Cutaneous melanoma survival rates of the elderly are not worse than those of the young, yet they have some specific differences.

IF 1.4 4区 医学 Q4 ONCOLOGY
Ferhat Ferhatoglu, Kayhan Erturk, Tas Faruk
{"title":"Cutaneous melanoma survival rates of the elderly are not worse than those of the young, yet they have some specific differences.","authors":"Ferhat Ferhatoglu, Kayhan Erturk, Tas Faruk","doi":"10.4103/jcrt.jcrt_815_21","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>The incidence of cutaneous melanoma among the elderly has increased significantly. Unfavorable survival rates are associated with insufficient patient managements and poor prognostic features in the elderly. We aimed to compare elderly (≥75 years) and younger (<75 years) patients with cutaneous melanoma to determine the differences and the prognostic significance of age.</p><p><strong>Materials and methods: </strong>The retrospective data of 117 elderly and 232 younger patients with cutaneous melanoma were compared.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The median age of the elderly patients was 78 years (75-104), and 51.3% of the patients were female. Of the patients, 14.5% were in the metastatic stages. Clinicopathologic factors such as extremity melanomas (P = 0.01), Clark levels IV-V (P = 0.04), ulceration (P = 0.009), and neurotropism (P = 0.03) were significantly more common in elderly patients. However, BRAF mutation was significantly more common in younger patients (P = 0.003). Overall survival (OS) and recurrence-free survival (RFS) rates of both the groups were similar. Lymph node involvement (P < 0.005), distant metastasis (P < 0.005), and relapse of disease (P = 0.02) were associated with poor OS in elderly patients. Tumor-infiltrating lymphocytes was associated with prolonged RFS (P = 0.05), while extremity melanomas (P = 0.01), lymphovascular invasion (P = 0.006), and lymph node involvement (P < 0.005) had negative impact on RFS.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Although elderly patients with cutaneous melanoma had different clinicopathologic features in our series, their survival rates are similar to those of younger patients, which shows that age alone is inadequate to determine the prognosis. Disease stage and a comprehensive geriatric assessment might assist to determine appropriate management.</p>","PeriodicalId":15208,"journal":{"name":"Journal of cancer research and therapeutics","volume":"19 Supplement","pages":"S0"},"PeriodicalIF":1.4000,"publicationDate":"2023-04-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of cancer research and therapeutics","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.4103/jcrt.jcrt_815_21","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"ONCOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

Abstract

Introduction: The incidence of cutaneous melanoma among the elderly has increased significantly. Unfavorable survival rates are associated with insufficient patient managements and poor prognostic features in the elderly. We aimed to compare elderly (≥75 years) and younger (<75 years) patients with cutaneous melanoma to determine the differences and the prognostic significance of age.

Materials and methods: The retrospective data of 117 elderly and 232 younger patients with cutaneous melanoma were compared.

Results: The median age of the elderly patients was 78 years (75-104), and 51.3% of the patients were female. Of the patients, 14.5% were in the metastatic stages. Clinicopathologic factors such as extremity melanomas (P = 0.01), Clark levels IV-V (P = 0.04), ulceration (P = 0.009), and neurotropism (P = 0.03) were significantly more common in elderly patients. However, BRAF mutation was significantly more common in younger patients (P = 0.003). Overall survival (OS) and recurrence-free survival (RFS) rates of both the groups were similar. Lymph node involvement (P < 0.005), distant metastasis (P < 0.005), and relapse of disease (P = 0.02) were associated with poor OS in elderly patients. Tumor-infiltrating lymphocytes was associated with prolonged RFS (P = 0.05), while extremity melanomas (P = 0.01), lymphovascular invasion (P = 0.006), and lymph node involvement (P < 0.005) had negative impact on RFS.

Conclusions: Although elderly patients with cutaneous melanoma had different clinicopathologic features in our series, their survival rates are similar to those of younger patients, which shows that age alone is inadequate to determine the prognosis. Disease stage and a comprehensive geriatric assessment might assist to determine appropriate management.

老年人的皮肤黑色素瘤存活率并不比年轻人差,但也有一些特殊的差异。
导言:老年人皮肤黑色素瘤的发病率显著增加。老年人不良的生存率与患者管理不足和不良预后特征有关。我们旨在比较老年人(≥75 岁)和年轻人(材料和方法:比较了 117 名老年和 232 名年轻皮肤黑色素瘤患者的回顾性数据:老年患者的中位年龄为 78 岁(75-104 岁),51.3% 的患者为女性。其中,14.5%的患者处于转移期。临床病理因素如四肢黑色素瘤(P = 0.01)、克拉克水平 IV-V 级(P = 0.04)、溃疡(P = 0.009)和神经滋养(P = 0.03)在老年患者中明显更常见。然而,BRAF突变在年轻患者中明显更常见(P = 0.003)。两组患者的总生存期(OS)和无复发生存期(RFS)相似。淋巴结受累(P < 0.005)、远处转移(P < 0.005)和疾病复发(P = 0.02)与老年患者的不良OS有关。肿瘤浸润淋巴细胞与RFS延长有关(P = 0.05),而四肢黑色素瘤(P = 0.01)、淋巴管侵犯(P = 0.006)和淋巴结受累(P < 0.005)对RFS有负面影响:结论:在我们的系列研究中,虽然老年皮肤黑色素瘤患者的临床病理特征各不相同,但他们的生存率与年轻患者相似,这表明仅凭年龄并不足以判断预后。疾病分期和全面的老年病学评估可能有助于确定适当的治疗方法。
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 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
1.80
自引率
15.40%
发文量
299
审稿时长
6 months
期刊介绍: The journal will cover technical and clinical studies related to health, ethical and social issues in field of Medical oncology, radiation oncology, medical imaging, radiation protection, non-ionising radiation, radiobiology. Articles with clinical interest and implications will be given preference.
×
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
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
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 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信