Karlijn J G Schulkes1, Carin A M Pouw2, Elisabeth J M Driessen3, Leontine J R van Elden4, Frederiek van den Bos5, Maryska L G Janssen-Heijnen3,6, Jan-Willem J Lammers7, Marije E Hamaker2. 1. Department of Geriatric Medicine, Diakonessenhuis, Bosboomstraat 1, 3582 KE, Utrecht, The Netherlands. kschulkes@diakhuis.nl. 2. Department of Geriatric Medicine, Diakonessenhuis, Bosboomstraat 1, 3582 KE, Utrecht, The Netherlands. 3. Department of Clinical Epidemiology, VieCuri Medical Centre, Venlo, The Netherlands. 4. Department of Pulmonology, Diakonessenhuis, Utrecht, The Netherlands. 5. Department of Internal Medicine, Haga Hospital, The Hague, The Netherlands. 6. Department of Epidemiology, GROW - School for Oncology and Developmental Biology, Maastricht University Medical Centre+, Maastricht, The Netherlands. 7. Department of Pulmonology, UMC Utrecht, Utrecht, The Netherlands.
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: An important step in improving research and care for the oldest patients with lung cancer is analyzing current data regarding diagnostic work-up, treatment choices, and survival. METHODS: We analyzed data on lung cancer from the Netherlands Cancer Registry (NCR-IKNL) regarding diagnostic work-up, treatment, and survival in different age categories; the oldest old (≥85 years of age) versus those aged 71-84 (elderly) and those aged ≤70 years (younger patients). RESULTS: 47,951 patients were included in the 2010-2014 NCR database. 2196 (5%) patients were aged ≥85 years. Histological diagnosis was obtained significantly less often in the oldest old (38%, p < 0.001), and less standard treatment regimen was given (8%, p < 0.001) compared to elderly and younger patients. 67% of the oldest old received best supportive care only versus 38% of the elderly and 20% of the younger patients (p < 0.001). For the oldest old receiving standard treatment, survival rates were similar in comparison with the elderly patients. In the oldest old, no survival differences were found when comparing standard or adjusted regimens for stage I and IV NSCLC; for stage III, oldest old receiving standard treatment had longer survival. No oldest old patients with stage II received standard treatment. CONCLUSION: Clinicians make limited use of diagnostics and invasive treatment in the oldest old; however, selected oldest old patients experienced similar survival rates as the elderly when receiving some form of anticancer therapy (standard or adjusted). More research is needed to further develop individualized treatment algorithms.
INTRODUCTION: An important step in improving research and care for the oldest patients with lung cancer is analyzing current data regarding diagnostic work-up, treatment choices, and survival. METHODS: We analyzed data on lung cancer from the Netherlands Cancer Registry (NCR-IKNL) regarding diagnostic work-up, treatment, and survival in different age categories; the oldest old (≥85 years of age) versus those aged 71-84 (elderly) and those aged ≤70 years (younger patients). RESULTS: 47,951 patients were included in the 2010-2014 NCR database. 2196 (5%) patients were aged ≥85 years. Histological diagnosis was obtained significantly less often in the oldest old (38%, p < 0.001), and less standard treatment regimen was given (8%, p < 0.001) compared to elderly and younger patients. 67% of the oldest old received best supportive care only versus 38% of the elderly and 20% of the younger patients (p < 0.001). For the oldest old receiving standard treatment, survival rates were similar in comparison with the elderly patients. In the oldest old, no survival differences were found when comparing standard or adjusted regimens for stage I and IV NSCLC; for stage III, oldest old receiving standard treatment had longer survival. No oldest old patients with stage II received standard treatment. CONCLUSION: Clinicians make limited use of diagnostics and invasive treatment in the oldest old; however, selected oldest old patients experienced similar survival rates as the elderly when receiving some form of anticancer therapy (standard or adjusted). More research is needed to further develop individualized treatment algorithms.
Authors: Hirsh Koyi; Gunnar Hillerdal; Karl-Gustav Kölbeck; Daniel Brodin; Per Liv; Eva Brandén Journal: Anticancer Res Date: 2016-10 Impact factor: 2.480
Authors: Benjamin W Lamb; Nick Sevdalis; Sonal Arora; Anna Pinto; Charles Vincent; James S A Green Journal: World J Surg Date: 2011-09 Impact factor: 3.352
Authors: L P Fried; C M Tangen; J Walston; A B Newman; C Hirsch; J Gottdiener; T Seeman; R Tracy; W J Kop; G Burke; M A McBurnie Journal: J Gerontol A Biol Sci Med Sci Date: 2001-03 Impact factor: 6.053
Authors: M L G Janssen-Heijnen; H A A M Maas; S Siesling; C C E Koning; J W W Coebergh; H J M Groen Journal: Ann Oncol Date: 2011-06-20 Impact factor: 32.976
Authors: Karlijn J G Schulkes; Marije E Hamaker; Frederiek van den Bos; Leontine J R van Elden Journal: Clin Lung Cancer Date: 2016-06-02 Impact factor: 4.785
Authors: Sophie Pilleron; Helen Gower; Maryska Janssen-Heijnen; Virginia Claire Signal; Jason K Gurney; Eva Ja Morris; Ruth Cunningham; Diana Sarfati Journal: BMJ Open Date: 2021-03-10 Impact factor: 2.692