Background: A decade ago, it was demonstrated that the difference in survival between older patients and younger patients with colorectal cancer (CRC) was mainly due to mortality in the first... Show moreBackground: A decade ago, it was demonstrated that the difference in survival between older patients and younger patients with colorectal cancer (CRC) was mainly due to mortality in the first postoperative year. Over the last few years, improvements -especially in perioperative care-have increased survival. The current research investigates whether a survival gap between younger and older patients with CRC still exists on a national level in four European countries. Methods: Population-based data from Belgium, the Netherlands, Norway, and Sweden were collected from patients that underwent surgical resection for primary stage I-III CRC between 2007 and 2016. Relative survival and conditional relative survival (CS), with the condition of surviving the first postoperative year, were calculated for colon and rectal cancer separately, stratified for country and age category (< 65, 65-75, >= 75 years). In addition, relative excess risk of death (RER) was estimated, and one-year excess mortality was calculated. Results: Data of 206,024 patients were analyzed. In general, compared to patients < 65 years, patients >= 75 years had a worse survival during the first year after surgery, which was most pronounced in Belgium (RER colon cancer 2.5 [95% confidence interval (CI) 2.3-2.8] and RER rectal cancer 2.6 [95% CI 2.3-2.9]). After surviving the first year, CS was mostly not statistically different between patients < 65 years and patients >= 75 years with stage I-II, with the exception of stage II colon cancer in Belgium. However, CS remained worse in the largest part of the patients & GE;75 years with stage III colon or rectal cancer (except for rectal cancer in Norway). Conclusions: Although differences exist between the countries, the survival gap between young and older patients is based mainly on early mortality and remains only for stage III disease after surviving the first year. Show less
Objectives: The benefit of oseltamivir treatment in patients admitted with influenza virus infection and the design of studies addressing this issue have been questioned extensively. As the burden... Show moreObjectives: The benefit of oseltamivir treatment in patients admitted with influenza virus infection and the design of studies addressing this issue have been questioned extensively. As the burden of influenza disease is substantial and oseltamivir treatment is biologically plausible, this study assessed the clinical benefit of oseltamivir treatment in adult patients admitted with severe seasonal influenza virus infection in daily practice.Patients and methods: A multi-centre, retrospective cohort study was conducted to compare the effectiveness of treatment with and without oseltamivir <48 h after admission in patients admitted with laboratory-confirmed influenza virus infection in three large hospitals in the Netherlands. Propensity score matching was used to compare clinically relevant outcome variables.Results: In total, 390 patients were included in this study, of whom 80% had comorbidities. Thirty-day mortality, as well as the composite endpoint of 30-day mortality or intensive care unit admission >48 h after admission, were reduced by 9% (P = 0.04) and 11% (P = 0.02), respectively. Length of hospital stay and in-hospital mortality rates all showed a trend towards reduction. The median duration between symptom onset and initiation of treatment was 3 days.Conclusions: This study supports that, in daily practice, patients admitted with influenza virus infection should be treated with oseltamivir within 48 h of admission, even if they have had complaints for >48 h. (C) 2020 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier Ltd. Show less
Schuil, H.; Derks, M.; Liefers, G.J.; Portielje, J.; Velde, C. van de; Syed, B.; ... ; Bastiaannet, E. 2018
