A comprehensive comparison between young and older-age non-small cell lung cancer patients at a public referral centre in Delhi, India

Purpose

Given the increasing number of non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) patients in India, a comparative analysis between patients under 40 years and those of older age at a major public referral centre would provide insight into the phenotypic patterns of this group.

Methods

NSCLC patients who were accessioned within the lung cancer clinic database of the Pulmonary Medicine Department at the all India institute of medical sciences – Delhi between 2008 and 2019 were reviewed. Patients 40 years or younger and 60 years or older were selected and categorised as young and older patients, respectively. Baseline clinical characteristics, histologic profiles, treatments administered and survival outcomes were compared between both groups.

Results

Following the database review, 154 young and 1,058 older patients were selected for inclusion. Clinically, young patients were more often female (26.0% versus 14.5%, p < 0.001), retained a more independent performance status (64.1% versus 45.5%; p < 0.001) and never smoked (63.7 % versus 18.8%, p < 0.001). Regarding disease profiles, young patients were more frequently diagnosed with adenocarcinoma (p < 0.001) and 12 young patients had adenoid cystic carcinoma. Rates of stage IV disease at presentation were higher among young patients (78.0% versus 63.0%, p < 0.001). Regarding treatment, no differences in systemic therapies administered or survival were identified.

Conclusion

In India, young NSCLC patients are frequently non-smokers and diagnosed with advanced disease. Despite better performance status, young patients do not share better outcomes. Efforts should be directed towards optimising intensive treatment for young patients.

LIFETIME PHYSICAL INACTIVITY IS ASSOCIATED WITH LUNG CANCER RISK AND MORTALITY

INTRODUCTION

Investigations of the independent associations of physical inactivity with cancer endpoints have been mounting in the epidemiological literature, in part due to the high prevalence of physical inactivity among cancer patients and to evidence that inactivity associates with carcinogenesis via pathways independent of obesity. Yet, physical inactivity is not currently recognized as a well-established risk or prognostic factor for lung cancer. As such, we examined the associations of lifetime physical inactivity with lung cancer risk and mortality in a hospital-based, case-control study.

PRESENTATION OF CASE

Materials and Methods: The analyses included data from 660 lung cancer patients and 1335 matched cancer-free controls. Multivariable logistic regression analyses were utilized to assess the association between lifetime physical inactivity and lung cancer risk, and Cox proportional hazards models were utilized to estimate the association between lifetime physical inactivity and mortality among lung cancer cases.Results: We observed a significant positive association between lifetime physical inactivity and lung cancer risk: [Odds ratio (OR)=2.23, 95% confidence interval (CI): 1.77-2.81]; the association remained significant among never smokers (OR=3.00, 95% CI:1.33-6.78) and non-smokers (OR=2.33, 95% CI: 1.79-3.02). We also observed a significant positive association between lifetime physical inactivity and lung cancer mortality [Hazard ratio (HR)=1.40, 95% CI: 1.14-1.71]; the association remained significant in non-smokers (HR=1.51, 95% CI: 1.16-1.95).

DISCUSSION/CONCLUSION

These data add to the body of evidence suggesting that physical inactivity is an independent risk and prognostic factor for cancer. Additional research utilizing prospectively collected data is needed to substantiate the current findings.

The changing anatomic position of squamous cell carcinoma of the lung - a new conundrum

BACKGROUND

Traditionally, squamous cell carcinoma (SCC) of the lung is a central rather than a peripheral form of lung cancer. Rates of SCC in the lung periphery are typically sited in the 15-30% range. Recently, we observed that a significant portion of newly diagnosed SCC was located on a periphery. A comprehensive review of the tumor data at our facility, a busy teaching hospital with a large cohort of cancer patients, was undertaken to assess whether there had been a substantive change in the traditional epidemiologic distributions of the lung cancer, specifically with respect to SCC. Given the differences in cell biology and carcinogenesis of central versus peripheral SCC, a potential epidemiologic shift might suggest a change in tumor biology.

METHODS

From May 12, 2012 through May 13, 2013, all histopathologically confirmed diagnoses of SCC of the lung were retrospectively reviewed. Each patient's lesion was then classified as peripheral or central based on CT evidence.

RESULTS

A total of 56 patients were diagnosed with SCC. Of these, 55% (n=31) had peripheral and 45% (n=25) had central SCC. Twenty-nine patients did not have any prior history of malignancy. Of this subset of patients, 62% (n=18) had peripheral SCC, and 38% (n=11) had central SCC.

CONCLUSION

Our findings appear to correlate with our initial observation that, within our institution, there has been a substantive shift in the traditional distribution of SCC with the majority of these cancers now being diagnosed in the lung periphery as opposed to the more central locations.