Survival trends for left and right sided colon cancer using population-based SEER database: A forty-five-year analysis from 1975 to 2019.

BACKGROUND: Survival differences between left-sided colon cancer (LSCC) and right-sided colon cancer (RSCC) has been previously reported with mixed results, with various study periods not accounting for other causes of mortality. PURPOSE: We sought to assess the trends in colon cancer cause- specific survival (CSS) and overall survival (OS) based on sidedness. METHOD: Fine-Gray competing risk and Cox models were used to analyze Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) population-based cohort from 1975 to 2019. Various interval periods were identified based on the timeline of clinical adoption of modern chemotherapy (1975-1989, interval period A; 1990-2004, B; and 2005-2019, C). RESULTS: Of the 227,637 patients, 50.1% were female and 46.2% were RSCC. RSCC was more common for African Americans (51.5%), older patients (age ≥65; 51.4%), females (50.4%), while LSCC was more common among Whites (53.1%; p < 0.001), younger patients (age 18-49, 64.6%; 50-64, 62.3%; p < 0.001), males (58.1%; p < 0.001). The Median CSS for LSCC and RCC were 19.3 and 16.7 years respectively for interval period A (1975-1989). Median CSS for interval periods B and C were not reached (more than half of the cohort was still living at the end of the follow-up period). Adjusted CSS was superior for LSCC versus RSCC for the most recent interval period C (HR 0.89; 0.86-0.92; p < 0.001). LSCC consistently showed superior OS for all study periods. Stage stratification showed worse CSS for localized and regional LSCC in the earlier study periods, but the risk attenuated over time. However, left sided distant disease had superior CSS per stage for all interval periods. OS was better for LSCC irrespective of stage, with gradual improvement over time. CONCLUSION: LSCC was associated with superior survival compared to right sided tumors. With the adoption of modern chemotherapy regimens, prognosis between LSCC and RSCC became more divergent in favor of LSCC. Colon cancer clinical trials should strongly consider tumor sidedness as an enrollment factor.

The impact of COVID-19 on mortality, length of stay, and cost of care among patients with gastrointestinal malignancies: A propensity score-matched analysis.

BACKGROUND: Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) and the coronavirus 19 (COVID-19) pandemic have had a lasting impact on the care of cancer patients. The impact on patients with gastrointestinal (GI) malignancies remains incompletely understood. We aimed to assess the impact of COVID-19 on mortality, length of stay (LOS), and cost of care among patients with GI malignancies, and identify differences in outcomes based on primary tumor site. METHODS: We analyzed discharge encounters collected from the National Inpatient Sample (NIS) between March 2020 and December 2020 using propensity score matching (PSM) and COVID-19 as the treatment effect. RESULTS: Of the 87,684 patient discharges with GI malignancies, 1892 were positive for COVID-19 (C+) and eligible for matching in the PSM model. Following PSM analysis, C+ with GI tumors demonstrated increased incidence of mortality compared to their COVID-19-negative (C-) counterparts (21.3% vs. 11.9%, p < 0.001). C+ patients with colorectal cancer (CRC) had significantly higher mortality compared to those who were C- (40% vs. 24%; p = 0.035). In addition, C+ patients with GI tumors had a longer mean LOS (9.4 days vs. 6.9 days; p < 0.001) and increased cost of care ($26,048.29 vs. $21,625.2; p = 0.001) compared to C- patients. C+ patients also had higher odds of mortality secondary to myocardial infarction relative to C- patients (OR = 3.54, p = 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: C+ patients with GI tumors face approximately double the odds of mortality, increased LOS, and increased cost of care compared to their C- counterparts. Outcome disparities were most pronounced among patients with CRC.

Update on Emerging Therapies for Advanced Colorectal Cancer.

Colorectal cancer (CRC) is the third most common malignancy worldwide. It is projected to increase by 3.2 million new cases and account for 1.6 million deaths by 2040. Mortality is largely due to limited treatment options for patients who present with advanced disease. Thus, the development of effective and tolerable therapies is crucial. Chemotherapy has been the backbone of systemic treatment of advanced CRC, but utility has been limited because of invariable resistance to therapy, narrow mechanisms of action, and unfavorable toxicity profile. Tumors that are mismatch repair-deficient have demonstrated remarkable response to immune checkpoint inhibitor therapy. However, most CRC tumors are mismatch repair-proficient and represent an unmet medical need. Although ERBB2 amplification occurs only in a few cases, it is associated with left-sided tumors and a higher incidence of brain metastasis. Numerous combinations of HER2 inhibitors have demonstrated efficacy, and antibody-drug conjugates against HER2 represent innovative strategies in this area. The KRAS protein has been classically considered undruggable. Fortunately, new agents targeting KRAS G12C mutation represent a paradigm shift in the management of affected patients and could lead the advancement in drug development for the more common KRAS mutations. Furthermore, aberrant DNA damage response is present in 15%-20% of CRCs, and emerging innovative combinations with poly (ADP-ribose) polymerase (PARP) inhibitors could improve the current therapeutic landscape. Multiple novel biomarker-driven approaches in the management of patients with advanced CRC tumors are reviewed in this article.

The impact of atrial fibrillation on outcomes in patients undergoing radical prostatectomy.

PURPOSE: To assess the role of atrial fibrillation (AF) on complicating inpatient outcomes of radical prostatectomy (RP). MATERIALS AND METHODS: We identified patients treated with RP during 2012-2014 within National Inpatient Sample (NIS) database. Length of stay, cost of hospitalization, and in-hospital complications were compared between patients with or without diagnosis of AF. Propensity score matching methods and multivariable regression analysis were used to adjust for potential confounders and a trend analysis was conducted. RESULTS: Patients with AF had a significantly longer hospital stay (coefficient 0.19, 95% CI 0.09-0.29, P < 0.001) and higher cost (coefficient 0.10, 95% CI 0.06-0.15, P < 0.001). Post-operative cardiac complications were significantly higher for patients with AF (OR 16.38, 95% CI 7.72-34.74, P < 0.001), while no differences were found in other complications between the two groups. Similar results were shown in propensity score matching methods. The cardiac complications after laparoscopic RP (OR: 37.71, 95% CI 1.85-768.73, P = 0.018) and open RP (OR: 16.78, 95% CI 1.41-199.51, P = 0.026) were significantly higher than robot-assisted RP (RARP) in patients with AF. The results of trend study indicated that postoperative cardiac complication rates showed a trend of decreasing year by year while the prevalence of AF was rising. CONCLUSIONS: Perioperative AF is associated with increased cardiac complications, longer hospital stay and higher cost in PCa patients undergoing RP. RARP may be a preferred choice for patients with AF. Attention should be paid to this special patient population. Reasonable pre-operative risk stratification and standardized management should be done to decrease perioperative complications.