高级搜索

内蒙古地区中晚期结直肠癌患者的结直肠癌相关知识认知现状及影响因素研究

高静茹, 李佳昕, 乔友林, 张希, 张韶凯, 徐慧芳, 华云旗, 郝金奇, 傅颖, 石郑阳, 余艳琴, 石继海

高静茹, 李佳昕, 乔友林, 张希, 张韶凯, 徐慧芳, 华云旗, 郝金奇, 傅颖, 石郑阳, 余艳琴, 石继海. 内蒙古地区中晚期结直肠癌患者的结直肠癌相关知识认知现状及影响因素研究[J]. 肿瘤防治研究, 2023, 50(6): 603-608. DOI: 10.3971/j.issn.1000-8578.2023.22.1248
引用本文: 高静茹, 李佳昕, 乔友林, 张希, 张韶凯, 徐慧芳, 华云旗, 郝金奇, 傅颖, 石郑阳, 余艳琴, 石继海. 内蒙古地区中晚期结直肠癌患者的结直肠癌相关知识认知现状及影响因素研究[J]. 肿瘤防治研究, 2023, 50(6): 603-608. DOI: 10.3971/j.issn.1000-8578.2023.22.1248
GAO Jingru, LI Jiaxin, QIAO Youlin, ZHANG Xi, ZHANG Shaokai, XU Huifang, HUA Yunqi, HAO Jinqi, FU Ying, SHI Zhengyang, YU Yanqin, SHI Jihai. Cognition of Colorectal Cancer-related Knowledge and Influencing Factors of Patients with Middle- and Advanced-stage Colorectal Cancer in Inner Mongolia[J]. Cancer Research on Prevention and Treatment, 2023, 50(6): 603-608. DOI: 10.3971/j.issn.1000-8578.2023.22.1248
Citation: GAO Jingru, LI Jiaxin, QIAO Youlin, ZHANG Xi, ZHANG Shaokai, XU Huifang, HUA Yunqi, HAO Jinqi, FU Ying, SHI Zhengyang, YU Yanqin, SHI Jihai. Cognition of Colorectal Cancer-related Knowledge and Influencing Factors of Patients with Middle- and Advanced-stage Colorectal Cancer in Inner Mongolia[J]. Cancer Research on Prevention and Treatment, 2023, 50(6): 603-608. DOI: 10.3971/j.issn.1000-8578.2023.22.1248

内蒙古地区中晚期结直肠癌患者的结直肠癌相关知识认知现状及影响因素研究

基金项目: 

北京爱谱癌症基金会及Merck公司资助 

详细信息
    作者简介:

    高静茹(1997-)女,硕士在读,主要从事流行病与统计学研究,ORCID: 0009-0003-9498-4206

    李佳昕(1997-),女,硕士在读,主要从事流行病与统计学研究,ORCID: 0009-0004-0025-6652

    通信作者:

    余艳琴(1982-),女,博士,副教授,主要从事流行病与统计学研究,E-mail: yanqin0324@126.com,ORCID: 0000-0002-4303-4732

    石继海(1969-),男,博士,教授,主要从事肿瘤流行病学研究,E-mail: qiaoy@cicams.ac.cn,ORCID: 0000-0001-6161-0863

    *: 并列第一作者

  • 中图分类号: R737.33

Cognition of Colorectal Cancer-related Knowledge and Influencing Factors of Patients with Middle- and Advanced-stage Colorectal Cancer in Inner Mongolia

Funding: 

Beijing Aipu Cancer Foundation and Merck Project 

More Information
  • 摘要:
    目的 

    调查内蒙古少数民族地区中晚期结直肠患者的结直肠癌相关知识认知现状及影响因素。

    方法 

    按照全国人口数以及结直肠癌的患病率进行分层,随机抽样内蒙古地区277例结直肠癌患者,在包头市、赤峰市、巴彦淖尔市等医院对结直肠癌患者进行问卷调查。问卷内容包括患者基本情况、对结直肠癌危险因素和筛查知识的认知、筛查的信息等。

    结果 

    患病前患者对于结直肠癌相关知识(高危因素、早筛知识、治疗手段)的认知水平较低。54.9%的患者不了解结直肠癌的高危因素。75.8%的患者不了解结直肠癌的早筛知识,37.5%患者不了解结直肠癌的治疗手段。结直肠癌认知情况的主要影响因素是受教育程度和职业;机关及企事业单位、受教育程度越高的患者,其认知情况越好。

    结论 

    内蒙古地区中晚期结直肠癌患者在诊断前对结直肠癌危险因素和筛查知识的认知较差,受教育程度和职业是结直肠癌认知情况的影响因素,因此,结直肠癌知识的知晓率低、文化程度较低、无业下岗的人群应该优先进行干预。

     

    Abstract:
    Objective 

    To investigate the cognition of colorectal cancer-related knowledge and influencing factors of patients with middle- and advanced-stage colorectal cancer in ethnic minority areas of Inner Mongolia.

    Methods 

    According to the national population and the prevalence of colorectal cancer, 277 patients with colorectal cancer were selected by stratified and random sampling in Inner Mongolia. The patients were surveyed in Baotou, Chifeng, Bayannaoer, and other hospitals. The questionnaire included patients' basic information, cognition of colorectal cancer risk factors and screening knowledge, screening information, etc.

    Results 

    Before suffering from the disease, the patients' knowledge of colorectal cancer (risk factors, early screening knowledge, treatment methods) was low. About 54.9% of patients were unaware of high risk factors for colorectal cancer, 75.8% of patients did not understand the knowledge of early screening of colorectal cancer, and 37.5% of patients did not underst and the treatment of colorectal cancer. The main influencing factors of colorectal cancer cognition were education level and occupation. Patients who work in institutions and enterprises and with higher education level had better cognition.

    Conclusion 

    Patients with middle- and advanced-stage colorectal cancer in Inner Mongolia have poor knowledge and awareness of risk factors and screening of colorectal cancer before diagnosis. Education level and occupation are factors influencing colorectal cancer cognition, therefore, people with low knowledge rate of colorectal cancer and low education level as well as unemployed laid-off people should be given priority intervention.

     

  • 胶质母细胞瘤(glioblastoma, GBM)是颅内恶性程度最高的原发肿瘤之一。目前的标准化治疗方案,即最大程度的手术切除辅以术后放化疗,也仅将胶质母细胞瘤患者生存期提高至14~16月[1]。胶质瘤干细胞是胶质母细胞瘤细胞中的特殊亚群,仅占所有肿瘤细胞的1%左右,却在肿瘤恶性进展过程中具有非常重要的功能。研究报道胶质瘤干细胞对放疗和化疗耐受,并且与肿瘤复发相关[2]。NOTCH信号通路参与肿瘤恶性进展,并调节细胞生长、生存、分化和干性维持等多种重要生物学过程[3]。研究证实,胶质母细胞瘤中CD133阳性的胶质瘤干细胞具有较高的NOTCH通路活性,应用分泌酶抑制剂(Gamma-secretase inhibitor, GSI)抑制NOTCH通路活性,显著降低胶质瘤干细胞的体外单细胞成球和体内致瘤能力[4]。磷脂酰肌醇3-激酶/蛋白激酶B(PI3K/AKT)信号通路主要参与肿瘤细胞增殖、生存和侵袭等过程。GBM中常见的表皮生长因子受体(epidermal growth factor receptor, EGFR)基因扩增、磷脂酰肌醇3-激酶催化亚基a(phosphoinositide-3-kinase, catalytic, alpha polypeptide, PIK3CA)基因突变和磷酸酯酶与张力蛋白同源物(phosphatase and tensin homolog, PTEN)基因缺失均可导致PI3K/AKT信号通路的异常激活。一项急性T淋巴细胞白血病的研究显示NOTCH通路通过PTEN介导活化PI3K/AKT信号通路[5]。本研究旨在探讨GBM干细胞NOTCH通路与PI3K/AKT通路之间的相互作用。

    GBM细胞系购自中国科学院细胞库,细胞培养于含10%胎牛血清的DMEM培养基中,置于37℃、饱和湿度、5%CO2的细胞培养箱中培养。

    将1.1中培养的胶质瘤细胞,经胰蛋白酶消化形成单细胞,以干细胞培养基重悬,并以1×105个每毫升的密度置于干细胞培养基中,培养箱中培养,获得胶质瘤干细胞。干细胞培养基由DMEM/F12培养基辅以20 ng/ml表皮生长因子(epidermal growth factor, EGF)、20 ng/ml成纤维细胞生长因子(basic fibroblastic growth factor, bFGF)和2%B27配制而成[3, 6]

    胎牛血清、DMEM培养基、DMEM/F12培养基、EGF、bFGF和B27均购自美国ThermoFisher科技公司。DAPT和LY294002抑制剂购自美国Selleck公司。DMSO购自美国Sigma-Aldrich公司。兔抗人CD133、SOX2、GFAP、Notch1、ICN1、p-AKT(Thr308)、p-AKT(Ser473)和AKT抗体购自美国Cell Signaling公司。兔抗人HES1和HES5抗体购自美国Abcam公司。鼠抗人Nestin和TuJ1抗体购自美国Millipore公司。兔抗人β-actin抗体购自中国中杉金桥生物科技公司。

    慢病毒载体短发卡RNA(shRNA)和对应的无义序列购自中国吉凯生物公司。靶向AKT的shRNA1序列为:5’-GCACCGCTTCTTTGCCAACAT-3’,shRNA2序列为:5’-GAGGCCCAACACCTTCATCAT-3’。

    取对数生长期的胶质瘤干细胞,制备单细胞悬液,接种于96孔板中,每孔5×103细胞,设阴性对照组、处理组和空白对照组,加入不同浓度梯度的DAPT和(或)LY294002抑制剂,各浓度梯度设置3复孔,37℃细胞培养箱中培养5天,每孔加入5g/L MTT溶液15 μl,37℃孵育30 min,酶标仪490 nm下检测每孔的吸光度值(OD),细胞存活率(%)=(OD处理组-OD空白对照组)/(OD阴性对照组-OD空白对照组)×100%,实验重复3次。

    BLISS独立模型用于评价不同药物间对细胞增殖的相互作用,两药联用对细胞增殖抑制率预测值=(A药抑制率+B药抑制率-A药抑制率×B药抑制率)×100%。若A和B联用对细胞增殖实际抑制率大于预测值(差值为正),则A和B联用发挥协同效应;若差值为负,则A和B联用产生拮抗作用[7]

    取对数生长期的胶质瘤干细胞,制备单细胞悬液,以20个细胞每毫升接种于96孔板中,每孔50 μl细胞悬液,再加入50 μl DAPT抑制剂工作液,于37℃细胞培养箱中培养28天,显微镜下观察,有细胞球形成的孔计为阳性孔,无细胞球形成的孔计为阴性孔,细胞成球比例(%)=阳性孔数/(阳性孔数+阴性孔数)×100%,实验重复3次[3]

    实验数据以均数±标准差表示,采用SPSS22.0统计软件对数据进行Student-t检验,以P < 0.05为差异有统计学意义。

    贴壁生长的LN-229、U118-MG和A172胶质瘤细胞,经含EGF、bFGF和B27的DMEM/F12培养基培养筛选胶质瘤干细胞,胶质瘤干细胞成球悬浮生长,约7天形成显微镜下可见的胶质瘤干细胞球,见图 1A。单细胞成球实验结果显示,与含胎牛血清培养基中贴壁生长的细胞相比,LN-229、U118-MG和A172胶质瘤干细胞成球能力分别升高15.27±2.07(P=0.00647)、75.98±12.12(P=0.00763)和14.67±2.52(P=0.01012)倍,见图 1B。为了验证干细胞表型,我们选用CD133、Nestin和SOX2作为干性标志物,GFAP和TuJ1分别作为星形胶质细胞和神经元分化的标志物。Western blot结果显示,与含胎牛血清培养基中贴壁生长的细胞相比,LN-229、U118-MG和A172胶质瘤干细胞CD133表达水平分别上调16.38±1.15(P=0.00185)、1.90±0.25(P=0.06960)和2.41±0.55(P=0.04760)倍,Nestin分别上调26.82±4.35(P=0.00934)、20.40±2.59(P=0.00590)和1.21±0.36(P=0.42633)倍,SOX2分别上调2.94±0.35(P=0.01069)、6.71±1.67(P=0.02742)和27.96±10.29(P=0.04527)倍,NOTCH1分别上调102.15±19.06(P=0.01163)、170.54±31.70(P=0.01145)和1.62±0.33(P=0.08443)倍,ICN1分别上调7.03±0.69(P=0.00434)、4.33±0.66(P=0.01296)和141.11±53.59(P=0.04547)倍,HES1分别上调5.94±1.19(P=0.01868)、127.04±5.51(P=0.00064)和2.06±0.29(P=0.02398)倍,HES5分别上调41.76±3.92(P=0.00306)、25349.85±8782.13(P=0.03776)和14.99±3.41(P=0.01930)倍,GFAP分别下调57.00±19.57%(P=0.03714)、86.09±10.02%(P=0.00448)和83.12±16.54%(P=0.01294),TuJ1分别下调79.53±13.26%(P=0.00914)、55.49±13.63%(P=0.01954)和0.41±22.45%(P=0.97786),见图 2。LN-229、U118-MG和A172胶质瘤干细胞中干性标志物表达水平和自我更新能力显著高于贴壁细胞,细胞分化标志物表达水平显著低于贴壁细胞,证实其干细胞表型。

    图  1  胶质瘤干细胞成球实验
    Figure  1  Glioma stem-like cells(GSC) sphere formation assay
    A: Left:U118-MG GBM neurospheres (×5); Right: enlarged view (×20); B: single cell sphere formation assay; *: P < 0.05, **: P < 0.01
    图  2  Western blot鉴定胶质瘤干细胞干性
    Figure  2  GSC stemness identified by Western blot
    A: compared with adherent cells, LN-229, U118-MG, and A172 GSCs harbored higher stemness markers (CD133, Nestin and SOX2) expression, higher NOTCH expression and activity, and lower cell differentiation marker expression (GFAP and TuJ1); B: the quantification of related expressions; *: P < 0.05; **: P < 0.01

    NOTCH信号通路的活化需要γ-分泌酶水解作用释放ICN。在本部分研究中,我们应用GSI-DAPT抑制NOTCH通路活性。经DAPT(10 μmol/L)处理细胞24 h后,LN-229、U118-MG和A172胶质瘤干细胞的ICN1表达水平分别下调(81.5±16.4)%(P=0.00511)、(51.2±4.0)%(P=0.00491)和(52.4±11.8)%(P=0.00924),HES1表达水平分别下调(57.9±14.3)%(P=0.00372)、(86.8±6.0)%(P=0.00007)和(52.0±9.3)%(P=0.00138)。同时,DAPT处理显著降低AKT活性,LN-229、U118-MG和A172胶质瘤干细胞经DAPT处理后p-AKT(Thr308)磷酸化水平分别下调(58.6±12.1)%(P=0.00391)、(52.7±7.7)%(P=0.00703)和(53.6±8.9)%(P=0.00536),p-AKT(Ser473)磷酸化水平分别下调(58.7±10.9)%(P=0.00640)、(50.9±8.9)%(P=0.00322)和(49.3±14.3)%(P=0.02953),提示抑制NOTCH通路降低PI3K/AKT信号通路活性,见图 3。研究显示急性T淋巴细胞白血病中,NOTCH通路对PI3K/AKT信号通路的作用是通过NOTCH靶基因HES1参与调控PTEN转录实现的。本研究采用的胶质瘤细胞系中,LN-229为PTEN野生型细胞系,U118-MG和A172为PTEN基因缺失细胞系,结果显示LN-229胶质瘤干细胞模型中,DAPT未显著影响PTEN表达水平,且即使在PTEN缺失的U118-MG和A172胶质瘤干细胞中,NOTCH通路仍调控PI3K/AKT活性,见图 3。此研究结果说明在胶质母细胞瘤中,NOTCH通路不参与PTEN的表达调控过程,NOTCH通路对PI3K/AKT通路的调控不依赖于PTEN,这可能与不同组织来源肿瘤的基因背景差异有关。

    图  3  抑制NOTCH通路下调PI3K/AKT活性
    Figure  3  Inhibition of NOTCH signaling pathway down-regulated PI3K/AKT activity
    A: DAPT (10μmol/L) treatment for 24 hours down-regulated ICN1, HES1, p-AKT (Thr308) and p-AKT (Ser473) expressions in GSCs. PTEN expression was not regulated by DAPT; B: the quantification of target genes expression relative to β-actin; **: P < 0.01

    PI3K/AKT信号通路对胶质瘤细胞增殖和生存起重要作用,抑制NOTCH通路活性降低PI3K/AKT通路活性。因此,本部分研究NOTCH通路是否通过PI3K/AKT信号通路调控胶质瘤干细胞的增殖。我们应用慢病毒载体靶向敲低AKT1的短发卡RNA序列和PI3K抑制剂LY294002抑制胶质瘤干细胞的PI3K/AKT信号通路活性。为了避免shRNA脱靶效应对实验结果的干扰,我们针对AKT1设计两条不同的shRNA序列。结果显示,shAKT1和LY294002处理后的LN-229、U118-MG和A172胶质瘤干细胞对DAPT的敏感度降低。DAPT(50 μmol/L)处理5天对表达无义序列的LN-229、U118-MG和A172胶质瘤干细胞增殖抑制率分别为(79.3±2.0)%、(86.8±2.1)%和(84.6±4.3)%,对表达shAKT1-1敲低序列的三个干细胞系增殖抑制率较无义序列组下降分别为(38.0±1.8)%(P=0.00002)、(35.7±3.7)%(P=0.00014)和(52.7±2.3)%(P=0.00005),对表达shAKT1-2细胞抑制率下降分别为(51.6±2.7)%(P=0.00001)、(46.6±9.3)%(P=0.00108)和(58.9±6.7)%(P=0.00021),对LY294002(1μmol/L)处理的细胞抑制率下降分别为(35.5±2.2)%(P=0.00003)、(43.2±4.7)%(P=0.00013)和(41.0±8.2)%(P=0.00158)。DAPT对PI3K/AKT活性被抑制的胶质瘤干细胞增殖抑制率显著低于PI3K/AKT活性未受影响细胞,见图 4。此外,我们应用BLISS独立模型评价DAPT和LY294002(1 μmol/L)联用对胶质瘤干细胞增殖的影响,结果显示6.25~50 μmol/L不同浓度DAPT与LY294002(1 μmol/L)联用抑制率均低于预测值,抑制率差值(实际值-预测值)均为负值,且抑制率差值的绝对值随DAPT浓度增高而增加,说明DAPT和LY294002联用对胶质瘤干细胞增殖产生拮抗作用,见表 1~3。该结果显示PI3K/AKT通路活性抑制导致胶质瘤干细胞对DAPT耐受,提示NOTCH通路对胶质瘤干细胞增殖的调控依赖于PI3K/AKT通路。

    图  4  抑制NOTCH通路活性减弱胶质瘤干细胞增殖依赖于PI3K/AKT通路
    Figure  4  NOTCH signaling pathway required PI3K/AKT activity to inhibit GSC proliferation
    1: DAPT(50μmol/L)+scramble; 2: DAPT(50μmol/L)+shAKT1-1; 3: DAPT(50μmol/L)+shAKT1-2; 4: DAPT(50μmol/L)+LY294002(1μmol/L); A: GSCs were treated by different doses of DAPT for five days. ShAKT1-and LY294002(1μmol/L)-treated GSCs were partially resistant to DAPT; *: P < 0.05, **: P < 0.01; B: the proliferation inhibition rates of DAPT (50μmol/L) on GSCs under different treatments; **: P < 0.01
    表  1  BLISS独立模型评价DAPT和LY294002联用对LN-229胶质瘤干细胞增殖的影响
    Table  1  Effect of DAPT and LY294002 combination on LN-229 GSC proliferation evaluated by BLISS independence model
    下载: 导出CSV 
    | 显示表格
    表  2  BLISS独立模型评价DAPT和LY294002联用对U118-MG胶质瘤干细胞增殖的影响
    Table  2  Effect of DAPT and LY294002 combination on U118-MG GSC proliferation evaluated by BLISS independence model
    下载: 导出CSV 
    | 显示表格
    表  3  BLISS独立模型评价DAPT和LY294002联用对A172胶质瘤干细胞增殖的影响
    Table  3  Effect of DAPT and LY294002 combination on A172 GSC proliferation evaluated by BLISS independence model
    下载: 导出CSV 
    | 显示表格

    NOTCH信号通路对胶质瘤干细胞表型维持有至关重要的作用。通过对表达ShAKT1的胶质瘤干细胞DAPT处理,检测PI3K/AKT通路抑制对DAPT抑制干细胞自我更新能力的影响。我们采用体外单细胞成球实验,以形成细胞球的数量评价自我更新能力。结果显示,DAPT显著抑制胶质瘤干细胞成球能力,DAPT(5 μmol/L)使表达无义序列LN-229、U118-MG和A172胶质瘤干细胞成球率降低,分别为(96.3±2.5)%(P=0.00004)、(93.5±5.6)%(P=0.00009)和(79.3±4.0)%(P=0.00006),然而对shAKT1-1三个胶质瘤干细胞系成球抑制率分别为(32.8±8.1)%(P=0.01533)、(7.0±23.6)%(P=0.68659)和(27.0±13.1)%(P=0.03715),对shAKT1-2细胞成球抑制率分别为(24.8±15.0)%(P=0.05968)、(6.7±16.6)%(P=0.61978)和(1.9±13.6)%(P=0.89798),DAPT对shAKT1胶质瘤干细胞成球能力抑制率显著低于无义序列组,见图 5。此研究结果说明敲低AKT1后,NOTCH通路抑制剂DAPT不能有效抑制胶质瘤干细胞体外成球能力,DAPT依赖于PI3K/AKT通路抑制胶质瘤干细胞自我更新能力,提示NOTCH通路对胶质瘤干细胞自我更新能力的维持依赖于PI3K/AKT信号通路。

    图  5  DAPT抑制胶质瘤干细胞成球能力依赖于PI3K/AKT通路
    Figure  5  DAPT required PI3K/AKT pathway to suppress GSC sphere formation
    1: Scramble; 2: Scramble+DAPT; 3: shAKT1-1; 4: shAKT1-1+DAPT; 5: shAKT1-2; 6: shAKT1-2+DAPT; DAPT (5μmol/L) significantly suppressed GSC sphere formation. The DAPT-induced sphere formation inhibition was partially rescued by shAKT1; *: P < 0.05, **: P < 0.01

    胶质母细胞瘤恶性进展与其弥漫浸润、放化疗耐受和复发等特点密切相关[8]。NOTCH信号通路参与肿瘤增殖、生存、抗凋亡、侵袭迁移、血管生成和代谢等诸多生物学过程[9]。NOTCH通路主要功能在于维持肿瘤干细胞的干性。NOTCH通路配体,如DL L-1、DLL-4、Jagged-1和Jagged-2,结合位于细胞表面的NOTCH通路受体(NOTCH1-4),诱发以跨膜蛋白形式存在的NOTCH受体两次水解,释放NOTCH胞内域(NOTCH intracellular domain, ICN),ICN进入细胞核启动靶基因(如HES1、HES3和HES5)转录,参与干细胞的维持[10]。本研究显示,NOTCH通路对PI3K/AKT通路调控不依赖于PTEN介导。虽然急性T淋巴细胞白血病的研究表明NOTCH靶基因HES1阻碍PTEN基因转录,间接活化PI3K/AKT信号通路,但是本研究提示胶质瘤干细胞NOTCH通路并不依赖于PTEN调控PI3K/AKT通路,NOTCH通路活性抑制并未影响PTEN表达水平,且NOTCH通路在PTEN缺失的细胞系中仍调控PI3K/AKT通路[5]。一方面,可能与组织起源不同的肿瘤基因背景不同有关;另一方面,NOTCH通路可以经其他分子介导调控PI3K/AKT通路[11-12]。NOTCH1活化后,其胞内域ICN1通过其下游的转录调节因子直接诱导白介素7受体亚基(interleukin-7 receptor subunit alpha, il7ra)基因转录,活化PI3K/AKT通路[13]。NOTCH靶基因通过诱导胰岛素样生长因子1受体(insulin like growth factor 1 receptor, IGF1R)基因转录,间接激活PI3K/AKT通路[14]。F盒子/WD重复序列蛋白7(F-box/WD repeat-containing protein 7, FBW7)作为泛素连接酶降解雷帕霉素靶蛋白(mammalian target of rapamycin, mTOR)和AKT,而FBW7又被NOTCH靶基因HES5抑制,进而活化PI3K/AKT通路[13]。本研究结果提示,NOTCH通路通过PI3K/AKT通路调控胶质瘤干细胞增殖和自我更新,抑制NOTCH通路同时下调PI3K/AKT通路活性,因此,靶向NOTCH通路的治疗方法可以作为PI3K/AKT靶向治疗的替代方案,为恶性胶质瘤的治疗提供新的策略和思路。

    Competing interests: The authors declare that they have no competing interests.
    利益冲突声明:
    所有作者均声明不存在利益冲突。
    作者贡献:
    高静茹:数据收集及分析、文章撰写
    李佳昕:数据分析
    乔友林:课题设计及指导
    张希、张韶凯、徐慧芳:数据核对
    华云旗:数据收集
    郝金奇、傅颖、石郑阳:资料整理
    余艳琴、石继海:课题设计、数据核对、指导文章
  • 表  1   研究对象的一般人口学特征

    Table  1   General demographic characteristics of the study subjects

    下载: 导出CSV

    表  2   中晚期结直肠癌患者对相关知识认知情况

    Table  2   Cognition of relevant knowledge in patients with middle- and advanced-stage colorectal cancer

    下载: 导出CSV

    表  3   结直肠癌患者认知得分在人群特征方面比较

    Table  3   Comparison of cognitive scores of colorectal cancer patients in terms of population characteristics

    下载: 导出CSV

    表  4   结直肠癌患者认知的多元线性回归

    Table  4   Multiple linear regression of colorectal cancer patients' cognition

    下载: 导出CSV
  • [1]

    Sung H, Ferlay J, Siegel RL, et al. Global Cancer Statistics 2020: GLOBOCAN Estimates of Incidence and Mortality Worldwide for 36 Cancers in 185 Countries[J]. CA Cancer J Clin, 2021, 71(3): 209-249. doi: 10.3322/caac.21660

    [2]

    Siegel RL, Torre LA, Soerjomataram I, et al. Globalpatterns and trends in colorectal cancer incidence in young adults[J]. Gut, 2019, 68(12): 2179-2185. doi: 10.1136/gutjnl-2019-319511

    [3]

    Wong MCS, Huang J, Lok V, et al. Differences in Incidence and Mortality Trends of Colorectal Cancer Worldwide Based on Sex, Age, and Anatomic Location[J]. Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol, 2021, 19(5): 955-966. e61. doi: 10.1016/j.cgh.2020.02.026

    [4] 国家癌症中心. 2019中国肿瘤登记年报[M]. 北京: 人民医学出版社, 2021.

    Center NC. China Cancer Registry Annual Report 2019[M]. Beijing: People's Medical Publishing House, 2021.

    [5]

    Siegel RL, Miller KD, Fedewa SA, et al. Colorectal cancer statistics, 2017[J]. CA Cancer J Clin, 2017, 67(3): 177-193. doi: 10.3322/caac.21395

    [6]

    Society AC. Survival Rates for Colorectal Cancers, Colorectal Cancer Prognosis. 2021. https://www.cancer.org/cancer/colon-rectal-cancer/detection-diagnosis-staging/survival-rates.html.

    [7]

    Nemer H, Hejase A, Hejase H, et al. Colorectal cancer: Exploring awareness in Lebanon[J]. J Middle East North Africa Sci, 2016, 2: 10-21.

    [8]

    Pancar N, Mercan Y. Association between health literacy and colorectal cancer screening behaviors in adults in Northwestern Turkey[J]. Eur J Public Health, 2021, 31(2): 361-366. doi: 10.1093/eurpub/ckaa227

    [9]

    Hamza A, Argaw Z, Gela D. Awareness of Colorectal Cancer and Associated Factors Among Adult Patients in Jimma, South-West Ethiopia: An Institution Based Cross-Sectional Study[J]. Cancer Control, 2021, 28: 10732748211033550.

    [10]

    Weiser MR. AJCC 8th Edition: Colorectal Cancer[J]. Ann Surg Oncol, 2018, 25(6): 1454-1455. doi: 10.1245/s10434-018-6462-1

    [11]

    Xu HF, Gu XF, Wang XH, et al. Knowledge and awareness of colorectal cancer risk factors, screening, and associated factors in advanced colorectal cancer patients: a multicenter cross-sectional study in China[J]. Ann Transl Med, 2022, 10(6): 354. doi: 10.21037/atm-22-1019

    [12]

    Tfaily MA, Naamani D, Kassir A, et al. Awareness of Colorectal Cancer and Attitudes Towards Its Screening Guidelines in Lebanon[J]. Ann Glob Health, 2019, 85(1): 75. doi: 10.5334/aogh.2437

    [13]

    Hussain I, Majeed A, Rasool MF, et al. Knowledge, attitude, preventive practices and perceived barriers to screening about colorectal cancer among university students of newly merged district, Kpk, Pakistan-A crosssectional study[J]. J Oncol Pharm Pract, 2021, 27(2): 359-367. doi: 10.1177/1078155220922598

    [14]

    Rocke KD. Colorectal Cancer Knowledge and Awareness Among University Students in a Caribbean Territory: a Cross-sectional Study[J]. J Cancer Educ, 2020, 35(3): 571-578. doi: 10.1007/s13187-019-01499-1

    [15]

    Wong GCY, Lee KY, Lam KF, et al. Community-based survey of knowledge of, attitudes to and practice of colorectal cancer screening in Hong Kong[J]. J Dig Dis, 2017, 18(10): 582-590. doi: 10.1111/1751-2980.12544

    [16]

    Mhaidat NM, Al-Husein BA, Alzoubi KH, et al. Knowledge and Awareness of Colorectal Cancer Early Warning Signs and Risk Factors among University Students in Jordan[J]. J Cancer Educ, 2018, 33(2): 448-456. doi: 10.1007/s13187-016-1142-y

    [17]

    Gu MJ, Huang QC, Bao CZ, et al. Attributable causes of colorectal cancer in China[J]. BMC Cancer, 2018, 18(1): 38. doi: 10.1186/s12885-017-3968-z

    [18]

    Deng SX, Gao J, An W, et al. Colorectal cancer screening behavior and willingness: an outpatient survey in China[J]. World J Gastroenterol, 2011, 17(26): 3133-3139.

    [19]

    Mueller NM, Hyams T, King-Marshall EC, et al. Colorectal cancer knowledge and perceptions among individuals below the age of 50[J]. Psychooncology, 2022, 31(3): 436-441. doi: 10.1002/pon.5825

    [20]

    Siegel RL, Miller KD, Goding Sauer A, et al. Colorectal cancer statistics, 2020[J]. CA Cancer J Clin, 2020, 70(3): 145-164. doi: 10.3322/caac.21601

    [21]

    Huang RL, Liu Q, Wang YX, et al. Awareness, attitude and barriers of colorectal cancer screening among highrisk populations in China: a cross-sectional study[J]. BMJ Open, 2021, 11(7): e045168. doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2020-045168

    [22]

    Wong FMF. Factors Associated with Knowledge, Attitudes, and Practice towards Colorectal Cancer and Its Screening among People Aged 50-75 Years[J]. Int J Environ Res Public Health, 2021, 18(8): 4100. doi: 10.3390/ijerph18084100

    [23]

    Nasaif HA, Al Qallaf SM. Knowledge of colorectal cancer symptoms and risk factors in the Kingdom of Bahrain: a cross-sectional study[J]. Asian Pac J Cancer Prev, 2018, 19(8): 2299-2304.

    [24]

    Taş F, Kocaöz S, Çirpan R. The effect of knowledge and health beliefs about colorectal cancer on screening behavior[J]. J Clin Nurs, 2019, 28(23-24): 4471-4477. doi: 10.1111/jocn.15032

表(4)
计量
  • 文章访问数:  1868
  • HTML全文浏览量:  771
  • PDF下载量:  400
  • 被引次数: 0
出版历程
  • 收稿日期:  2022-10-23
  • 修回日期:  2023-01-17
  • 网络出版日期:  2024-01-12
  • 刊出日期:  2023-06-24

目录

/

返回文章
返回
x 关闭 永久关闭