title: The impact of old age on cancer-specific and non-cancer-related survival following elective potentially curative surgery for Dukes A/B colorectal cancer.
abstract: Previous studies have suggested that survival following surgery for colorectal cancer is poorer in the elderly. However, the findings were inconsistent and none of the studies adjusted for case mix. The aim of this study was to establish whether there were age-related differences in cancer (colorectal)-specific and non-cancer (colorectal)-related survival in patients undergoing elective potentially curative resection for Dukes stage A/B colorectal cancer. One thousand and forty three patients who underwent elective potentially curative resection for Dukes' A/B colorectal cancer between 1991 and 1994 in 11 hospitals in Scotland were included in the study. Ten year cancer-specific and non-cancer-related survival and the hazard ratios were calculated according to age groups (<64; 65-74/>74 years). On follow-up 273 patients died of their cancer and 328 died of non-cancer-related causes. At 10 years, overall survival was 45%, cancer specific was 70% and non-cancer-related survival was 64%. On multivariate analysis of all factors, age (HR 1.38, 95% CI 1.18-1.62, P<0.001), sex (HR 1.74, 95% CI 1.36-2.23, P<0.001), site (HR 1.42, 95% CI 1.11-1.81, P<0.01) and Dukes' stage (HR 1.71, 1.19-2.47, P<0.01) were independently associated with cancer-specific survival. On multivariate analysis of all factors, age (HR 2.14, 1.84-2.49, P<0.001), sex (HR 1.43, 1.15-1.79, P<0.01) and deprivation (HR 1.30, 1.09-1.55, P<0.01) were independently associated with non-cancer-related survival. The results of this study show that increasing age impacts negatively both on cancer-specific and non-cancer-related survival following elective potentially curative resection for node-negative colorectal cancer. However, the effect of increasing age is greater on the non-cancer-related survival. These results suggest that cancer-specific and non-cancer-related mortality should be considered separately in survival analysis of these cancer patients.
authors.affiliation: University Department of Surgery, Faculty of Medicine, University of Glasgow, Glasgow G12 8QQ, UK. d.c.mcmillan@clinmed.gla.ac.uk
authors.forename: D C
authors.initials: DC
authors.lastname: McMillan
authors.forename: D J
authors.initials: DJ
authors.lastname: Hole
authors.forename: C S
authors.initials: CS
authors.lastname: McArdle
mesh_terms: D000367:Age Factors; D000368:Aged; D015179:Colorectal Neoplasms / Q000503:physiopathology / Q000601:surgery*; D005260:Female; D006801:Humans; D008297:Male; D008875:Middle Aged; D015996:Survival Rate
references.citation: Clin Chem. 2000 Jul;46(7):934-8
references.pmid: 10894836
references.citation: Clin Chem Lab Med. 2000 Oct;38(10):1003-11
references.pmid: 11140615
references.citation: BMJ. 2006 Nov 25;333(7578):1109-11
references.pmid: 17124223
references.citation: Br J Surg. 1994 May;81(5):736-8
references.pmid: 8044567
references.citation: Br J Surg. 2004 May;91(5):610-7
references.pmid: 15122614
references.citation: Prev Cardiol. 2001 Summer;4(3):109-114
references.pmid: 11828186
references.citation: Br J Surg. 2003 Jun;90(6):711-5
references.pmid: 12808619
references.citation: Br J Surg. 2004 May;91(5):605-9
references.pmid: 15122613
references.citation: Eur J Surg Oncol. 1998 Oct;24(5):391-5
references.pmid: 9800966
references.citation: Circulation. 1999 Jan 19;99(2):237-42
references.pmid: 9892589
references.citation: JAMA. 2007 Sep 26;298(12):1412-9
references.pmid: 17895457
references.citation: Br J Surg. 2002 May;89(5):586-90
references.pmid: 11972548
references.citation: J Natl Cancer Inst. 1996 Dec 4;88(23):1717-30
references.pmid: 8944002
references.citation: J Natl Cancer Inst. 2005 Nov 16;97(22):1679-87
references.pmid: 16288121
references.citation: Br Med Bull. 2002;64:119-25
references.pmid: 12421729
references.citation: Aliment Pharmacol Ther. 2006 Aug 1;24(3):535-9
references.pmid: 16886920
references.citation: Br J Cancer. 2002 Feb 1;86(3):331-5
references.pmid: 11875693
references.citation: Lancet. 2000 Sep 16;356(9234):968-74
references.pmid: 11041397