Prognostic value of primary tumor location in colorectal cancer: an updated meta-analysis

Clinical and Experimental Medicine - Tập 23 - Trang 4369-4383 - 2023
Hanieh Gholamalizadeh1, Nima Zafari1, Mahla Velayati1, Hamid Fiuji1, Mina Maftooh1,2, Elnaz Ghorbani1, Seyed Mahdi Hassanian1,2, Majid Khazaei1,2, Gordon A. Ferns3, Elham Nazari1,2, Amir Avan1,4,5,6
1Metabolic Syndrome Research Center, Mashhad University of Medical Sciences, Mashhad, Iran
2Basic Sciences Research Institute, Mashhad University of Medical Sciences, Mashhad, Iran
3Division of Medical Education, Brighton and Sussex Medical School, Falmer, Brighton, Sussex, UK
4College of Medicine, University of Warith Al-Anbiyaa, Karbala, Iraq
5School of Mechanical, Medical and Process Engineering, Science and Engineering Faculty, Queensland University of Technology, Brisbane, Australia
6Faculty of Health, School of Biomedical Sciences, Queensland University of Technology, Brisbane, Australia

Tóm tắt

The clinical, histological, and molecular differences between right-sided colon cancer (RCC) and left-sided colon cancer (RCC) have received considerable attention. Over the past decade, many articles have been published concerning the association between primary tumor location (PTL) of colorectal cancer and survival outcomes. Therefore, there is a growing need for an updated meta-analysis integrating the outcomes of recent studies to determine the prognostic role of right vs left-sidedness of PTL in patients with colorectal cancer. We conducted a comprehensive database review using PubMed, SCOPUS, and Cochrane library databases from February 2016 to March 2023 for prospective or retrospective studies reporting data on overall survival (OS) and cancer-specific survival (CSS) of RCC compared with LCC. A total of 60 cohort studies comprising 1,494,445 patients were included in the meta-analysis. We demonstrated that RCC is associated with a significantly increased risk of death compared with LCC by 25% (hazard ratio (HR), 1.25; 95% confidence interval (CI), 1.19–1.31; I2 = 78.4%; Z = 43.68). Results showed that patients with RCC have a worse OS compared with LCC only in advanced stages (Stage III: HR, 1.275; 95% CI 1.16–1.4; P = 0.0002; I2 = 85.8%; Stage IV: HR, 1.34; 95% CI 1.25–1.44; P < 0.0001; I2 = 69.2%) but not in primary stages (Stage I/II: HR, 1.275; 95% CI 1.16–1.4; P = 0.0002; I2 = 85.8%). Moreover, a meta-analysis of 13 studies including 812,644 patients revealed that there is no significant difference in CSS between RCC and LCC (HR, 1.121; 95% CI 0.97–1.3; P = 0.112). Findings from the present meta-analysis highlight the importance of PTL in clinical decision-making for patients with CRC, especially in advanced stages. We provide further evidence supporting the hypothesis that RCC and LCC are distinct disease entities that should be managed differently.

Tài liệu tham khảo