• 文献检索
  • 文档翻译
  • 深度研究
  • 学术资讯
  • Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件
  • 邀请有礼
  • 套餐&价格
  • 历史记录
应用&插件
Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件浏览器插件Mac 客户端Windows 客户端微信小程序
定价
高级版会员购买积分包购买API积分包
服务
文献检索文档翻译深度研究API 文档MCP 服务
关于我们
关于 Suppr公司介绍联系我们用户协议隐私条款
关注我们

Suppr 超能文献

核心技术专利:CN118964589B侵权必究
粤ICP备2023148730 号-1Suppr @ 2026

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验

在随访中由全科医生和外科医生检测结肠癌复发。

Detection of colon cancer recurrences during follow-up care by general practitioners vs surgeons.

机构信息

Department of General Practice, Amsterdam UMC, Location University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, the Netherlands.

Amsterdam Public Health, Research Programme Quality of Care, and Personalized Medicine, Amsterdam, the Netherlands.

出版信息

J Natl Cancer Inst. 2023 May 8;115(5):523-529. doi: 10.1093/jnci/djad019.

DOI:10.1093/jnci/djad019
PMID:36715623
原文链接:https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC10165489/
Abstract

BACKGROUND

In the I CARE study, colon cancer patients were randomly assigned to receive follow-up care from either a general practitioner (GP) or a surgeon. Here, we address a secondary outcome, namely, detection of recurrences and effect on time to detection of transferring care from surgeon to GP.

METHODS

Pattern, stage, and treatment of recurrences were described after 3 years. Time to event was defined as date of surgery, until date of recurrence or last follow-up, with death as competing event. Effects on time to recurrence and death were estimated as hazard ratios (HRs) using Cox regression. Restricted mean survival times were estimated.

RESULTS

Of 303 patients, 141 were randomly assigned to the GP and 162 to the surgeon. Patients were male (67%) with a mean age of 68.0 (8.4) years. During follow-up, 46 recurrences were detected; 18 (13%) in the GP vs 28 (17%) in the surgeon group. Most recurrences were detected via abnormal follow-up tests (74%) and treated with curative intent (59%). Hazard ratio for recurrence was 0.75 (95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.41 to 1.36) in GP vs surgeon group. Patients in the GP group remained in the disease-free state slightly longer (2.76 vs 2.71 years). Of the patients, 38 died during follow-up; 15 (11%) in the GP vs 23 (14%) in the surgeon group. Of these, 21 (55%) deaths were related to colon cancer. There were no differences in overall deaths between the groups (HR = 0.76, 95% CI = 0.39 to 1.46).

CONCLUSION

Follow-up provided by GPs vs surgeons leads to similar detection of recurrences. Also, no differences in mortality were found.

摘要

背景

在 I CARE 研究中,结肠癌患者被随机分配接受全科医生(GP)或外科医生的随访护理。在这里,我们解决了次要结果,即检测复发情况以及将护理从外科医生转移到 GP 对检测时间的影响。

方法

在 3 年后描述了复发的模式、阶段和治疗情况。时间事件定义为手术日期,直至复发日期或最后一次随访日期,以死亡为竞争事件。使用 Cox 回归估计对复发和死亡的时间影响,作为风险比(HRs)。估计限制性平均生存时间。

结果

在 303 名患者中,141 名被随机分配到 GP 组,162 名分配到外科医生组。患者为男性(67%),平均年龄为 68.0(8.4)岁。在随访期间,检测到 46 例复发;GP 组 18 例(13%),外科医生组 28 例(17%)。大多数复发是通过异常随访检查发现的(74%),并采用治愈性治疗(59%)。GP 组的复发风险比为 0.75(95%置信区间[CI] = 0.41 至 1.36)。GP 组的患者保持无疾病状态的时间略长(2.76 年 vs. 2.71 年)。在随访期间,有 38 名患者死亡;GP 组 15 例(11%),外科医生组 23 例(14%)。其中,21 例(55%)死亡与结肠癌有关。两组之间的总死亡率没有差异(HR = 0.76,95% CI = 0.39 至 1.46)。

结论

GP 提供的随访与外科医生提供的随访在检测复发方面效果相当。而且,两组在死亡率方面没有差异。

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/bfac/10165489/c7d2ff28a7d8/djad019f3.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/bfac/10165489/42f4a61f5005/djad019f1.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/bfac/10165489/cf529e7ca04f/djad019f2.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/bfac/10165489/c7d2ff28a7d8/djad019f3.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/bfac/10165489/42f4a61f5005/djad019f1.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/bfac/10165489/cf529e7ca04f/djad019f2.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/bfac/10165489/c7d2ff28a7d8/djad019f3.jpg

相似文献

1
Detection of colon cancer recurrences during follow-up care by general practitioners vs surgeons.在随访中由全科医生和外科医生检测结肠癌复发。
J Natl Cancer Inst. 2023 May 8;115(5):523-529. doi: 10.1093/jnci/djad019.
2
Effect of general practitioner-led versus surgeon-led colon cancer survivorship care, with or without eHealth support, on quality of life (I CARE): an interim analysis of 1-year results of a randomised, controlled trial.全科医生主导与外科医生主导的结肠癌生存护理,联合或不联合电子健康支持,对生活质量的影响(I CARE):一项随机对照试验 1 年结果的中期分析。
Lancet Oncol. 2021 Aug;22(8):1175-1187. doi: 10.1016/S1470-2045(21)00273-4. Epub 2021 Jul 2.
3
Follow-up after colon cancer treatment in the Netherlands; a survey of patients, GPs, and colorectal surgeons.荷兰结肠癌治疗后的随访;对患者、全科医生和结直肠外科医生的调查。
Eur J Surg Oncol. 2013 Aug;39(8):837-43. doi: 10.1016/j.ejso.2013.04.001. Epub 2013 May 18.
4
General practice vs surgical-based follow-up for patients with colon cancer: randomised controlled trial.结肠癌患者的全科医疗随访与外科为主的随访:随机对照试验
Br J Cancer. 2006 Apr 24;94(8):1116-21. doi: 10.1038/sj.bjc.6603052.
5
Cost-effectiveness and quality of life in surgeon versus general practitioner-organised colon cancer surveillance: a randomised controlled trial.外科医生与全科医生组织的结肠癌监测的成本效益和生活质量:一项随机对照试验。
BMJ Open. 2013 Apr 4;3(4). doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2012-002391. Print 2013.
6
Adherence to national guidelines for surveillance after curative resection of nonmetastatic colon and rectum cancer: a survey among Norwegian gastrointestinal surgeons.遵循国家指南对非转移性结直肠癌治愈性切除术后进行监测:一项针对挪威胃肠外科医生的调查。
Colorectal Dis. 2012 Mar;14(3):320-4. doi: 10.1111/j.1463-1318.2011.02631.x.
7
An evaluation of postoperative follow-up tests in colon cancer patients treated for cure.对接受根治性治疗的结肠癌患者术后随访检查的评估。
Oncology. 1997 Jul-Aug;54(4):287-92. doi: 10.1159/000227705.
8
Emergency surgery for obstructing and perforated colon cancer: patterns of recurrence and prognostic factors.急诊手术治疗梗阻性和穿孔性结肠癌:复发模式和预后因素。
Tech Coloproctol. 2019 Dec;23(12):1141-1161. doi: 10.1007/s10151-019-02110-x. Epub 2019 Nov 14.
9
A comparison of laparoscopically assisted and open colectomy for colon cancer.腹腔镜辅助结肠癌切除术与开腹结肠癌切除术的比较。
N Engl J Med. 2004 May 13;350(20):2050-9. doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa032651.
10
Cardiovascular medication use and risks of colon cancer recurrences and additional cancer events: a cohort study.心血管药物使用与结肠癌复发和其他癌症事件风险:一项队列研究。
BMC Cancer. 2019 Mar 27;19(1):270. doi: 10.1186/s12885-019-5493-8.

引用本文的文献

1
General practitioner-led vs surgeon-led colon cancer survivorship care: a randomized clinical trial.全科医生主导与外科医生主导的结肠癌生存护理:一项随机临床试验。
JNCI Cancer Spectr. 2025 Apr 30;9(3). doi: 10.1093/jncics/pkaf052.
2
Cost-effectiveness of general practitioner- versus surgeon-led colon cancer survivorship care: an economic evaluation alongside a randomised controlled trial.初级保健医生与外科医生主导的结肠癌生存者护理的成本效益:一项随机对照试验的经济评估。
J Cancer Surviv. 2024 Aug;18(4):1393-1402. doi: 10.1007/s11764-023-01383-4. Epub 2023 Apr 25.

本文引用的文献

1
Patient experiences of GP-led colon cancer survivorship care: a Dutch mixed-methods evaluation.患者对全科医生主导的结肠癌生存护理的体验:荷兰混合方法评估。
Br J Gen Pract. 2023 Jan 26;73(727):e115-e123. doi: 10.3399/BJGP.2022.0104. Print 2023 Feb.
2
Improved models of care for cancer survivors.针对癌症幸存者的改进护理模式。
Lancet. 2022 Apr 16;399(10334):1551-1560. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(22)00306-3.
3
Delivering colon cancer survivorship care in primary care; a qualitative study on the experiences of general practitioners.
在初级保健中提供结肠癌生存者护理;全科医生经验的定性研究。
BMC Prim Care. 2022 Jan 17;23(1):13. doi: 10.1186/s12875-021-01610-w.
4
Recruitment challenges to the I CARE study: a randomised trial on general practitioner-led colon cancer survivorship care.招募挑战的 I CARE 研究:一个随机试验的全科医生主导的结肠癌生存护理。
BMJ Open. 2021 Aug 24;11(8):e048985. doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2021-048985.
5
Effect of general practitioner-led versus surgeon-led colon cancer survivorship care, with or without eHealth support, on quality of life (I CARE): an interim analysis of 1-year results of a randomised, controlled trial.全科医生主导与外科医生主导的结肠癌生存护理,联合或不联合电子健康支持,对生活质量的影响(I CARE):一项随机对照试验 1 年结果的中期分析。
Lancet Oncol. 2021 Aug;22(8):1175-1187. doi: 10.1016/S1470-2045(21)00273-4. Epub 2021 Jul 2.
6
Disease recurrence after colorectal cancer surgery in the modern era: a population-based study.结直肠癌手术后疾病复发的现代研究:基于人群的研究。
Int J Colorectal Dis. 2021 Nov;36(11):2399-2410. doi: 10.1007/s00384-021-03914-w. Epub 2021 Apr 4.
7
Outcomes of cancer survivorship education and training for primary care providers: a systematic review.初级保健提供者癌症生存教育培训的结果:系统评价。
J Cancer Surviv. 2022 Apr;16(2):279-302. doi: 10.1007/s11764-021-01018-6. Epub 2021 Mar 24.
8
GP involvement after a cancer diagnosis; patients' call to improve decision support.癌症确诊后全科医生的参与;患者呼吁改善决策支持。
BJGP Open. 2021 Feb 23;5(1). doi: 10.3399/bjgpopen20X101124. Print 2021 Jan.
9
Survivorship care for cancer patients in primary versus secondary care: a systematic review.癌症患者初级与二级保健中的生存护理:系统评价。
J Cancer Surviv. 2021 Feb;15(1):66-76. doi: 10.1007/s11764-020-00911-w. Epub 2020 Aug 19.
10
Major differences in follow-up practice of patients with colorectal cancer; results of a national survey in the Netherlands.结直肠癌患者随访实践的主要差异;荷兰全国调查结果。
BMC Cancer. 2020 Jan 6;20(1):22. doi: 10.1186/s12885-019-6509-0.