Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30661923›Full record

ArticleEuropean journal of surgical oncology : the journal of the European Society of Surgical Oncology and the British Association of Surgical Oncology2019

Rectal cancer in old age -is it appropriately managed? Evidence from population-based analysis of routine data across the English national health service.

Rebecca J Birch, John C Taylor, Amy Downing, Katie Spencer, Paul J Finan, Riccardo A Audisio, Christopher M Carrigan, Peter J Selby, Eva J A Morris

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in European journal of surgical oncology : the journal of the European Society of Surgical Oncology and the British Association of Surgical Oncology, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
12citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

12 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Challenges in Geriatric Oncology-A Surgeon's Perspective.Current oncology (Toronto, Ont.) · 2022
    Review
  11. Surgical Considerations for Older Adults With Cancer: A Multidimensional, Multiphase Pathway to Improve Care.Journal of clinical oncology : official journal of the American Society of Clinical Oncology · 2021
    Review
  12. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

9 authors.

Rebecca J BirchCancer Epidemiology Group, Leeds Institute for Data Analytics, Worsley Building, University of Leeds, LS2 9NL, UK. Electronic address: r.j.birch@leeds.ac.uk.
John C TaylorCancer Epidemiology Group, Leeds Institute for Data Analytics, Worsley Building, University of Leeds, LS2 9NL, UK.
Amy DowningCancer Epidemiology Group, Leeds Institute for Data Analytics, Worsley Building, University of Leeds, LS2 9NL, UK.
Katie SpencerCancer Epidemiology Group, Leeds Institute for Data Analytics, Worsley Building, University of Leeds, LS2 9NL, UK; Leeds Cancer Centre, Bexley Wing, St James's University Teaching Hospital, Leeds, LS9 7TF, UK.
Paul J FinanCancer Epidemiology Group, Leeds Institute for Data Analytics, Worsley Building, University of Leeds, LS2 9NL, UK.
Riccardo A AudisioDepartment of Surgery, Sahlgrenska University Hospital, Goteborg, Sweden.
Christopher M CarriganCancer Epidemiology Group, Leeds Institute for Data Analytics, Worsley Building, University of Leeds, LS2 9NL, UK.
Peter J SelbyLeeds Institute of Cancer and Pathology, St James's University Hospital, Leeds, LS9 7TF, UK.
Eva J A MorrisCancer Epidemiology Group, Leeds Institute for Data Analytics, Worsley Building, University of Leeds, LS2 9NL, UK.

Funding

Cancer Research UK 16438Department of Health RP-PG-0707-10101Medical Research Council MR/L01629X/1
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThere is significant debate as to where to draw the line between undertreating older rectal cancer patients and minimising treatment risks. This study sought to examine the use of radical rectal cancer treatments and associated outcomes in relation to age across the English NHS.

methodsPatient, tumour and treatment characteristics for all patients diagnosed with a first primary rectal cancer in England between 1st April 2009 and 31st December 2014 were obtained from the CORECT-R data repository. Descriptive analyses and adjusted logistic regression models were undertaken to examine any association between age and the use of major resection and post-surgical outcomes. Funnel plots were used to show variation in adjusted rates of major resection.

resultsThe proportion of patients who underwent a major surgical resection fell from 66.5% to 31.7%, amongst those aged <70 and aged ≥80 respectively. After adjustment, 30-day post-operative mortality, failure to rescue and prolonged length of stay were significantly higher among the oldest group when compared to the youngest. Patient reported outcomes were not significantly worse amongst older patients. Significant variation was observed in adjusted surgical resection rates in the oldest patients between NHS Trusts. The probability of death due to cancer was comparable across all age groups.

conclusionsOlder patients who are selected for surgery have good outcomes, often comparable to their younger counterparts. Significant variation in the treatment of older patients could not be explained by differences in measured characteristics and required further investigation.

Indexed as

ChemoradiotherapyDigestive System Surgical ProceduresNeoadjuvant TherapyRadiotherapyAgedAged, 80 and overAge FactorsComorbidityEnglandFemaleHumansLogistic ModelsMaleNeoplasm StagingPatient Reported Outcome MeasuresPostoperative ComplicationsAgeCancerColorectalInequalitiesRectal

Identifiers

PMID30661923
PMCPMC6602152

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.