A Belgian population-based study reveals subgroups of right-sided colorectal cancer with a better prognosis compared to left-sided cancer

Abstract: Background: Patients with left-sided colorectal cancer (L-CRC) are known to have a significantly better prognosis than those with right-sided CRC (R-CRC). It has been hypothesized that RAS, BRAF mutations, or deficient mismatch repair status (MMR) might be responsible for the prognostic effect of primary tumor location (PTL). This study aims to evaluate the prognostic effect of PTL in the Belgian population and to determine the role of biomarkers (MMR, BRAF, and RAS status) in this effect.Patients and Methods: We performed a retrospective analysis of Belgian Cancer Registry data. Fir... Mehr ...

Verfasser: Janssens, Katleen
Fransen, Erik
Van Camp, Guy
Prenen, Hans
op de Beeck, Ken
Van Damme, Nancy
Peeters, Marc
Dokumenttyp: Artikel
Erscheinungsdatum: 2023
Schlagwörter: Human medicine
Sprache: Englisch
Permalink: https://search.fid-benelux.de/Record/base-26916226
Datenquelle: BASE; Originalkatalog
Powered By: BASE
Link(s) : https://hdl.handle.net/10067/1966820151162165141

Abstract: Background: Patients with left-sided colorectal cancer (L-CRC) are known to have a significantly better prognosis than those with right-sided CRC (R-CRC). It has been hypothesized that RAS, BRAF mutations, or deficient mismatch repair status (MMR) might be responsible for the prognostic effect of primary tumor location (PTL). This study aims to evaluate the prognostic effect of PTL in the Belgian population and to determine the role of biomarkers (MMR, BRAF, and RAS status) in this effect.Patients and Methods: We performed a retrospective analysis of Belgian Cancer Registry data. First, we studied the prognostic effect of PTL on 5-year relative survival of 91 946 patients diagnosed with CRC (all stages) from 2004-2015. Second, we investigated the interaction between biomarkers and the prognostic effect of PTL in 1818 patients diagnosed with stage IV CRC in 2014-2015.Results: L-CRC was associated with a significantly better 5-year relative survival compared to R-CRC in all stages and ages combined (68.4%, 95% CI, 67.7-69.1% vs 65.6%, 95% CI, 64.7-66.4%). Also, when stratified by age, sex, and stage, the prognosis of L-CRC was better compared to R-CRC in most subgroups. Only in stage II and certain subgroups of elderly patients, the opposite was observed. Furthermore, our data showed that none of the biomarkers had a significant interaction with the effect of PTL on survival.Conclusion: This population-based study confirms that L-CRC is associated with significantly better relative survival compared to R-CRC, in all stages and ages combined. Furthermore, in stage IV L-CRC is associated with a longer survival than R-CRC, regardless of MMR, RAS, and BRAF status.