Ductal carcinoma in situ in the elderly: what is the ideal treatment plan?

Cosette A. Dechant, Samantha M. Thomas, L. Rosenberger, O. Fayanju, R. Greenup, E. Hwang, J. Plichta
{"title":"Ductal carcinoma in situ in the elderly: what is the ideal treatment plan?","authors":"Cosette A. Dechant, Samantha M. Thomas, L. Rosenberger, O. Fayanju, R. Greenup, E. Hwang, J. Plichta","doi":"10.20517/2572-8180.2019.07","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Aim: To evaluate the association between local-regional treatment strategies on overall survival (OS), we compared elderly patients with ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) who underwent lumpectomy alone vs. lumpectomy + radiation or mastectomy. Methods: Patients ≥ 70 years in the National Cancer Data Base (2004-2015) with DCIS who underwent lumpectomy or mastectomy were selected. Kaplan-Meier curves were used to visualize the unadjusted OS. A Cox proportional hazards model was used to estimate the effect of local-regional treatment on OS after adjustment. Separate subgroup analyses were conducted for grade 1, estrogen receptor positive (ER+), and low-volume (< 3 cm) disease. Results: 18,451 patients met inclusion criteria (n = 13,284 lumpectomy + radiation or mastectomy; n = 5,167 lumpectomy alone). The unadjusted 10-year OS was 54% for the entire cohort. After adjustment, patients who underwent lumpectomy + radiation or mastectomy had a slightly improved OS (vs. lumpectomy alone; HR = 0.841, 95%CI: 0.774-0.914). For patients with grade 1 disease, lumpectomy + radiation or mastectomy was not associated with an improved OS (P = 0.12). For patients with ER+ disease, (lumpectomy + radiation or mastectomy) + endocrine therapy yielded the most significant improvement in OS (HR = 0.669, 95%CI: 0.598-0.748). Among patients with low-volume disease, lumpectomy + radiation or mastectomy was associated with an improved OS (HR = 0.812, 95%CI: 0.725-0.91). Conclusion: Our data suggest that chronologic age alone should not preclude a patient from receiving standard therapy for DCIS, while patient fitness, competing comorbidities, and patient preferences are critical factors to consider in light of potentially limited benefits of treatment. In favorable cancer diagnoses such as DCIS, thoughtful omission of standard therapy may be considered.","PeriodicalId":17398,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Unexplored Medical Data","volume":"6 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2019-03-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"4","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Unexplored Medical Data","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.20517/2572-8180.2019.07","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 4

Abstract

Aim: To evaluate the association between local-regional treatment strategies on overall survival (OS), we compared elderly patients with ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) who underwent lumpectomy alone vs. lumpectomy + radiation or mastectomy. Methods: Patients ≥ 70 years in the National Cancer Data Base (2004-2015) with DCIS who underwent lumpectomy or mastectomy were selected. Kaplan-Meier curves were used to visualize the unadjusted OS. A Cox proportional hazards model was used to estimate the effect of local-regional treatment on OS after adjustment. Separate subgroup analyses were conducted for grade 1, estrogen receptor positive (ER+), and low-volume (< 3 cm) disease. Results: 18,451 patients met inclusion criteria (n = 13,284 lumpectomy + radiation or mastectomy; n = 5,167 lumpectomy alone). The unadjusted 10-year OS was 54% for the entire cohort. After adjustment, patients who underwent lumpectomy + radiation or mastectomy had a slightly improved OS (vs. lumpectomy alone; HR = 0.841, 95%CI: 0.774-0.914). For patients with grade 1 disease, lumpectomy + radiation or mastectomy was not associated with an improved OS (P = 0.12). For patients with ER+ disease, (lumpectomy + radiation or mastectomy) + endocrine therapy yielded the most significant improvement in OS (HR = 0.669, 95%CI: 0.598-0.748). Among patients with low-volume disease, lumpectomy + radiation or mastectomy was associated with an improved OS (HR = 0.812, 95%CI: 0.725-0.91). Conclusion: Our data suggest that chronologic age alone should not preclude a patient from receiving standard therapy for DCIS, while patient fitness, competing comorbidities, and patient preferences are critical factors to consider in light of potentially limited benefits of treatment. In favorable cancer diagnoses such as DCIS, thoughtful omission of standard therapy may be considered.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
老年导管原位癌:理想的治疗方案是什么?
目的:为了评估局部-区域治疗策略与总生存期(OS)之间的关系,我们比较了老年导管原位癌(DCIS)患者单独行乳房肿瘤切除术与乳房肿瘤切除术+放疗或乳房切除术。方法:选择≥70岁的国家癌症数据库(2004-2015)中接受乳房肿瘤切除术或乳房切除术的DCIS患者。Kaplan-Meier曲线用于显示未调整的OS。采用Cox比例风险模型估计局部-区域处理对调整后OS的影响。对1级、雌激素受体阳性(ER+)和小体积(< 3cm)疾病进行单独的亚组分析。结果:18,451例患者符合纳入标准(n = 13,284例乳房肿瘤切除术+放疗或乳房切除术;N = 5167例乳房肿瘤切除术)。整个队列未经调整的10年OS为54%。调整后,接受乳房肿瘤切除术+放疗或乳房切除术的患者OS略有改善(与单独进行乳房肿瘤切除术相比;Hr = 0.841, 95%ci: 0.774-0.914)。对于1级疾病患者,乳房肿瘤切除术+放疗或乳房切除术与改善的OS无关(P = 0.12)。对于ER+疾病的患者,(乳房肿瘤切除术+放疗或乳房切除术)+内分泌治疗的OS改善最为显著(HR = 0.669, 95%CI: 0.598-0.748)。在小体积疾病患者中,乳房肿瘤切除术+放疗或乳房切除术与改善的OS相关(HR = 0.812, 95%CI: 0.725-0.91)。结论:我们的数据表明,单纯的年龄不应阻止患者接受DCIS的标准治疗,而患者的健康状况、竞争的合并症和患者的偏好是考虑治疗潜在有限益处的关键因素。在有利的癌症诊断,如DCIS,可以考虑考虑省略标准治疗。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Cancer is a word, not a sentence Acknowledgement to reviewers of Journal of Unexplored Medical Data in 2019 Exemestane leads to hormone-associated ascites in female hamsters with experimental metabolic syndrome Platelet aerobic metabolism: new perspectives The quest for reliable prediction of chemotherapy-induced delayed nausea among breast cancer patients
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1