Comorbidities in lung cancer: prevalence, severity and links with socioeconomic status and treatment.

BACKGROUND: Survival from lung cancer remains poor in Scotland, UK. Although the presence of comorbidities is known to influence outcomes, detailed quantification of comorbidities is not available in routinely collected audit or cancer registry data. The aim of the present study was to assess the prevalence and severity of comorbidities in patients with newly diagnosed lung cancer across four centres throughout Scotland using validated criteria. METHODS: Between 2005 and 2008, all patients with newly diagnosed lung cancer coming through the multidisciplinary teams in four Scottish centres were included in the study. Patient demographics, WHO/Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status, clinicopathological features and primary treatment modality were recorded. RESULTS: Details of 882 patients were collected prospectively. The majority of patients (87.3%) had at least one comorbidity, the most common being weight loss (53%), chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (43%), renal impairment (28%) and ischaemic heart disease (27%). A composite score was produced that included both number and severity of comorbidities. One in seven patients (15.3%) had severe comorbidity scores. There were statistically significant variations in comorbidity scores between treatment centres and between non-small cell lung carcinoma treatment groups. Disease stage was not associated with comorbidity score. CONCLUSIONS: There is a high prevalence of multiple, severe comorbidities in Scottish patients with lung cancer, and these vary by site and treatment group. Further research is needed to determine the relationship between comorbidity scores and survival in these patients.

Variation in comorbidity and clinical management in patients newly diagnosed with lung cancer in four Scottish centers.

BACKGROUND: Treatment and survival rates within Scotland for patients with lung cancer seem lower than in many other European countries. No study of lung cancer has attempted to specifically investigate the association between variation in investigation, comorbidity, and treatment and outcome between different centers. METHODS: Patient demographics, World Health Organization/Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status, and primary treatment modality were recorded. In addition to recording the comorbidities present in each patient, the severity of each comorbidity was graded on a 4-point scale (0-3) using validated severity scales. Data were collected as the patient was investigated and entered in an anonymized format into a database designed for the study. RESULTS: Prospectively collected data from 882 patients diagnosed with lung cancer in four Scottish centers. A number of statistically significant differences were identified between centers. These included investigation, treatment between centers (i.e., surgical rates), age, tumor histology, smoking history, socioeconomic profile, ventilatory function, and performance status. Predictors of declining performance status included increasing severity of a number of comorbidities, age, lower socioeconomic status, and specific centers. CONCLUSIONS: This study has identified many significant intercenter differences within Scotland. We believe this to be the first study to identify nontumor factors independent of performance status that together limit the ability to deliver radical, possibly curative, therapy to our lung cancer population. It is only by identifying such factors that we can hope to improve on the relatively poor outlook for the majority of Scottish patients with lung cancer.

Understanding why older people participate in clinical trials: the experience of the Scottish PROSPER participants.

BACKGROUND: over the next 20 years it is anticipated that there will be a significant increase in those aged 75 and over, and a consequent increase in cardiovascular disease, cancer and chronic illness. As this shift takes effect, there will be an increased need for treatment strategies that are of known benefit to this age group and a consequent rise in demand for clinical trials that are conducted specifically with the older population. Because factors that motivate older individuals to participate in clinical trials may differ from those that influence younger adults, it is important to evaluate the strategies used to encourage recruitment and retention and to determine how appropriate these are. AIM: evaluation of the reasons why subjects agree to participate in a controlled clinical trial of vascular disease prevention and the strategies used to improve compliance and protocol adherence. SETTING: Scotland. SUBJECTS: 2,520 Prospective Study of Pravastatin in the Elderly at Risk participants, aged 70-82 with either pre-existing vascular disease or at least one major vascular risk factor (hypertension, cigarette smoking, or diabetes mellitus). DESIGN OF STUDY: two-stage iterative survey. Stage I was exploratory. RESULTS: curiosity, or an interest in finding out more about the study, 'a desire to support research', and anticipated personal benefits, such as health screening, were the most important motivators for generating initial interest in the trial. Ongoing health monitoring was the most important recruitment and retention motivator (P = 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: curiosity, self interest and altruism may act as motivators at different points in the study time-line. However, fostering positive relationships between staff and recruits, and keeping recruits informed about the progress of the study are likely to maximise the retention of older subjects to long-term trials.