4.7 Article

Survival and Treatment of Lung Cancer in Taiwan between 2010 and 2016

Journal

JOURNAL OF CLINICAL MEDICINE
Volume 10, Issue 20, Pages -

Publisher

MDPI
DOI: 10.3390/jcm10204675

Keywords

lung cancer; stage; treatment; surgery

Ask authors/readers for more resources

This study analyzed the prognostic factors of overall survival for 71,334 lung cancer patients in Taiwan from 2010 to 2016. It was found that age, gender, tumor type, and clinical staging were independent prognostic factors for lung cancer patients' survival outcomes.
Background: Lung cancer is the leading cause of cancer-related death, and its incidence is still growing in Taiwan. This study investigated the prognostic factors of overall survival between 2010 and 2016 in Taiwan. Methods: Data from 2010 to 2016 was collected from the Taiwan Cancer Registry (TCR). The characteristics and overall survival of 71,334 lung cancer patients were analyzed according to the tumor, node, metastasis (TNM) 7th staging system. Univariate and multivariate analysis were performed to identify the prognostic factors. Results: The five-year overall survival (n = 71,334) was 25.0%, and the median survival was 25.3 months. The five-year overall survival of patients receiving any kind of treatment (n = 65,436; 91.7%) and surgical resection (n = 20,131; 28.2%) was 27.09% and 69.93%, respectively. The clinical staging distribution was as follows: stage IA (9208, 12.9%), stage IB (4087, 5.7%), stage IIA (1702, 2.4%), stage IIB (1454, 2.0%), stage IIIA (5309, 7.4%), stage IIIB (6316, 8.9%), stage IV (41458, 58.1%). Age, sex, Charlson comorbidity index, cell type, clinical T, clinical N, clinical M, grading and treatment strategy are independent prognostic factors in the multivariate analysis. Conclusion: The outcome for lung cancer patients was still poor. The identification of prognostic factors could facilitate in choosing treatment strategies and designing further randomized clinical trials.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available