ObjectiveTo analyze the relationship between occupational type of patients with colorectal cancer (CRC) and decision-making and curative effect of neoadjuvant therapy in the current version of the Database from Colorectal Cancer (DACCA). MethodsThe eligible CRC patients were collected from June 29, 2022 updated DACCA according to the screening criteria, in which the data items analyzed included: gender, age, BMI, blood type, marriage, occupation, neoadjuvant therapy, symptomatic changes, imaging changes, and tumor regression grade (TRG), and the occupations were classified into the mental labour group, physical labour group, and the unemployed and resident groups according to the type of labour, then compared the decision-making and curative effect of neoadjuvant therapy among the 3 groups. ResultsA total of 2 415 eligible data were screened, of which 1 160 (48.0%) were the most in the manual labour group, followed by 877 (36.3%) in the unemployed and resident group, and finally 378 (15.7%) in the mental labour group. The proportion of those who did not use targeted drugs was higher in both patients ≤60 years old and >60 years old [75.6% (958/1 267) vs. 82.5% (947/1 148)], with both differences being statistically significant (P=0.004 and P=0.019), and among patients >60 years old, the different occupational types were associated with symptomatic changes and imaging changes after neoadjuvant therapy, with the highest number of both changes to partial remission [71.5% (161/225) vs. 66.7% (148/222)], both differences being statistically significant (P=0.001 and P=0.017). ConclusionThe analysis results of DACCA data reveal that the occupational type of CRC patients was associated with the choice of neoadjuvant therapy, and that different occupational types were associated with changes in curative effect before and after neoadjuvant therapy in CRC patients >60 years old, which needs to be further analysis for the reasons.
Objective To analyze the advantages and disadvantages of various neoadjuvant therapy , provide reference for clinical diagnosis and treatment, and provide direction for further research and exploration. Method The recent domestic and international medical databases (PubMed, EMBASE, Cochrane Library, VIP database, CNKI, WanFang database, etc.) were searched and the relevant literature on neoadjuvant therapy for locally advanced rectal cancer (LARC) were reviewed. Results Neoadjuvant therapy could decrease tumor staging, increase anal reserving rate, and reduce local recurrence rate, but it does not significantly reduce the rates of distant metastasis and lateral lymph node metastasis, nor does it improve long-term survival. More and more optimization neoadjuvant therapy had emerged. Molecular targeted drugs and immunotherapy were being attempted for clinical using, combined with research on emerging biomarkers, to improve the therapeutic efficacy of LARC patients, reduce treatment related side effects, and improve patient survival benefits. Conclusions Neoadjuvant therapy is the standard treatment strategy for LARC, and the exploration of neoadjuvant treatment models is expected to further improve treatment effectiveness, reduce toxic side effects, and improve survival prognosis. By combining tumor molecular biology indicators to identify and screen beneficiaries, it is expected to become an important direction for future research.
ObjectiveTo analyze the association between the cultural level and hospitalization management process and length of hospitalization of the colorectal patients served by West China Hospital of Sichuan University as a regional center in the current version of the Database from Colorectal Cancer (DACCA). MethodAccording to the established screening criteria, eligible colorectal cancer patients were collected from the updated version of DACCA on June 29, 2022. The analyzed data items included gender, age, BMI, blood type, marriage, waiting time before admission, preoperative hospitalization time, postoperative hospitalization time, total hospitalization time, and management process, and patients were divided into illiterate group, primary education group, medium education group, and higher education group according to their educational level, then compared the hospitalization management process and length of hospitalization of each group. ResultsA total of 4 765 eligible data were screened, with secondary education being the most prevalent (2 792, 58.6%), followed by primary (1 337, 28.1%) and higher education (417, 8.7%), and illiteracy being the least prevalent (219, 4.6%). In the classification of management processes, “regular” account for the majority (4 219, 88.5%), followed by “enhanced”(274, 5.8%), “individual” was third (231, 4.8%), and “rapid” was the least (41, 0.9%). There was no statistically significant difference in the comparison of waiting time before admission, preoperative hospitalisation time and postoperative hospitalisation time among patients with different literacy levels (P=0.371, P=0.095, P=0.352), but there was a statistically significant difference in total hospitalisation time (P=0.021), with a significant difference in total hospitalisation length between illiterate patients and patients with medium education (P=0.041). There was no statistically significant difference in the comparison of inpatient management processes of patients in different literacy groups (χ2=15.2, P=0.085). ConclusionsAnalysis of the DACCA data revealed a statistically significant difference in total hospitalisation time between patients with illiteracy and those with medium education. However, the choice of hospitalisation management process was similar for patients with different literacy levels, which needs to be further analysed for the reasons.