Zoéwendtalé Cyrille Compaoré1,2, Elisabeth Monnet3, Aurélie Gérazime1,2, Florence Molinié4,5, Anne-Valérie Guizard5,6,7, Patricia Delafosse5,8, Tienhan Sandrine Dabakuyo-Yonli5,9, Gaëlle Coureau5,10, Karima Hammas5,11, Sandrine Plouvier5,12, Simona Bara5,13, Gautier Défossez5,14, Bénédicte Lapôtre-Ledoux5,15, Laetitia Daubisse-Marliac5,16, Tania d'Almeida5,17, Guy Launoy7, Laura Mansi18, Brigitte Trétarre5,19, Anne-Sophie Woronoff20,21,22. 1. Doubs Cancer Registry, Besançon University Hospital, Besançon, France. 2. Research Unit EA3181, Franche-Comté University, Besançon, France. 3. INSERM CIC 1431, Besançon University Hospital, Besançon, France. 4. Loire-Atlantique/Vendée Cancer Registry, SIRIC-ILIAD, Nantes, France. 5. French Network of Cancer Registries (Francim), Toulouse, France. 6. Calvados General Cancer Registry, Caen, France. 7. INSERM U1086 "Anticipe", Centre François Baclesse, Caen, France. 8. Isère Cancer Registry, Grenoble, France. 9. Côte d'Or Cancer Registry, Dijon, France. 10. Gironde General Cancer Registry, Bordeaux, France. 11. Haut-Rhin Cancer Registry, Mulhouse, France. 12. Lille General Cancer Registry, Lille, France. 13. Manche Cancer Registry, Cherbourg-en-Cotentin, France. 14. Poitou-Charentes Cancer Registry, Poitiers, France. 15. Somme Cancer Registry, Amiens, France. 16. Tarn Cancer Registry, Albi, France. 17. Haute-Vienne Cancer Registry, Limoges, France. 18. Department of Medical Oncology, Besançon University Hospital, Besançon, France. 19. Hérault Cancer Registry, Montpellier, France. 20. Doubs Cancer Registry, Besançon University Hospital, Besançon, France. asworonoff@chu-besancon.fr. 21. Research Unit EA3181, Franche-Comté University, Besançon, France. asworonoff@chu-besancon.fr. 22. French Network of Cancer Registries (Francim), Toulouse, France. asworonoff@chu-besancon.fr.
Abstract
PURPOSE: In an attempt to understand why cervical cancer (CC) survival is decreasing with diagnosis period among older women in France, this study aimed to estimate the effects of main prognostic factors on net survival in CC according to age. METHODS: French cancer registries databases were used to retrospectively analyze women diagnosed with CC in 2011-2012. Net survival was estimated with the Pohar-Perme method and prognostic factors (socio-demographic, clinical variables, stage at diagnosis, therapeutic management) were analyzed with Lambert and Royston's flexible parametric model. RESULTS: One thousand one hundred fifty three women with CC were identified. 30.4% were < 45, 41.4% 45-64, and 28.3% ≥ 65 years. Older women were diagnosed at a more advanced stage than younger women: 54.8% regional (FIGO IB2-IVA), 33.0% distant (IVB) in women ≥ 65 years vs 33.7% and 8.0%, respectively in women < 45 years. Half of women with regional stage of CC received recommended treatment; this rate decreased with increasing age (< 45: 66.1%, 45-64: 62.7%, ≥ 65: 29.2%). Older age was significantly associated with increased risk of death: hazard ratio 1.89 for age ≥ 65, as were regional stage (2.81), distant stage (15.99), and not receiving recommended treatment (2.26). CONCLUSION: Older women with CC diagnosed at advanced stage who do not receive standard of care are at markedly increased risk of death. Special attention to the management of older women is warranted in France, not only to diagnose cancer at an earlier stage (via gynecological follow-up in these menopaused women who remain at risk of CC), but also to ensure they receive standard of care, taking into account their overall state of health.
PURPOSE: In an attempt to understand why cervical cancer (CC) survival is decreasing with diagnosis period among older women in France, this study aimed to estimate the effects of main prognostic factors on net survival in CC according to age. METHODS: French cancer registries databases were used to retrospectively analyze women diagnosed with CC in 2011-2012. Net survival was estimated with the Pohar-Perme method and prognostic factors (socio-demographic, clinical variables, stage at diagnosis, therapeutic management) were analyzed with Lambert and Royston's flexible parametric model. RESULTS: One thousand one hundred fifty three women with CC were identified. 30.4% were < 45, 41.4% 45-64, and 28.3% ≥ 65 years. Older women were diagnosed at a more advanced stage than younger women: 54.8% regional (FIGO IB2-IVA), 33.0% distant (IVB) in women ≥ 65 years vs 33.7% and 8.0%, respectively in women < 45 years. Half of women with regional stage of CC received recommended treatment; this rate decreased with increasing age (< 45: 66.1%, 45-64: 62.7%, ≥ 65: 29.2%). Older age was significantly associated with increased risk of death: hazard ratio 1.89 for age ≥ 65, as were regional stage (2.81), distant stage (15.99), and not receiving recommended treatment (2.26). CONCLUSION: Older women with CC diagnosed at advanced stage who do not receive standard of care are at markedly increased risk of death. Special attention to the management of older women is warranted in France, not only to diagnose cancer at an earlier stage (via gynecological follow-up in these menopaused women who remain at risk of CC), but also to ensure they receive standard of care, taking into account their overall state of health.
Authors: Freddie Bray; Anja H Loos; Peter McCarron; Elizabete Weiderpass; Mark Arbyn; Henrik Møller; Matti Hakama; D Max Parkin Journal: Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev Date: 2005-03 Impact factor: 4.254
Authors: Maria Bjurberg; Erik Holmberg; Christer Borgfeldt; Angelique Flöter-Rådestad; Pernilla Dahm-Kähler; Elisabet Hjerpe; Thomas Högberg; Preben Kjølhede; Janusz Marcickiewicz; Per Rosenberg; Karin Stålberg; Bengt Tholander; Kristina Hellman; Elisabeth Åvall-Lundqvist Journal: Gynecol Oncol Date: 2019-08-30 Impact factor: 5.482
Authors: Marina Vercelli; Roberto Lillini; Riccardo Capocaccia; Andrea Micheli; Jan Willem Coebergh; Mike Quinn; Carmen Martinez-Garcia; Alberto Quaglia Journal: Eur J Cancer Date: 2005-12-15 Impact factor: 9.162
Authors: M Arbyn; A Anttila; J Jordan; G Ronco; U Schenck; N Segnan; H Wiener; A Herbert; L von Karsa Journal: Ann Oncol Date: 2010-03 Impact factor: 32.976
Authors: Stacey A Fedewa; Vilma Cokkinides; Katherine S Virgo; Priti Bandi; Debbie Saslow; Elizabeth M Ward Journal: Am J Public Health Date: 2012-06-28 Impact factor: 9.308
Authors: Sarah P Huepenbecker; Shuangshuang Fu; Charlotte C Sun; Hui Zhao; Kristin M Primm; Sharon H Giordano; Larissa A Meyer Journal: Am J Obstet Gynecol Date: 2022-04-29 Impact factor: 10.693