Division of Epidemiology and Public Health, University of Nottingham, Nottingham NG5 1PB, UK.
Lung Cancer. 2013 Feb;79(2):125-31. doi: 10.1016/j.lungcan.2012.11.005. Epub 2012 Dec 4.
The National Lung Cancer Audit (NLCA) recommends that trusts obtain pathology (histology or cytology) for 75% of their lung cancer patients, however this figure was arbitrarily chosen and the optimal pathological confirmation rate is unknown, and many countries report somewhat higher rates. The aims of this study were to provide a simple means of benchmarking appropriate pathological confirmation rates by stratifying patients into groups, and whether obtaining pathology based on those groups is associated with a survival benefit.
We calculated the proportion of patients with non-small cell or small cell lung cancer in the NLCA database, first seen between 1st January 2004 and 31st December 2010, who had pathological confirmation of their diagnosis. Using logistic we assessed the independent influence of patient factors on the likelihood of having histology or cytology, and the overall effect on survival. We also used bivariate analysis to identify the features which were most strongly associated with having pathology and performed Cox regression to identify any survival advantage.
We analysed data on 136,993 individuals. Age and performance status (PS) were the strongest predictors of pathological confirmation: age ≥ 85 odds ratio (OR) 0.20 (95% confidence interval (CI) 0.19-0.22) compared with age<55; PS 4 OR 0.11 (95%CI 0.10-0.12) compared with PS 0. Pathological confirmation of diagnosis was associated with a small early survival advantage for groups 1 & 2 which represented younger patients with good PS, even after adjusting for other patient features: hazard ratio (HR) 0.93 & 0.89 respectively.
Stratifying patients by age and performance status is useful and appropriate when benchmarking standards for pathological confirmation of the diagnosis of lung cancer. We have shown better survival at six months and one year for younger patients with better PS, even after adjusting for confounders. Much of the survival advantage was accounted for by adjusting for the use of chemotherapy.
国家肺癌审计(NLCA)建议各信托机构对 75%的肺癌患者进行病理检查(组织学或细胞学),然而这一数字是任意选择的,最佳病理确诊率尚不清楚,而且许多国家的报告显示确诊率略高。本研究旨在通过分层患者,提供一种简单的方法来衡量适当的病理确诊率,以及根据这些分组获得病理检查是否与生存获益相关。
我们计算了 NLCA 数据库中,2004 年 1 月 1 日至 2010 年 12 月 31 日期间首次就诊的非小细胞肺癌或小细胞肺癌患者中,经病理确诊的患者比例。使用逻辑回归评估患者因素对进行组织学或细胞学检查的可能性的独立影响,以及对总体生存的影响。我们还使用双变量分析确定与进行病理检查最密切相关的特征,并进行 Cox 回归分析以确定任何生存优势。
我们分析了 136993 名患者的数据。年龄和体能状态(PS)是病理确诊的最强预测因素:年龄≥85 岁的患者确诊率为 0.20(95%置信区间 0.19-0.22),而年龄<55 岁的患者确诊率为 1;PS 4 的患者确诊率为 0.11(95%置信区间 0.10-0.12),而 PS 0 的患者确诊率为 1。诊断的病理确诊与年龄较小且 PS 较好的 1 组和 2 组患者的早期生存优势较小相关,即使在调整了其他患者特征后也是如此:风险比(HR)分别为 0.93 和 0.89。
在以年龄和 PS 分层患者时,当以病理确诊肺癌诊断的标准为基准时,这种方法是有用且合适的。我们已经证明,对于 PS 较好的年轻患者,即使在调整混杂因素后,在六个月和一年时的生存情况更好。大部分生存优势归因于调整化疗的使用。