Background
We examined frequency of guideline-concordant cancer care in elderly patients, including “older” elderly (age≥80).
Methods
Using the Surveillance, Epidemiology and End Results-Medicare dataset in patients age≥66 years, diagnosed with non-metastatic breast (n=55,094), non-small cell lung (NSCLC) (n=36,203), or prostate (n=86,544) cancer from 2006–2011, chemotherapy, surgery, and radiation (RT) treatments were identified using claims. Pearson chi-square tested associations between age and guideline concordance.
Results
Older patients were less likely to receive guideline-concordant curative treatment: in Stage III breast cancer, receipt of post-mastectomy RT (70%, 46% and 21% in patients age 66–79, 80–89 and ≥90 respectively; P<0.0001); in Stage I NSCLC, RT or surgery (89%, 80%, and 64% in age 66–79, 80–89 and ≥90; P<0.0001); in Stage III NSCLC, RT or surgery plus chemotherapy (79%, 58%, and 27% in age 66–79, 80–89 and ≥90; P<0.0001); and in intermediate/high risk prostate cancer, RT or prostatectomy (projected life expectancy >10 yrs—85% and 82% in age 66–69 and 70–75; and ≤10 years—70%, 42%, and 9% in age 76–79, 80–89, ≥90; P<0.0001). However, older patients were more likely to receive guideline-concordant de-intensified treatment: in Stage I–II node-negative breast cancer, hypofractionated post-lumpectomy RT (9%, 16% and 23% in age 66–79, 80–89 and ≥90; P<0.0001); in stage I ER+ breast cancer, observation after lumpectomy (12%, 42%, and 84% in age 66–79, 80–89 and ≥90; P<0.0001); in stage I NSCLC, stereotactic body RT instead of surgery (7%, 16%, and 25% in age 66–79, 80–89 and ≥90; P<0.0001); and in lower-risk prostate cancer, no active treatment (25%, 54%, and 68% in age 66–79, 80–89 and ≥90; P<0.0001).
Conclusion
Actual treatment of older elderly cancer patients frequently diverged from guidelines, especially in curative treatment of advanced disease. Results suggest a need for better metrics than existing guidelines alone to evaluate quality and appropriateness of care in this population.