Oops, you're using an old version of your browser so some of the features on this page may not be displaying properly.

MINIMAL Requirements: Google Chrome 24+Mozilla Firefox 20+Internet Explorer 11Opera 15–18Apple Safari 7SeaMonkey 2.15-2.23

Poster session 16

568P - Risk factors for recurrence after surgery for rectal cancer in a modern, nationwide population-based cohort

Date

14 Sep 2024

Session

Poster session 16

Topics

Cancer Registries;  Surgical Oncology;  Cancer Research

Tumour Site

Colon and Rectal Cancer

Presenters

Sepehr Doroudian

Citation

Annals of Oncology (2024) 35 (suppl_2): S428-S481. 10.1016/annonc/annonc1588

Authors

S. Doroudian

Author affiliations

  • Igp, University Hospital Uppsala/Akademiska Sjukhuset, 751 85 - Uppsala/SE

Resources

Login to get immediate access to this content.

If you do not have an ESMO account, please create one for free.

Abstract 568P

Background

The success of modern multimodal treatment in rectal cancer is dependent on risk prediction. Better knowledge of the risk of locoregional and distant recurrence, in relation to preoperative treatment, pathological stage, and commonly used risk factors, is needed when deciding on adjuvant therapy and surveillance.

Methods

The Swedish ColoRectal Cancer Registry was used to identify patients diagnosed with rectal adenocarcinoma between 2011 to 2018. Readily available variables including patient, tumour, and treatment factors were exposures. Cox proportional hazard models were used to identify important risk factors for recurrence and calculate recurrence risks.

Results

A total of 9428 curatively resected patients were included and followed for a median of 72 months. Eight-teen per cent had distal- and 3% locoregional recurrence at 5 years. Risk factors with major impact on distal recurrence were pT4a (HR 5.1, 95% CI 3.3-8.0), pN2b (HR 3.4, 95% CI 2.7-4.2), tumour deposit (HR 1.7, 95% CI 1.5-1.9), lymph node yield (HR 1.5, 95% CI 1.3-1.8), and tumour level 0-5cm (HR 1.5, 95% CI 1.3-1.8. Pathologic stage and number of risk factors identified groups with markedly different recurrence risks in all neoadjuvant treatment groups.

Conclusions

Readily available risk factors, as a complement to stage, are still valid and robust in all neoadjuvant treatment groups. Tumour deposit is important, while circumferential resection margin might no longer be important with improved oncological treatments and high-quality TME-surgery. Tailored surveillance is possible in selected groups using risk stratification based on stage and risk factors.

Clinical trial identification

Editorial acknowledgement

Legal entity responsible for the study

The authors.

Funding

Center for Research and Development, Uppsala University/Region Gävleborg, Sweden grant number CFUG-978856, and the Swedish Cancer Society.

Disclosure

The author has declared no conflicts of interest.

This site uses cookies. Some of these cookies are essential, while others help us improve your experience by providing insights into how the site is being used.

For more detailed information on the cookies we use, please check our Privacy Policy.

Customise settings
  • Necessary cookies enable core functionality. The website cannot function properly without these cookies, and you can only disable them by changing your browser preferences.