Colorectal cancer survival in the USA and Europe: a CONCORD high-resolution study.

OBJECTIVES: To assess the extent to which stage at diagnosis and adherence to treatment guidelines may explain the persistent differences in colorectal cancer survival between the USA and Europe. DESIGN: A high-resolution study using detailed clinical data on Dukes' stage, diagnostic procedures, treatment and follow-up, collected directly from medical records by trained abstractors under a single protocol, with standardised quality control and central statistical analysis. SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS: 21 population-based registries in seven US states and nine European countries provided data for random samples comprising 12 523 adults (15-99 years) diagnosed with colorectal cancer during 1996-1998. OUTCOME MEASURES: Logistic regression models were used to compare adherence to 'standard care' in the USA and Europe. Net survival and excess risk of death were estimated with flexible parametric models. RESULTS: The proportion of Dukes' A and B tumours was similar in the USA and Europe, while that of Dukes' C was more frequent in the USA (38% vs 21%) and of Dukes' D more frequent in Europe (22% vs 10%). Resection with curative intent was more frequent in the USA (85% vs 75%). Elderly patients (75-99 years) were 70-90% less likely to receive radiotherapy and chemotherapy. Age-standardised 5-year net survival was similar in the USA (58%) and Northern and Western Europe (54-56%) and lowest in Eastern Europe (42%). The mean excess hazard up to 5 years after diagnosis was highest in Eastern Europe, especially among elderly patients and those with Dukes' D tumours. CONCLUSIONS: The wide differences in colorectal cancer survival between Europe and the USA in the late 1990s are probably attributable to earlier stage and more extensive use of surgery and adjuvant treatment in the USA. Elderly patients with colorectal cancer received surgery, chemotherapy or radiotherapy less often than younger patients, despite evidence that they could also have benefited.

Comodidad materna y reducción del dolor en mujeres con posición fetal occipitoposterior durante el parto con el uso de las posturas de decúbito lateral y manos-rodillas: Ensayo clínico aleatorizado

Objective: To assess the maternal comfort and reduction of pain associated with contractions during labor with “hands-knees” (HK) maternal posture compared with “lateral maternal postures toward the fetal back” in pregnant women with occipitoposterior (OP) fetal position. Methods: In the multicenter trial by randomization, 70 women with OP fetal position during labor took the lateral posture and 65 women the HK posture for at least 30 minutes. We analyzed maternal comfort, perceived pain, influence of epidural analgesia and use of fit-ball on posture HK. Results: Back pain and abdominal pain reduction was higher with HK posture. With lateral posture 78.6% of women expressed comfort versus 73.8% of women with HK posture. Regarding the lateral posture, the comfort with HK posture reduces in multiparous women, with an odds ratio (OR) of 0.29, for a confidence interval (CI) 95% 0.12 to 0.76, and epidural analgesia (OR= 0.39; CI 95%: 0.15-1.03), comfort with K posture is higher with reduction of pain (OR= 4.13, 95% CI: 1.34- 12.72) and abdominal pain compared with back pain (OR= 4.05, 95% CI: 1.36-11.85). Conclusions: Women consider comfortable lateral and HK maternal postures during labor. The lateral posture is most comfortable for multiparous and epidural analgesia. The reduction of pain during labor is higher with HK posture, recommending this posture in primiparous women without epidural analgesia.