Elisabeth J M Driessen1, Karlijn J G Schulkes2, Anne-Marie C Dingemans3, Judith G M van Loon4, Marije E Hamaker5, Mieke J Aarts6, Maryska L G Janssen-Heijnen7. 1. Department of Clinical Epidemiology, VieCuri Medical Centre, Venlo, The Netherlands; Department of Epidemiology, Maastricht University Medical Centre+, GROW School for Oncology and Developmental Biology, Maastricht, the Netherlands. Electronic address: ldriessen@viecuri.nl. 2. Department of Pulmonology, University Medical Centre Utrecht, Utrecht, The Netherlands. Electronic address: k.j.g.schulkes-2@umcutrecht.nl. 3. Department of Pulmonary Diseases, GROW School for Oncology and Developmental Biology, Maastricht University Medical Center, Maastricht, The Netherlands. Electronic address: a.dingemans@mumc.nl. 4. MAASTRO Clinic, department of radiation oncology, GROW School for Oncology and Developmental Biology, Maastricht University Medical Centre, Maastricht, The Netherlands. Electronic address: judith.vanloon@maastro.nl. 5. Department of Geriatric Medicine, Diakonessenhuis Utrecht, Utrecht, The Netherlands. Electronic address: mhamaker@diakhuis.nl. 6. Netherlands Cancer Registry, Netherlands Comprehensive Cancer Organisation, Utrecht, The Netherlands. Electronic address: m.aarts@iknl.nl. 7. Department of Clinical Epidemiology, VieCuri Medical Centre, Venlo, The Netherlands; Department of Epidemiology, Maastricht University Medical Centre+, GROW School for Oncology and Developmental Biology, Maastricht, the Netherlands. Electronic address: mjanssenheijnen@viecuri.nl.
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: Patterns of treatment and survival are largely unknown for older patients with stage III non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) in daily clinical practice. METHODS: All patients ≥65 years with stage III NSCLC (2009-2013) were included from the population-based Netherlands Cancer Registry. Descriptive and multivariable treatment and survival analyses were stratified for patients aged 65-74 years and ≥75 years. RESULTS: Compared to older patients (n = 3163), those aged 65-74 years (n = 3876) underwent more often surgery (21% vs 12% for stage IIIA), chemoradiotherapy (47% vs 22% for both stage IIIA and IIIB), and chemotherapy (23% vs 12% for stage IIIB), and received less radiotherapy (8% vs 22% for both stage IIIA and IIIB). One-year survival was significantly higher among patients aged 65-74 compared to those aged ≥75 (61% vs 43%, for stage IIIA and 45% vs 30% for stage IIIB; P < .01). However, stratification of treatment showed similar survival rates between age groups. Among patients aged 65-74 years, the multivariably adjusted hazard ratio (HR) of death was twice as high for patients receiving radiotherapy (HR 1.9 (95%CI 1.6-2.2) for stage IIIA and HR 2.5 (95%CI 2.1-3.0) for stage IIIB) and chemotherapy (HR 2.2 (95%CI 1.9-2.5) and HR 2.2 (95%CI 1.8-2.7), respectively) compared to chemoradiotherapy, and were slightly lower for patients aged ≥75 years receiving radiotherapy (HR 1.6 (95%CI 1.4-1.9) and HR 1.8 (95%CI 1.5-2.1), respectively) and chemotherapy (HR 2.2 (95%CI 1.8-2.7) and HR 1.8 (95%CI 1.5-2.2), respectively). Comorbidity was not significantly associated with poorer survival (p = .07). CONCLUSION: Chemoradiotherapy was more often applied among patients aged 65-74 years compared to those aged ≥75. While survival was worse for patients aged ≥75 years, differences between age groups largely disappeared after stratification for treatment. Future research should focus on predictive patient characteristics to distinguish patients within the heterogeneous older population who can benefit from curative-intent treatment.
INTRODUCTION: Patterns of treatment and survival are largely unknown for older patients with stage III non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) in daily clinical practice. METHODS: All patients ≥65 years with stage III NSCLC (2009-2013) were included from the population-based Netherlands Cancer Registry. Descriptive and multivariable treatment and survival analyses were stratified for patients aged 65-74 years and ≥75 years. RESULTS: Compared to older patients (n = 3163), those aged 65-74 years (n = 3876) underwent more often surgery (21% vs 12% for stage IIIA), chemoradiotherapy (47% vs 22% for both stage IIIA and IIIB), and chemotherapy (23% vs 12% for stage IIIB), and received less radiotherapy (8% vs 22% for both stage IIIA and IIIB). One-year survival was significantly higher among patients aged 65-74 compared to those aged ≥75 (61% vs 43%, for stage IIIA and 45% vs 30% for stage IIIB; P < .01). However, stratification of treatment showed similar survival rates between age groups. Among patients aged 65-74 years, the multivariably adjusted hazard ratio (HR) of death was twice as high for patients receiving radiotherapy (HR 1.9 (95%CI 1.6-2.2) for stage IIIA and HR 2.5 (95%CI 2.1-3.0) for stage IIIB) and chemotherapy (HR 2.2 (95%CI 1.9-2.5) and HR 2.2 (95%CI 1.8-2.7), respectively) compared to chemoradiotherapy, and were slightly lower for patients aged ≥75 years receiving radiotherapy (HR 1.6 (95%CI 1.4-1.9) and HR 1.8 (95%CI 1.5-2.1), respectively) and chemotherapy (HR 2.2 (95%CI 1.8-2.7) and HR 1.8 (95%CI 1.5-2.2), respectively). Comorbidity was not significantly associated with poorer survival (p = .07). CONCLUSION: Chemoradiotherapy was more often applied among patients aged 65-74 years compared to those aged ≥75. While survival was worse for patients aged ≥75 years, differences between age groups largely disappeared after stratification for treatment. Future research should focus on predictive patient characteristics to distinguish patients within the heterogeneous older population who can benefit from curative-intent treatment.
Authors: Elisabeth J M Driessen; Judith G M van Loon; Huub A Maas; Anne-Marie C Dingemans; Maryska L G Janssen-Heijnen Journal: Lung Date: 2018-04-12 Impact factor: 2.584
Authors: Merle I Ronden; Idris Bahce; Niels J M Claessens; Nicole Barlo; Max R Dahele; Johannes M A Daniels; Caroline Tissing-Tan; Edo Hekma; Sayed M S Hashemi; Antoinet van der Wel; Femke O B Spoelstra; Wilko F A R Verbakel; Marian A Tiemessen; Marjolein van Laren; Annemarie Becker; Svitlana Tarasevych; Cornelis J A Haasbeek; Karen Maassen van den Brink; Chris Dickhoff; Suresh Senan Journal: JTO Clin Res Rep Date: 2021-06-06
Authors: Simon Ekman; Pia Horvat; Mats Rosenlund; Anne Mette Kejs; Dony Patel; Ariadna Juarez-Garcia; Laure Lacoin; Melinda J Daumont; John R Penrod; Odd Terje Brustugun; Jens Benn Sørensen Journal: JTO Clin Res Rep Date: 2021-03-24
Authors: Eric D Miller; James L Fisher; Karl E Haglund; John C Grecula; Meng Xu-Welliver; Erin M Bertino; Kai He; Peter G Shields; David P Carbone; Terence M Williams; Gregory A Otterson; Jose G Bazan Journal: Radiat Oncol Date: 2018-10-05 Impact factor: 3.481
Authors: Farastuk Bozorgmehr; Inn Chung; Petros Christopoulos; Johannes Krisam; Marc A Schneider; Lena Brückner; Daniel Wilhelm Mueller; Michael Thomas; Stefan Rieken Journal: BMC Cancer Date: 2020-08-26 Impact factor: 4.430
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