Introduction: Lung cancer is the leading cause of cancer mortality in Western nations, and associated health‐care costs are escalating. The aim of this study was to describe the current pattern of resource use and direct medical costs associated in managing lung cancer in South Western Sydney, Australia. Methods: All new cases of primary lung carcinoma discussed at the Liverpool and Macarthur Cancer Therapy Centre (CTC) Lung Cancer Multidisciplinary Team meeting or seen at CTC between 1 December 2005 and 21 December 2006 were reviewed. Staging investigations, hospitalisation, treatment and follow‐up investigations were documented from first consultation to last follow‐up (31 October 2008 or death). Cost estimates were based on the Australian Medicare Benefits Schedule and reported in Australian dollars. Infrastructure, staff and non‐medical costs were excluded. Results: There were 210 patients, median age 68.2 years (range 39–90) with median follow‐up of 16.6 months. The pathology and stage distribution were: 3.8% limited stage small cell lung cancer (SCLC), 10.0% extensive stage SCLC, 13.4% stage I and II non‐small cell lung cancer (NSCLC), 28.5% stage III NSCLC and 44.3% stage IV NSCLC. The estimated total cost for managing this patient cohort was A$2.91 million. The cost components were: staging investigations (10.1%), treatment 41.2% (2.8% surgery, 15.8% radiotherapy and 22.6% chemotherapy), hospitalisation (43.7%) and follow‐up investigations (5%). The median costs for managing NSCLC and SCLC subgroups were A$10 675 (range A$669–612 789) and A$14 799 (range A$908–31 057), respectively. Conclusion: Hospitalisation and cancer treatment, particularly chemotherapy, accounted for the major components of direct medical costs in the management of lung cancer.

Background: As treatments for rectal cancer improve with developments in surgical techniques, radiotherapy and chemotherapy, the nature of recurrences are evolving. We used a comprehensive database of a large Australian population with stage I-III rectal adenocarcinoma to identify timing and prognostic significance of recurrences, and factors associated with risk of developing recurrent disease. Methods: All patients with locoregional rectal cancer treated with curative intent in our health district from 2006 to 2017 were included. Multivariate analysis using Cox regression models were used to identify factors associated with recurrence. Results: A total of 483 patients were included. Recurrence occurred in 117 (24.2%) of 483 patients, being locoregional in 15 (3.1%) patients, distant in 85 patients (17.6%) and both locoregional and distant in 17 (3.5%) patients. Compared to those with locoregional recurrence, those with both locoregional and distant recurrence had worse cancer-specific survival. On univariate analysis, factors associated with recurrence included stage, grade, radiotherapy, chemotherapy, surgery type and distal tumour location. Factors which remained significant on multivariate analysis included higher grade and stage. Conclusion: In the era of multimodality therapy for rectal cancer, recurrences are predominantly distant. Traditional predictors including higher stage, grade and distal tumour location remain independently associated with recurrence, despite current treatment paradigms.

No abstract

The elderly population comprises a significant proportion of patients diagnosed with rectal cancer. However, there is a lack of evidence to guide treatment decisions in this group. Thus, this multicentre study compares the histopathology, treatment patterns and outcomes between the elderly and young populations with non-metastatic rectal cancer. The present study reported on the clinicopathological variables, treatment modalities and survival outcomes in 736 patients diagnosed with non-metastatic rectal cancer between 2006 and 2015. Patients were divided into the following two groups, <70 and ≥70 years of age, which were compared using Chi-square and survival outcome analysis using Kaplan-Meier. Elderly patients made up nearly half of the cohort and were less likely to undergo trimodality therapy or be discussed in a multidisciplinary meeting. Surgery in the elderly patients was associated with increased mortality. Elderly patients had worse cancer-specific survival (75 vs. 85%), which was particularly evident in stage III disease (hazard ratio, 2.1). Elderly patients in this subgroup treated with trimodality therapy had similar survival outcomes to younger patients. Elderly patients with locally advanced rectal cancer comprise a large proportion of the patient cohort. Consideration should be given for trimodality therapy in this group, taking into account biological age, especially in the context of increasing life expectancy and improvement in the management of age-related comorbidities.

Background Neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy plays a key role in reducing local recurrence rates for locally advanced rectal cancer. Pelvic magnetic resonance imaging (pMRI) is the gold standard for local clinical staging which allows clinicians to decide the treatment patients receive. A more advanced tumour or the presence of high‐risk features on pMRI mean that neoadjuvant therapy will be offered to these patients. Understanding the accuracy of pMRI in local staging for rectal cancer is therefore crucial. Methods A retrospective cohort analysis of the accuracy of pMRI staging in a subgroup of patients who had primary rectal cancer surgery without neoadjuvant therapy was performed. Specificity and sensitivity for T‐staging, N‐staging and presence of high‐risk features (threatened circumferential resection margin and extramural venous invasion) were calculated. Patients who had previous pelvic surgery, previous pelvic radiotherapy and previous surgery for continence were excluded. Results A total of 114 patients were included in the analysis. MRI accurately predicts T‐stage in 56.6% and N‐stage in 55.8%. Prediction of extramural disease was accurate in 51%. A negative circumferential resection margin was accurately predicted in 98.6% of patients. Overall adherence to reporting proforma was 15.8%. Conclusion Overall, this study provided valuable information about the clinical staging of patients with rectal cancer who are at an early stage within a large regional catchment area in Australia with pMRI. These results allow us to assess the accuracy of our local staging with ramifications to the clinical decisions being made in the context of the more recent trials which questioned the need for neoadjuvant chemo‐radiotherapy in all node positive patients.

Background: Colorectal cancer (CRC) is one of the most commonly diagnosed malignancies globally; however, a survival paradox has been observed unique to this malignancy. The aim of this study was to review survival outcomes of patients diagnosed with stage II and stage III rectal cancer, to determine whether a survival paradox is present in our centre and assess for patient-related factors that can explain the observed paradox or were predictors of prognosis. Methods: A retrospective review of data collected from 2006 to 2018 of patients diagnosed with rectal cancer in three separate centres was conducted. Percentages pertaining to patient and tumour characteristics, presentation, management and subsequent recurrence were reported. Preoperative and postoperative factors associated with survival were determined using univariable and multivariable logistic regression analysis. Results: Stage IIB/C patients had significantly higher carcinoembryonic antigen (CEA) levels compared to stage IIA and stage IIIA patients (P < 0.001). Stage IIB/C patients had significantly larger primary rectal tumour and were more symptomatic (i.e. rectal bleeding, altered bowel habits and obstruction) at the time of diagnosis (P = 0.007). Preoperative CEA was an independent prognostic factor for cancer-specific survival in patients diagnosed with stage IIB/C and stage IIIA disease (P = 0.008) on multivariable analysis. Overall survival was greatest in stage IIIA disease, which was significantly greater than stage IIB/C disease. Conclusion:This study confirms the existence of a survival paradox in patients diagnosed with CRC in an Australian tertiary centre and adds further weight to the revision of the TNM staging to provide more emphasis on the T stage.

678 Background: There is limited information on outcomes in elderly patients with rectal cancer as they are often excluded from clinical trials. This study aimed to assess treatment patterns and outcomes in these patients. Methods: We utilised data from electronic records to identify patients aged ≥ 70 years with a histological diagnosis of rectal cancer from 2006-2015, treated in the South Western Sydney and Illawarra Shoalhaven Local Health Districts, Australia. Treatment modalities, recurrence and survival data were analysed. Results: We identified 942 patients with rectal cancer, with median follow-up of 3.4 years. 393 patients (42%) were aged ≥ 70 years. Median age of this cohort was 77 years (range 70–96 years). Elderly patients were more likely to present with locoregional disease (stage I-III, 83% vs. 75%) and more likely to receive palliative treatment only (21% vs. 16%, p = 0.0005). Of 704 patients who received treatment with curative intent, 300 (43%) were ≥ 70 years. Although clinicopathological features were similar between elderly and young patients, patients ≥ 70 years were more likely to be treated with surgery alone (56% vs. 28%, p < 0.0001), less likely to receive neoadjuvant (25% vs. 44%, p < 0.0001) or adjuvant treatments (29% vs. 55%, p < 0.0001), or be discussed in a multidisciplinary meeting (51% vs. 61%, p = 0.001). Compared to younger patients, elderly patients had a significantly poorer overall survival (HR 2.9, 95% CI 2.2 – 3.7, p < 0.0001). There were no significant differences in cancer specific survival (HR 1.4, 95% CI 0.98 – 2.0, p = 0.06) or relapse free survival (HR 0.92, 95% CI 0.7 – 1.2, p = 0.60). Conclusions: Although more elderly patients were treated with palliative intent compared to younger patients, the majority of elderly rectal cancer patients were still treated with curative intent. Most had surgery alone. Uptake of neoadjuvant and adjuvant therapy, as well as multidisciplinary involvement, was lower. Elderly patients had similar cancer-specific outcomes compared to younger patients, supporting curative intent treatment in these patients. Further analyses are underway to identify subgroups in the elderly population who benefit from trimodality therapy, and potential differences in their disease biology.

No abstract