INTRODUCTION: Perceptions of poor outcome may detract caregivers from offering standard therapies to patients over 80 years who have been diagnosed with rectal cancer. We evaluate the effect of operative intervention on their survival. METHODS: Demographics, tumor characteristics, treatment, and survival for patients over 80 years with rectal and rectosigmoid cancer from 1993 to 2002 in the Surveillance, Epidemiology and End Results Program of the National Cancer Institute were examined. Survival was determined by using the Kaplan-Meier method. Patients who underwent operation (Group A) were compared with those who did not undergo surgery (Group B). Fisher's exact, chi-squared, analysis of variance, and log-rank tests were used as appropriate, and P < 0.05 was considered statistically significant. RESULTS: A total of 9,501 patients (19 percent) were aged older than 80 years. Mean age was 85 years, and median survival was 24 months. Stage of disease was unknown for 2,915 patients. Median survival was 58, 53, 39, 27, and 5 months for Stages 0 (n=163), I (n=1,878), II (n=1,796), III (n=1,536), and IV (n=1,213), respectively. A total of 6,900 patients (81 percent) underwent surgery. Median survival for operated patients was significantly longer for all stages (36 vs. 5 months, P < 0.00001), Stage 0 (60 vs. 7 months, P < 0.01), Stage I (55 vs. 11 months, P < 0.0001), Stage II (41 vs. 13 months, P < 0.0001), Stage III (28 vs. 14 months, P < 0.05), and Stage IV (8 vs. 3 months, P < 0.0001). For patients with rectal cancer, local therapy also significantly improved median survival compared with nonoperated patients (P < 0.0001). CONCLUSIONS: Operative intervention provides sustained benefit in terms of survival to patients aged >80 years with rectal cancer at all stages who are assessed to be a good operative risk. Age older than 80 years should not detract surgeons from offering optimal therapy to good-risk patients.
INTRODUCTION: Perceptions of poor outcome may detract caregivers from offering standard therapies to patients over 80 years who have been diagnosed with rectal cancer. We evaluate the effect of operative intervention on their survival. METHODS: Demographics, tumor characteristics, treatment, and survival for patients over 80 years with rectal and rectosigmoid cancer from 1993 to 2002 in the Surveillance, Epidemiology and End Results Program of the National Cancer Institute were examined. Survival was determined by using the Kaplan-Meier method. Patients who underwent operation (Group A) were compared with those who did not undergo surgery (Group B). Fisher's exact, chi-squared, analysis of variance, and log-rank tests were used as appropriate, and P < 0.05 was considered statistically significant. RESULTS: A total of 9,501 patients (19 percent) were aged older than 80 years. Mean age was 85 years, and median survival was 24 months. Stage of disease was unknown for 2,915 patients. Median survival was 58, 53, 39, 27, and 5 months for Stages 0 (n=163), I (n=1,878), II (n=1,796), III (n=1,536), and IV (n=1,213), respectively. A total of 6,900 patients (81 percent) underwent surgery. Median survival for operated patients was significantly longer for all stages (36 vs. 5 months, P < 0.00001), Stage 0 (60 vs. 7 months, P < 0.01), Stage I (55 vs. 11 months, P < 0.0001), Stage II (41 vs. 13 months, P < 0.0001), Stage III (28 vs. 14 months, P < 0.05), and Stage IV (8 vs. 3 months, P < 0.0001). For patients with rectal cancer, local therapy also significantly improved median survival compared with nonoperated patients (P < 0.0001). CONCLUSIONS: Operative intervention provides sustained benefit in terms of survival to patients aged >80 years with rectal cancer at all stages who are assessed to be a good operative risk. Age older than 80 years should not detract surgeons from offering optimal therapy to good-risk patients.
Authors: Nam P Nguyen; Misty Ceizyk; Jacqueline Vock; Paul Vos; Alexander Chi; Vincent Vinh-Hung; Judy Pugh; Rihan Khan; Christina Truong; Gabby Albala; Angela Locke; Ulf Karlsson; Steve Gelumbauskas; Lexie Smith-Raymond Journal: PLoS One Date: 2013-08-13 Impact factor: 3.240