Penny Fang1, Weiguo He2, Daniel R Gomez1, Karen E Hoffman1, Benjamin D Smith3, Sharon H Giordano2, Reshma Jagsi4, Grace L Smith5. 1. Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Texas. 2. Department of Health Services Research, University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Texas. 3. Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Texas; Department of Health Services Research, University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Texas. 4. Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Michigan. 5. Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Texas; Department of Health Services Research, University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Texas. Electronic address: glsmith@mdanderson.org.
Abstract
PURPOSE: To examine the frequency of guideline-concordant cancer care in elderly patients, including "older" elderly (age ≥80 years). METHODS AND MATERIALS: Using the Surveillance, Epidemiology and End Results-Medicare dataset in patients aged ≥66 years diagnosed with nonmetastatic breast cancer (n=55,094), non-small cell lung (NSCLC) (n=36,203), or prostate cancer (n=86,544) from 2006 to 2011, chemotherapy, surgery, and radiation (RT) treatments were identified using claims. Pearson χ2 tested associations between age and guideline concordance. RESULTS: Older patients were less likely to receive guideline-concordant curative treatment: in stage III breast cancer, receipt of postmastectomy RT (70%, 46%, and 21% in patients aged 66-79, 80-89, and ≥90 years, respectively; P<.0001); in stage I NSCLC, RT or surgery (89%, 80%, and 64% in age 66-79, 80-89, and ≥90 years; P<.0001); in stage III NSCLC, RT or surgery plus chemotherapy (79%, 58%, and 27% in age 66-79, 80-89, and ≥90 years; P<.0001); and in intermediate/high-risk prostate cancer, RT or prostatectomy (projected life expectancy >10 years: 85% and 82% in age 66-69 and 70-75 years; and ≤10 years: 70%, 42%, and 9% in age 76-79, 80-89, and ≥90 years; P<.0001). However, older patients were more likely to receive guideline-concordant de-intensified treatment: in stage I to II node-negative breast cancer, hypofractionated postlumpectomy RT (9%, 16%, and 23% in age 66-79, 80-89, and ≥90 years; P<.0001); in stage I estrogen receptor-positive breast cancer, observation after lumpectomy (12%, 42%, and 84% in age 66-79, 80-89, and ≥90 years; P<.0001); in stage I NSCLC, stereotactic body RT instead of surgery (7%, 16%, and 25% in age 66-79, 80-89, and ≥90 years; P<.0001); and in lower-risk prostate cancer, no active treatment (25%, 54%, and 68% in age 66-79, 80-89, and ≥90 years; P<.0001). CONCLUSION: Actual treatment of older elderly cancer patients frequently diverged from guidelines, especially in curative treatment of advanced disease. Results suggest a need for better metrics than existing guidelines alone to evaluate quality and appropriateness of care in this population.
PURPOSE: To examine the frequency of guideline-concordant cancer care in elderly patients, including "older" elderly (age ≥80 years). METHODS AND MATERIALS: Using the Surveillance, Epidemiology and End Results-Medicare dataset in patients aged ≥66 years diagnosed with nonmetastatic breast cancer (n=55,094), non-small cell lung (NSCLC) (n=36,203), or prostate cancer (n=86,544) from 2006 to 2011, chemotherapy, surgery, and radiation (RT) treatments were identified using claims. Pearson χ2 tested associations between age and guideline concordance. RESULTS: Older patients were less likely to receive guideline-concordant curative treatment: in stage III breast cancer, receipt of postmastectomy RT (70%, 46%, and 21% in patients aged 66-79, 80-89, and ≥90 years, respectively; P<.0001); in stage I NSCLC, RT or surgery (89%, 80%, and 64% in age 66-79, 80-89, and ≥90 years; P<.0001); in stage III NSCLC, RT or surgery plus chemotherapy (79%, 58%, and 27% in age 66-79, 80-89, and ≥90 years; P<.0001); and in intermediate/high-risk prostate cancer, RT or prostatectomy (projected life expectancy >10 years: 85% and 82% in age 66-69 and 70-75 years; and ≤10 years: 70%, 42%, and 9% in age 76-79, 80-89, and ≥90 years; P<.0001). However, older patients were more likely to receive guideline-concordant de-intensified treatment: in stage I to II node-negative breast cancer, hypofractionated postlumpectomy RT (9%, 16%, and 23% in age 66-79, 80-89, and ≥90 years; P<.0001); in stage I estrogen receptor-positive breast cancer, observation after lumpectomy (12%, 42%, and 84% in age 66-79, 80-89, and ≥90 years; P<.0001); in stage I NSCLC, stereotactic body RT instead of surgery (7%, 16%, and 25% in age 66-79, 80-89, and ≥90 years; P<.0001); and in lower-risk prostate cancer, no active treatment (25%, 54%, and 68% in age 66-79, 80-89, and ≥90 years; P<.0001). CONCLUSION: Actual treatment of older elderly cancerpatients frequently diverged from guidelines, especially in curative treatment of advanced disease. Results suggest a need for better metrics than existing guidelines alone to evaluate quality and appropriateness of care in this population.
Authors: Benjamin D Smith; Bruce G Haffty; Thomas A Buchholz; Grace L Smith; Deron H Galusha; Justin E Bekelman; Cary P Gross Journal: J Natl Cancer Inst Date: 2006-09-20 Impact factor: 13.506
Authors: Reshma Jagsi; Aaron D Falchook; Laura H Hendrix; Heather Curry; Ronald C Chen Journal: Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys Date: 2014-12-01 Impact factor: 7.038
Authors: Benjamin D Smith; Cary P Gross; Grace L Smith; Deron H Galusha; Justin E Bekelman; Bruce G Haffty Journal: J Natl Cancer Inst Date: 2006-05-17 Impact factor: 13.506
Authors: Shervin M Shirvani; Jing Jiang; Joe Y Chang; James Welsh; Anna Likhacheva; Thomas A Buchholz; Stephen G Swisher; Benjamin D Smith Journal: JAMA Surg Date: 2014-12 Impact factor: 14.766
Authors: Jordan A Holmes; Jeannette T Bensen; James L Mohler; Lixin Song; Merle H Mishel; Ronald C Chen Journal: Cancer Date: 2016-09-13 Impact factor: 6.860
Authors: Benjamin D Smith; Jing Jiang; Ya-ChenTina Shih; Sharon H Giordano; Jinhai Huo; Reshma Jagsi; Adeyiza O Momoh; Abigail S Caudle; Kelly K Hunt; Simona F Shaitelman; Thomas A Buchholz; Shervin M Shirvani Journal: J Natl Cancer Inst Date: 2016-09-27 Impact factor: 13.506
Authors: Ronica H Nanda; Yuan Liu; Theresa W Gillespie; John L Mikell; Suresh S Ramalingam; Felix G Fernandez; Walter J Curran; Joseph Lipscomb; Kristin A Higgins Journal: Cancer Date: 2015-09-08 Impact factor: 6.860
Authors: Caitlin E Marks; Yi Ren; Laura H Rosenberger; Samantha M Thomas; Rachel A Greenup; Oluwadamilola M Fayanju; Susan McDuff; Gretchen Kimmick; E Shelley Hwang; Jennifer K Plichta Journal: J Surg Res Date: 2020-05-29 Impact factor: 2.192
Authors: Cameron W Swanick; Xiudong Lei; Ying Xu; Yu Shen; Nathan A Goodwin; Grace L Smith; Sharon H Giordano; Kelly K Hunt; Reshma Jagsi; Simona F Shaitelman; Susan K Peterson; Benjamin D Smith Journal: Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys Date: 2017-12-09 Impact factor: 7.038
Authors: Geriletu Ao; Maria de Miguel; Ana Gomes; Runhan Liu; Valentina Boni; Irene Moreno; José Miguel Cárdenas; Antonio Cubillo; Lisardo Ugidos; Emiliano Calvo Journal: Invest New Drugs Date: 2021-07-21 Impact factor: 3.850
Authors: Susan Y Wu; Ann A Lazar; Matthew A Gubens; Collin M Blakely; Alexander R Gottschalk; David M Jablons; Thierry M Jahan; Victoria E H Wang; Taylor L Dunbar; Melisa L Wong; Jason W Chan; William Guthrie; Jeff Belkora; Sue S Yom Journal: JAMA Netw Open Date: 2020-09-01