRC survivors. Multiple factors contributed to adverse symptoms, such as younger age, female gender, and lack of family/social support. Symptoms negatively impacted quality of life, social and sexual functioning, financial status, and caregivers' physical and mental conditions.

Conclusions

Colorectal cancer survivors experienced multiple adverse symptoms related to distinct risk factors. These symptoms negatively impacted patients and caregivers' well-being.

Implications for practice

Healthcare providers can use study findings to better assess and monitor patient symptoms after cancer treatments. More research is needed on CRC-specific symptoms and their effective management.

SUBMITTER: Han CJ

PROVIDER: S-EPMC7182500 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:To perform a systematic review and meta-analysis of published studies assessing the sensitivity of both computed tomographic (CT) colonography and optical colonoscopy (OC) for colorectal cancer detection.Analysis followed Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses recommendations. The primary data source was the results of a detailed PubMed search from 1994 to 2009. Diagnostic studies evaluating CT colonography detection of colorectal cancer were assessed by using predefined inclusion and exclusion criteria, in particular requiring both OC and histologic confirmation of disease. Studies that also included a mechanism to assess true-positive versus false-negative diagnoses at OC (eg, segmental unblinding) were used to calculate OC sensitivity. Assessment and data extraction were performed independently by two authors. Potential bias was ascertained by using Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies guidelines. Specific CT colonography techniques were cataloged. Forest plots of per-patient sensitivity were produced on the basis of random-effect models. Potential bias across primary studies was assessed by using the I(2) statistic. Original study authors were contacted for data clarification when necessary.Forty-nine studies provided data on 11,151 patients with a cumulative colorectal cancer prevalence of 3.6% (414 cancers). The sensitivity of CT colonography for colorectal cancer was 96.1% (398 of 414; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 93.8%, 97.7%). No heterogeneity (I(2) = 0%) was detected. No cancers were missed at CT colonography when both cathartic and tagging agents were combined in the bowel preparation. The sensitivity of OC for colorectal cancer, derived from a subset of 25 studies including 9223 patients, was 94.7% (178 of 188; 95% CI: 90.4%, 97.2%). A moderate degree of heterogeneity (I(2) = 50%) was present.CT colonography is highly sensitive for colorectal cancer, especially when both cathartic and tagging agents are combined in the bowel preparation. Given the relatively low prevalence of colorectal cancer, primary CT colonography may be more suitable than OC for initial investigation of suspected colorectal cancer, assuming reasonable specificity.http://radiology.rsna.org/lookup/suppl/doi:10.1148/radiol.11101887/-/DC1.