Nationwide Outcomes After Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy for Locally Advanced Sigmoid Colon Cancer—A Propensity Score-Matched Analysis

Background The role of neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NAC) in advanced sigmoid colon carcinoma remains to be further characterized. Rationale for NAC includes downstaging on final pathology and optimization of microscopically negative margins (R0 resection). We investigated rates of neoadjuvant chemother...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:The American surgeon 2024-04, Vol.90 (4), p.866-874
Hauptverfasser: Kodia, Karishma, Alnajar, Ahmed, Huerta, Carlos T., Gupta, Gaurav, Giri, Bhuwan, Dosch, Austin, Paluvoi, Nivedh
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
Beschreibung
Zusammenfassung:Background The role of neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NAC) in advanced sigmoid colon carcinoma remains to be further characterized. Rationale for NAC includes downstaging on final pathology and optimization of microscopically negative margins (R0 resection). We investigated rates of neoadjuvant chemotherapy use in advanced sigmoid colon cancer at academic cancer centers and assessed factors associated with likelihood of NAC administration. Methods The National Cancer Database was queried from 2004 to 2017 for patients with clinical T3 or T4, N0-2, M0 sigmoid colon cancer who underwent surgical resection. Those with neoadjuvant radiation or metastatic disease were excluded. The outcomes of patients who did and did not receive neoadjuvant chemotherapy were evaluated for this retrospective cohort study. Results There were 23,597 patients of whom 364 (1.5%) received NAC. More patients received NAC at academic (41%, P < .001) and high-volume centers (27%, P < .001). Patients with Medicare/Medicaid (39%) and private insurance (52%) were more likely to receive NAC (P < .001). There was a significantly higher rate of N2 to N1 downstaging in the NAC group. Propensity-score matching demonstrated comprehensive community cancer programs (CCCP) were less likely to provide NAC (OR 0.4; 95% CI 0.23, 0.70, P < .001). There was no difference in survival (P = .20), R0 resection (P = .090), or 30-day readmission rates (P = .30) in the NAC cohort compared to the non-NAC cohort. Conclusions Access to centers offering multi-disciplinary care with NAC prior to surgical resection is important. This care was associated with academic and high-volume centers and private or government-sponsored insurance. There was no difference in survival between NAC and non-NAC cohort.
ISSN:0003-1348
1555-9823
DOI:10.1177/00031348231216491