Younger patients with non–small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) may have better survival, despite higher rates of brain metastasis and driver mutations, according to results from a retrospective analysis.
“We carried out a comprehensive analysis of patient clinicopathologic features and clinical outcomes in both young (age ≤ 50 years) and older (age > 60 years) patients with NSCLC,” wrote Anna May Suidan of Tel Aviv University, and colleagues. The findings were published in the Journal of Global Oncology.
The researchers reviewed medical records of patients who were diagnosed with lung cancer at a large cancer treatment facility in Israel from 2010 to 2015. Patients were categorized into two groups according to age at cancer diagnosis, which was established based on tumor pathology.
Various clinical data were collected, including demographic information, history of malignancy, smoking history, histologic subtype, and survival data.
In all, 62 patients were included in the younger cohort (median age, 44.5 years) and 124 patients in the older cohort (median age, 68.0 years).
After analysis, the researchers found that younger patients had a higher incidence of brain metastasis (39% vs. 25%, respectively; P = .04), and increased rates of EGFR mutations (23% vs. 18%, respectively; P = .4) and ALK translocations (13% vs. 2%, respectively; P = .002) versus older patients.
“Our cohort, which was [composed] of white patients, demonstrated that younger patients harbored more targetable driver mutations compared with older patients (34% vs. 18%; P = .01),” the researchers wrote.
In addition, among those with a driver mutation, younger patients showed a trend toward better survival (median survival, 33 vs. 25 months, respectively; P = .4).
Two key limitations of the study were the small sample size and retrospective design.
“[These results] highlight the importance of genetic background assessments and considering lung cancer as a possible diagnosis in young symptomatic patients in clinical settings,” the researchers concluded.
No funding sources were reported. The authors reported financial affiliations with Astra Zeneca, Boehringer Ingelheim, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Eli Lilly, Novartis, Roche, Teva Pharmaceuticals, and several others.
SOURCE: Suidan AM et al. J Glob Oncol. 2019 May 8. doi: 10.1200/JGO.18.00216.