Dataset Information

National variation in pulmonary metastasectomy for colorectal cancer.

ABSTRACT:

Aim

Evidence on patterns of use of pulmonary metastasectomy in colorectal cancer patients is limited. This population-based study aims to investigate the use of pulmonary metastasectomy in the colorectal cancer population across the English National Health Service (NHS) and quantify the extent of any variations in practice and outcome.

Methods

All adults who underwent a major resection for colorectal cancer in an NHS hospital between 2005 and 2013 were identified in the COloRECTal cancer data Repository (CORECT-R). All inpatient episodes corresponding to pulmonary metastasectomy, occurring within 3 years of the initial colorectal resection, were identified. Multi-level logistic regression was used to determine patient and organizational factors associated with the use of pulmonary metastasectomy for colorectal cancer, and Kaplan-Meier and Cox models were used to assess survival following pulmonary metastasectomy.

Results

In all, 173 354 individuals had a major colorectal resection over the study period, with 3434 (2.0%) undergoing pulmonary resection within 3 years. The frequency of pulmonary metastasectomy increased from 1.2% of patients undergoing major colorectal resection in 2005 to 2.3% in 2013. Significant variation was observed across hospital providers in the risk-adjusted rates of pulmonary metastasectomy (0.0%-6.8% of patients). Overall 5-year survival following pulmonary resection was 50.8%, with 30-day and 90-day mortality of 0.6% and 1.2% respectively.

Conclusions

This study shows significant variation in the rates of pulmonary metastasectomy for colorectal cancer across the English NHS.

SUBMITTER: Fenton HM

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8614123 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:ObjectivesTo capture an accurate contemporary description of the practice of pulmonary metastasectomy for colorectal carcinoma in one national healthcare system.DesignA national registry set up in Spain by Grupo Español de Cirugía Metástasis Pulmonares de Carcinoma Colo-Rectal (GECMP-CCR).Setting32 Spanish thoracic units.ParticipantsAll patients with one or more histologically proven lung metastasis removed by surgery between March 2008 and February 2010.InterventionsPulmonary metastasectomy for one or more pulmonary nodules proven to be metastatic colorectal carcinoma.Primary and secondary outcome measuresThe age and sex of the patients having this surgery were recorded with the number of metastases removed, the interval between the primary colorectal cancer operation and the pulmonary metastasectomy, and the carcinoembryonic antigen level. Also recorded were the practices with respect to mediastinal lymphadenopathy and coexisting liver metastases.ResultsData were available on 543 patients from 32 units (6-43/unit). They were aged 32-88 (mean 65) years, and 65% were men. In 55% of patients, there was a solitary metastasis. The median interval between the primary cancer resection and metastasectomy was 28 months and the serum carcinoembryonic antigen was low/normal in the majority. Liver metastatic disease was present in 29% of patients at some point prior to pulmonary metastasectomy. Mediastinal lymphadenectomy varied from 9% to 100% of patients.ConclusionsThe data represent a prospective comprehensive national data collection on pulmonary metastasectomy. The practice is more conservative than the impression gained when members of the European Society of Thoracic Surgeons were surveyed in 2006/2007 but is more inclusive than would be recommended on the basis of recent outcome analyses. Further analyses on the morbidity associated with this surgery and the correlation between imaging studies and pathological findings are being published separately by GECMP-CCR.

Project description:BackgroundLung metastasectomy in the treatment of advanced colorectal cancer has been widely adopted without good evidence of survival or palliative benefit. We aimed to test its effectiveness in a randomised controlled trial (RCT).MethodsMultidisciplinary teams in 13 hospitals recruited participants with potentially resectable lung metastases to a multicentre, two-arm RCT comparing active monitoring with or without metastasectomy. Other local or systemic treatments were decided by the local team. Randomisation was remote and stratified by site with minimisation for age, sex, primary cancer stage, interval since primary resection, prior liver involvement, the number of metastases, and carcinoembryonic antigen level. The central Trial Management Group were blind to patient allocation until completion of the analysis. Analysis was on intention to treat with a margin for non-inferiority of 10%.ResultsBetween December 2010 and December 2016, 65 participants were randomised. Characteristics were well-matched in the two arms and similar to those in reported studies: age 35 to 86 years (interquartile range (IQR) 60 to 74); primary resection IQR 16 to 35 months previously; stage at resection T1, 2 or 3 in 3, 8 and 46; N1 or N2 in 31 and 26; unknown in 8. Lung metastases 1 to 5 (median 2); 16/65 had previous liver metastases; carcinoembryonic antigen normal in 55/65. There were no other interventions in the first 6 months, no crossovers from control to treatment, and no treatment-related deaths or major adverse events. The Hazard ratio for death within 5 years, comparing metastasectomy with control, was 0.82 (95%CI 0.43, 1.56).ConclusionsBecause of poor and worsening recruitment, the study was stopped. The small number of participants in the trial (N = 65) precludes a conclusive answer to the research question given the large overlap in the confidence intervals in the proportions still alive at all time points. A widely held belief is that the 5-year absolute survival benefit with metastasectomy is about 35%: 40% after metastasectomy compared to < 5% in controls. The estimated survival in this study was 38% (23-62%) for metastasectomy patients and 29% (16-52%) in the well-matched controls. That is the new and important finding of this RCT.Trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov, ID: NCT01106261. Registered on 19 April 2010.