Limits...
Clinicopathological features and prognostic factors of young patients with surgically treated liver cancer.

Zhang W, Jiang R, Hou J, Sun B - Medicine (Baltimore) (2015)

Bottom Line: Univariate and multivariate analysis also confirmed the difference (P < 0.001).Further analysis showed that this significant difference existed in localized, regional, and distant-stage patients.Patients aged ≤35 years have better CSS than those aged 36 to 45 years, despite exhibiting unfavorable clinicopathological characteristics.

View Article: PubMed Central - PubMed

Affiliation: From the Liver Transplantation Center of the First Affiliated Hospital and State Key Laboratory of Reproductive Medicine, Nanjing Medical University, Nanjing, Jiangsu Province, P.R. China.

ABSTRACT
This article compares the clinical characteristics and prognosis of young patients in different age groups with liver cancer (LC). In this retrospective study, we searched the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results population-based database and identified 2641 patients who had been diagnosed with LC between 1988 and 2005. These patients were categorized into 2 different age ranges: Group 1 (≤35 years) and Group 2 (36-45 years). Five-year cancer-specific survival (CSS) data were obtained. Kaplan-Meier methods and multivariable Cox regression models were used to analyze the long-term survival outcomes and risk factors. There were significant differences between the age groups for stage and tumor size (P < 0.001). The 5-year liver CSS rate was 20.4% and 14.5%, respectively (P < 0.001). Univariate and multivariate analysis also confirmed the difference (P < 0.001). Further analysis showed that this significant difference existed in localized, regional, and distant-stage patients. Young patients with LC of age 18 to 45 years are inherently heterogeneous. Patients aged ≤35 years have better CSS than those aged 36 to 45 years, despite exhibiting unfavorable clinicopathological characteristics.

Show MeSH

Related in: MedlinePlus

Survival curves in patients with liver cancer according to different age groups. A: Group I versus Group II, χ2 = 2.243, P = 0.134; Group I versus Group III, χ2 = 17.304, P < 0.001; Group I versus Group IV, χ2 = 22.360, P < 0.001; Group II versus Group III, χ2 = 5.474, P = 0.019; Group II versus Group IV, χ2=8.469, P = 0.004; Group III versus Group IV, χ2 = 0.252, P = 0.616. (B) Group 1 versus Group 2, χ2 = 26.990, P < 0.001.
© Copyright Policy - open-access
Related In: Results  -  Collection

License
getmorefigures.php?uid=PMC4554000&req=5

Figure 1: Survival curves in patients with liver cancer according to different age groups. A: Group I versus Group II, χ2 = 2.243, P = 0.134; Group I versus Group III, χ2 = 17.304, P < 0.001; Group I versus Group IV, χ2 = 22.360, P < 0.001; Group II versus Group III, χ2 = 5.474, P = 0.019; Group II versus Group IV, χ2=8.469, P = 0.004; Group III versus Group IV, χ2 = 0.252, P = 0.616. (B) Group 1 versus Group 2, χ2 = 26.990, P < 0.001.

Mentions: There were 2641 cases of LC diagnosed between 1988 and 2005 in the SEER database. At first, as shown in Table S1, http://links.lww.com/MD/A233, these young patients were divided into 4 age groups: 294 patients in Group I (≤30 years), 282 in Group II (31–35 years), 610 in Group III (36–40 years), and 1455 in Group IV (41–45 years). However, no differences in LCSS were observed between Groups I and II, or Groups III and IV (Figure 1A). Thus, Groups I and II were merged into Group 1 (≤35 years) and Groups III and IV were merged into Group 2 (36–45 years) to increase patient numbers. There were 2000 (75.7%) male and 641 (24.3%) female patients, which was consistent with epidemiological results in which men have higher LC rates than women. The median age was 39 years. The median follow-up period was 24 months. Patient demographics and pathological features are summarized in Table 1.


Clinicopathological features and prognostic factors of young patients with surgically treated liver cancer.

Zhang W, Jiang R, Hou J, Sun B - Medicine (Baltimore) (2015)

Survival curves in patients with liver cancer according to different age groups. A: Group I versus Group II, χ2 = 2.243, P = 0.134; Group I versus Group III, χ2 = 17.304, P < 0.001; Group I versus Group IV, χ2 = 22.360, P < 0.001; Group II versus Group III, χ2 = 5.474, P = 0.019; Group II versus Group IV, χ2=8.469, P = 0.004; Group III versus Group IV, χ2 = 0.252, P = 0.616. (B) Group 1 versus Group 2, χ2 = 26.990, P < 0.001.
© Copyright Policy - open-access
Related In: Results  -  Collection

License
Show All Figures
getmorefigures.php?uid=PMC4554000&req=5

Figure 1: Survival curves in patients with liver cancer according to different age groups. A: Group I versus Group II, χ2 = 2.243, P = 0.134; Group I versus Group III, χ2 = 17.304, P < 0.001; Group I versus Group IV, χ2 = 22.360, P < 0.001; Group II versus Group III, χ2 = 5.474, P = 0.019; Group II versus Group IV, χ2=8.469, P = 0.004; Group III versus Group IV, χ2 = 0.252, P = 0.616. (B) Group 1 versus Group 2, χ2 = 26.990, P < 0.001.
Mentions: There were 2641 cases of LC diagnosed between 1988 and 2005 in the SEER database. At first, as shown in Table S1, http://links.lww.com/MD/A233, these young patients were divided into 4 age groups: 294 patients in Group I (≤30 years), 282 in Group II (31–35 years), 610 in Group III (36–40 years), and 1455 in Group IV (41–45 years). However, no differences in LCSS were observed between Groups I and II, or Groups III and IV (Figure 1A). Thus, Groups I and II were merged into Group 1 (≤35 years) and Groups III and IV were merged into Group 2 (36–45 years) to increase patient numbers. There were 2000 (75.7%) male and 641 (24.3%) female patients, which was consistent with epidemiological results in which men have higher LC rates than women. The median age was 39 years. The median follow-up period was 24 months. Patient demographics and pathological features are summarized in Table 1.

Bottom Line: Univariate and multivariate analysis also confirmed the difference (P < 0.001).Further analysis showed that this significant difference existed in localized, regional, and distant-stage patients.Patients aged ≤35 years have better CSS than those aged 36 to 45 years, despite exhibiting unfavorable clinicopathological characteristics.

View Article: PubMed Central - PubMed

Affiliation: From the Liver Transplantation Center of the First Affiliated Hospital and State Key Laboratory of Reproductive Medicine, Nanjing Medical University, Nanjing, Jiangsu Province, P.R. China.

ABSTRACT
This article compares the clinical characteristics and prognosis of young patients in different age groups with liver cancer (LC). In this retrospective study, we searched the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results population-based database and identified 2641 patients who had been diagnosed with LC between 1988 and 2005. These patients were categorized into 2 different age ranges: Group 1 (≤35 years) and Group 2 (36-45 years). Five-year cancer-specific survival (CSS) data were obtained. Kaplan-Meier methods and multivariable Cox regression models were used to analyze the long-term survival outcomes and risk factors. There were significant differences between the age groups for stage and tumor size (P < 0.001). The 5-year liver CSS rate was 20.4% and 14.5%, respectively (P < 0.001). Univariate and multivariate analysis also confirmed the difference (P < 0.001). Further analysis showed that this significant difference existed in localized, regional, and distant-stage patients. Young patients with LC of age 18 to 45 years are inherently heterogeneous. Patients aged ≤35 years have better CSS than those aged 36 to 45 years, despite exhibiting unfavorable clinicopathological characteristics.

Show MeSH
Related in: MedlinePlus