Urology
Volume 64, Issue 2 , Pages 292-297, August 2004

Aggressive treatment for bladder cancer is associated with improved overall survival among patients 80 years old or older

  • Brent K Hollenbeck

      Affiliations

    • Department of Urology, University of Michigan Medical Center, Ann Arbor, Michigan, USA
    • Corresponding Author InformationReprint requests: Brent K. Hollenbeck, Department of Urology, University of Michigan Medical Center, 1500 East Medical Center Drive, Taubman Center 2916H, Box 0330, Ann Arbor, MI 48109-0330, USA
  • ,
  • David C Miller

      Affiliations

    • Department of Urology, University of Michigan Medical Center, Ann Arbor, Michigan, USA
  • ,
  • David Taub

      Affiliations

    • Department of Urology, University of Michigan Medical Center, Ann Arbor, Michigan, USA
  • ,
  • Rodney L Dunn

      Affiliations

    • Department of Urology, University of Michigan Medical Center, Ann Arbor, Michigan, USA
  • ,
  • Willie Underwood III

      Affiliations

    • Department of Urology, University of Michigan Medical Center, Ann Arbor, Michigan, USA
  • ,
  • James E Montie

      Affiliations

    • Department of Urology, University of Michigan Medical Center, Ann Arbor, Michigan, USA
  • ,
  • John T Wei

      Affiliations

    • Department of Urology, University of Michigan Medical Center, Ann Arbor, Michigan, USA

Received 3 February 2004; accepted 15 March 2004.

Abstract 

Objectives

To examine the impact of various treatment modalities on survival among patients with bladder cancer who were 80 years old or older compared with younger patients. A compendium of evidence suggests that bladder cancer surgery is safe among octogenarians; however, the benefit of such treatment in a population with limited life expectancy has not been well documented.

Methods

Subjects with the primary diagnosis of bladder cancer were identified from the National Cancer Institute's Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results cancer registry between 1988 and 1999. Of the 13,796 patients diagnosed with bladder cancer, 24% were older than 80 years of age. Proportional hazards regression modeling was performed to determine the independent association of treatment strategy on overall and bladder cancer survival while adjusting for multiple covariates.

Results

Of patients 80 years old or older, bladder cancer management included watchful waiting (7%), radiotherapy alone (1%), full or partial cystectomy (12%), and transurethral resection (79%). Patients 80 years old or older were less likely to be treated with extirpative surgery than their younger counterparts (P <0.0001). Cox proportional hazards models demonstrated that, among patients 80 years old or older, radical cystectomy/partial cystectomy had the greatest risk reduction in death from bladder cancer (hazard ratio 0.3) and death from any cause (hazard ratio 0.4) among the primary treatment modalities (both P <0.0001).

Conclusions

Disparities in practice patterns between younger and geriatric patients with bladder cancer exist. We provide compelling evidence that aggressive surgical management of bladder cancer in these patients may improve survival. Risk adjustment tools should be used to identify patients (young and old) who would be better served by less aggressive management.

To access this article, please choose from the options below

Login to an existing account or Register a new account.

  • Purchase this article for 31.50 USD (You must login/register to purchase this article)

    Online access for 24 hours. The PDF version can be downloaded as your permanent record.

  • Subscribe to this title

    Get unlimited online access to this article and all other articles in this title 24/7 for one year.

  • Claim access now

    For current subscribers with Society Membership or Account Number.

  • Visit SciVerse ScienceDirect to see if you have access via your institution.
 

 J. E. Montie is a study investigator funded by AstraZeneca. J. T. Wei is a paid consultant to Sanofi Synthelabo.

PII: S0090-4295(04)00406-6

doi:10.1016/j.urology.2004.03.034

Urology
Volume 64, Issue 2 , Pages 292-297, August 2004