Registry-based study comparing health-related quality of life between patients with primary rectal cancer and locally recurrent rectal cancer.

AIM

National clinical registries offer the benefits of a comprehensive dataset, particularly when linked with patient-reported outcome (PRO) data. This aim of this study was to utilise UK registry data to assess cross-sectional differences in health-related quality of life (HrQoL) in patients with primary rectal (PRC) and locally recurrent rectal cancer (LRRC).

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Data were extracted from the COloRECTal cancer Repository (CORECT-R) and the Locally Recurrent Rectal Cancer - Quality of Life (LRRC-QoL) datasets. Propensity score matching was undertaken in a 1:1 ratio using two covariates: age and sex. The primary outcome was the FACT-C Colorectal Cancer Subscale (CCS). Statistical significance was determined using p < 0.05 and clinical significance using effect size (ES) and minimally important clinical difference (MCID).

RESULTS

A matched cohort with 72 patients in each group was identified. Overall FACT-C CCS scores were worse in patients with LRRC from a statistical (11.80 vs 18.03, p < 0.001) and clinically meaningful perspective (ES 1.63, MCID 6.23). Patients with PRC reported better digestion (p < 0.001, ES 0.85), better control over their bowels (p < 0.001, ES 1.03) and increased appetite (p < 0.001, ES 1.74, MCID 2.08). Patients with LRRC reported worse stomach swelling (p < 0,001, ES 0.97) and more diarrhoea (p < 0.001, ES 0.92), however they reported better body image (p < 0.001, ES 0.80).

CONCLUSION

Patients with LRRC reported significantly worse overall scores in the FACT-C CCS from both a statistical and clinical perspective, demonstrating the ability of the FACT-C to distinguish between these patient groups and the benefits of the inclusion of PROs within colorectal cancer registries, specifically including patients with advanced/recurrent disease.