Oncologic treatment strategies and relative survival of patients with stage I–III rectal cancer - A EURECCA international comparison between the Netherlands, Belgium, Denmark, Sweden, England, Ireland, Spain, and Lithuania

A. J. Breugom; E. Bastiaannet; P. G. Boelens; E. Van Eycken; L. H. Iversen; A. Martling; R. Johansson; T. Evans; Sarah Lawton; K. M. O'Brien; H. Ortiz; R. Janciauskiene; O. M. Dekkers; H. J.T. Rutten; G. J. Liefers; V. E.P.P. Lemmens; C. J.H. van de Velde

doi:10.1016/j.ejso.2018.05.025

Oncologic treatment strategies and relative survival of patients with stage I–III rectal cancer - A EURECCA international comparison between the Netherlands, Belgium, Denmark, Sweden, England, Ireland, Spain, and Lithuania

A. J. Breugom, E. Bastiaannet, P. G. Boelens, E. Van Eycken, L. H. Iversen, A. Martling, R. Johansson, T. Evans, Sarah Lawton, K. M. O'Brien, H. Ortiz, R. Janciauskiene, O. M. Dekkers, H. J.T. Rutten, G. J. Liefers, V. E.P.P. Lemmens, C. J.H. van de Velde^*

^*Corresponding author for this work

Research output: Contribution to journal › Article › peer-review

8 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Introduction: The aim of this EURECCA international comparison is to compare oncologic treatment strategies and relative survival of patients with stage I–III rectal cancer between European countries. Material and methods: Population-based national cohort data from the Netherlands (NL), Belgium (BE), Denmark (DK), Sweden (SE), England (ENG), Ireland (IE), Spain (ES), and single-centre data from Lithuania (LT) were obtained. All operated patients with (y)pTNM stage I-III rectal cancer diagnosed between 2004 and 2009 were included. Oncologic treatment strategies and relative survival were calculated and compared between neighbouring countries. Results: We included 57,120 patients. Treatment strategies differed between NL and BE (p < 0.001), DK and SE (p < 0.001), and ENG and IE (p < 0.001). More preoperative radiotherapy as single treatment before surgery was administered in NL compared with BE (59.7% vs. 13.1%), in SE compared with DK (55.1% vs. 10.4%), and in ENG compared with IE (15.2% vs. 9.6%). Less postoperative chemotherapy was given in NL (9.6% vs. 39.1%), in SE (7.9% vs. 14.1%), and in IE (12.6% vs. 18.5%) compared with their neighbouring country. In ES, 55.1% of patients received preoperative chemoradiation and 62.3% postoperative chemotherapy. There were no significant differences in relative survival between neighbouring countries. Conclusion: Large differences in oncologic treatment strategies for patients with (y)pTNM I-III rectal cancer were observed across European countries. No clear relation between oncologic treatment strategies and relative survival was observed. Further research into selection criteria for specific treatments could eventually lead to individualised and optimal treatment for patients with non-metastasised rectal cancer.

Original language	English
Pages (from-to)	1338-1343
Number of pages	6
Journal	European Journal of Surgical Oncology
Volume	44
Issue number	9
DOIs	https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejso.2018.05.025
Publication status	Published - Sept 2018

Bibliographical note

Funding Information:
The authors thank the registration teams of the Comprehensive Cancer Centre Netherlands, the Belgian Cancer Registry, the Danish Colorectal Cancer Group, the Swedish Colorectal Cancer Registry, National Cancer Registration and Analysis Service Public Health England, the National Cancer Registry Ireland, the Spanish Rectal Cancer Project, and the Hospital of Lithuanian University of Health Sciences Kaunas Clinics for the collection of data for the registries.

Funding Information:
EURECCA was funded by the European Society of Surgical Oncology (ESSO). The funding source had no role in the study design, data collection, analysis, interpretation of the data, writing of the manuscript, or the decision to publish.

Publisher Copyright:
© 2018

Keywords

International comparison
Oncologic treatment
Population-based
Rectal cancer
Stage I–III
Surgery

UN SDGs

This output contributes to the following UN Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs)

Access to Document

10.1016/j.ejso.2018.05.025

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of 'Oncologic treatment strategies and relative survival of patients with stage I–III rectal cancer - A EURECCA international comparison between the Netherlands, Belgium, Denmark, Sweden, England, Ireland, Spain, and Lithuania'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this

Breugom, A. J., Bastiaannet, E., Boelens, P. G., Van Eycken, E., Iversen, L. H., Martling, A., Johansson, R., Evans, T., Lawton, S., O'Brien, K. M., Ortiz, H., Janciauskiene, R., Dekkers, O. M., Rutten, H. J. T., Liefers, G. J., Lemmens, V. E. P. P., & van de Velde, C. J. H. (2018). Oncologic treatment strategies and relative survival of patients with stage I–III rectal cancer - A EURECCA international comparison between the Netherlands, Belgium, Denmark, Sweden, England, Ireland, Spain, and Lithuania. European Journal of Surgical Oncology, 44(9), 1338-1343. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejso.2018.05.025

@article{8a2fcc05999c4779bd4d380532a6933c,

title = "Oncologic treatment strategies and relative survival of patients with stage I–III rectal cancer - A EURECCA international comparison between the Netherlands, Belgium, Denmark, Sweden, England, Ireland, Spain, and Lithuania",

abstract = "Introduction: The aim of this EURECCA international comparison is to compare oncologic treatment strategies and relative survival of patients with stage I–III rectal cancer between European countries. Material and methods: Population-based national cohort data from the Netherlands (NL), Belgium (BE), Denmark (DK), Sweden (SE), England (ENG), Ireland (IE), Spain (ES), and single-centre data from Lithuania (LT) were obtained. All operated patients with (y)pTNM stage I-III rectal cancer diagnosed between 2004 and 2009 were included. Oncologic treatment strategies and relative survival were calculated and compared between neighbouring countries. Results: We included 57,120 patients. Treatment strategies differed between NL and BE (p < 0.001), DK and SE (p < 0.001), and ENG and IE (p < 0.001). More preoperative radiotherapy as single treatment before surgery was administered in NL compared with BE (59.7% vs. 13.1%), in SE compared with DK (55.1% vs. 10.4%), and in ENG compared with IE (15.2% vs. 9.6%). Less postoperative chemotherapy was given in NL (9.6% vs. 39.1%), in SE (7.9% vs. 14.1%), and in IE (12.6% vs. 18.5%) compared with their neighbouring country. In ES, 55.1% of patients received preoperative chemoradiation and 62.3% postoperative chemotherapy. There were no significant differences in relative survival between neighbouring countries. Conclusion: Large differences in oncologic treatment strategies for patients with (y)pTNM I-III rectal cancer were observed across European countries. No clear relation between oncologic treatment strategies and relative survival was observed. Further research into selection criteria for specific treatments could eventually lead to individualised and optimal treatment for patients with non-metastasised rectal cancer.",

keywords = "International comparison, Oncologic treatment, Population-based, Rectal cancer, Stage I–III, Surgery",

author = "Breugom, {A. J.} and E. Bastiaannet and Boelens, {P. G.} and {Van Eycken}, E. and Iversen, {L. H.} and A. Martling and R. Johansson and T. Evans and Sarah Lawton and O'Brien, {K. M.} and H. Ortiz and R. Janciauskiene and Dekkers, {O. M.} and Rutten, {H. J.T.} and Liefers, {G. J.} and Lemmens, {V. E.P.P.} and {van de Velde}, {C. J.H.}",

note = "Funding Information: The authors thank the registration teams of the Comprehensive Cancer Centre Netherlands, the Belgian Cancer Registry, the Danish Colorectal Cancer Group, the Swedish Colorectal Cancer Registry, National Cancer Registration and Analysis Service Public Health England, the National Cancer Registry Ireland, the Spanish Rectal Cancer Project, and the Hospital of Lithuanian University of Health Sciences Kaunas Clinics for the collection of data for the registries. Funding Information: EURECCA was funded by the European Society of Surgical Oncology (ESSO). The funding source had no role in the study design, data collection, analysis, interpretation of the data, writing of the manuscript, or the decision to publish. Publisher Copyright: {\textcopyright} 2018",

year = "2018",

month = sep,

doi = "10.1016/j.ejso.2018.05.025",

language = "English",

volume = "44",

pages = "1338--1343",

journal = "European Journal of Surgical Oncology",

issn = "0748-7983",

publisher = "Elsevier",

number = "9",

}

Breugom, AJ, Bastiaannet, E, Boelens, PG, Van Eycken, E, Iversen, LH, Martling, A, Johansson, R, Evans, T, Lawton, S, O'Brien, KM, Ortiz, H, Janciauskiene, R, Dekkers, OM, Rutten, HJT, Liefers, GJ, Lemmens, VEPP & van de Velde, CJH 2018, 'Oncologic treatment strategies and relative survival of patients with stage I–III rectal cancer - A EURECCA international comparison between the Netherlands, Belgium, Denmark, Sweden, England, Ireland, Spain, and Lithuania', European Journal of Surgical Oncology, vol. 44, no. 9, pp. 1338-1343. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejso.2018.05.025

Oncologic treatment strategies and relative survival of patients with stage I–III rectal cancer - A EURECCA international comparison between the Netherlands, Belgium, Denmark, Sweden, England, Ireland, Spain, and Lithuania. / Breugom, A. J.; Bastiaannet, E.; Boelens, P. G. et al.

In: European Journal of Surgical Oncology, Vol. 44, No. 9, 09.2018, p. 1338-1343.

Research output: Contribution to journal › Article › peer-review

TY - JOUR

T1 - Oncologic treatment strategies and relative survival of patients with stage I–III rectal cancer - A EURECCA international comparison between the Netherlands, Belgium, Denmark, Sweden, England, Ireland, Spain, and Lithuania

AU - Breugom, A. J.

AU - Bastiaannet, E.

AU - Boelens, P. G.

AU - Van Eycken, E.

AU - Iversen, L. H.

AU - Martling, A.

AU - Johansson, R.

AU - Evans, T.

AU - Lawton, Sarah

AU - O'Brien, K. M.

AU - Ortiz, H.

AU - Janciauskiene, R.

AU - Dekkers, O. M.

AU - Rutten, H. J.T.

AU - Liefers, G. J.

AU - Lemmens, V. E.P.P.

AU - van de Velde, C. J.H.

N1 - Funding Information: The authors thank the registration teams of the Comprehensive Cancer Centre Netherlands, the Belgian Cancer Registry, the Danish Colorectal Cancer Group, the Swedish Colorectal Cancer Registry, National Cancer Registration and Analysis Service Public Health England, the National Cancer Registry Ireland, the Spanish Rectal Cancer Project, and the Hospital of Lithuanian University of Health Sciences Kaunas Clinics for the collection of data for the registries. Funding Information: EURECCA was funded by the European Society of Surgical Oncology (ESSO). The funding source had no role in the study design, data collection, analysis, interpretation of the data, writing of the manuscript, or the decision to publish. Publisher Copyright: © 2018

PY - 2018/9

Y1 - 2018/9

N2 - Introduction: The aim of this EURECCA international comparison is to compare oncologic treatment strategies and relative survival of patients with stage I–III rectal cancer between European countries. Material and methods: Population-based national cohort data from the Netherlands (NL), Belgium (BE), Denmark (DK), Sweden (SE), England (ENG), Ireland (IE), Spain (ES), and single-centre data from Lithuania (LT) were obtained. All operated patients with (y)pTNM stage I-III rectal cancer diagnosed between 2004 and 2009 were included. Oncologic treatment strategies and relative survival were calculated and compared between neighbouring countries. Results: We included 57,120 patients. Treatment strategies differed between NL and BE (p < 0.001), DK and SE (p < 0.001), and ENG and IE (p < 0.001). More preoperative radiotherapy as single treatment before surgery was administered in NL compared with BE (59.7% vs. 13.1%), in SE compared with DK (55.1% vs. 10.4%), and in ENG compared with IE (15.2% vs. 9.6%). Less postoperative chemotherapy was given in NL (9.6% vs. 39.1%), in SE (7.9% vs. 14.1%), and in IE (12.6% vs. 18.5%) compared with their neighbouring country. In ES, 55.1% of patients received preoperative chemoradiation and 62.3% postoperative chemotherapy. There were no significant differences in relative survival between neighbouring countries. Conclusion: Large differences in oncologic treatment strategies for patients with (y)pTNM I-III rectal cancer were observed across European countries. No clear relation between oncologic treatment strategies and relative survival was observed. Further research into selection criteria for specific treatments could eventually lead to individualised and optimal treatment for patients with non-metastasised rectal cancer.

AB - Introduction: The aim of this EURECCA international comparison is to compare oncologic treatment strategies and relative survival of patients with stage I–III rectal cancer between European countries. Material and methods: Population-based national cohort data from the Netherlands (NL), Belgium (BE), Denmark (DK), Sweden (SE), England (ENG), Ireland (IE), Spain (ES), and single-centre data from Lithuania (LT) were obtained. All operated patients with (y)pTNM stage I-III rectal cancer diagnosed between 2004 and 2009 were included. Oncologic treatment strategies and relative survival were calculated and compared between neighbouring countries. Results: We included 57,120 patients. Treatment strategies differed between NL and BE (p < 0.001), DK and SE (p < 0.001), and ENG and IE (p < 0.001). More preoperative radiotherapy as single treatment before surgery was administered in NL compared with BE (59.7% vs. 13.1%), in SE compared with DK (55.1% vs. 10.4%), and in ENG compared with IE (15.2% vs. 9.6%). Less postoperative chemotherapy was given in NL (9.6% vs. 39.1%), in SE (7.9% vs. 14.1%), and in IE (12.6% vs. 18.5%) compared with their neighbouring country. In ES, 55.1% of patients received preoperative chemoradiation and 62.3% postoperative chemotherapy. There were no significant differences in relative survival between neighbouring countries. Conclusion: Large differences in oncologic treatment strategies for patients with (y)pTNM I-III rectal cancer were observed across European countries. No clear relation between oncologic treatment strategies and relative survival was observed. Further research into selection criteria for specific treatments could eventually lead to individualised and optimal treatment for patients with non-metastasised rectal cancer.

KW - International comparison

KW - Oncologic treatment

KW - Population-based

KW - Rectal cancer

KW - Stage I–III

KW - Surgery

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85049043806&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1016/j.ejso.2018.05.025

DO - 10.1016/j.ejso.2018.05.025

M3 - Article

C2 - 29960770

AN - SCOPUS:85049043806

SN - 0748-7983

VL - 44

SP - 1338

EP - 1343

JO - European Journal of Surgical Oncology

JF - European Journal of Surgical Oncology

IS - 9

ER -

Breugom AJ, Bastiaannet E, Boelens PG, Van Eycken E, Iversen LH, Martling A et al. Oncologic treatment strategies and relative survival of patients with stage I–III rectal cancer - A EURECCA international comparison between the Netherlands, Belgium, Denmark, Sweden, England, Ireland, Spain, and Lithuania. European Journal of Surgical Oncology. 2018 Sept;44(9):1338-1343. doi: 10.1016/j.ejso.2018.05.025

Oncologic treatment strategies and relative survival of patients with stage I–III rectal cancer - A EURECCA international comparison between the Netherlands, Belgium, Denmark, Sweden, England, Ireland, Spain, and Lithuania

Abstract

Bibliographical note

Keywords

UN SDGs

Access to Document

Other files and links

Fingerprint

Cite this