Multiple primary cancers involving lung cancer at a single tertiary hospital: Clinical features and prognosis

Kim, Seo Woo; Kong, Kyoung Ae; Kim, Do Youn; Ryu, Yon Ju; Lee, Jin Hwa; Chang, Jung Hyun

doi:10.1111/1759-7714.12158

Cited by 16 publications

(14 citation statements)

References 24 publications

(29 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The later the stage of lung cancer, the worse the prognosis. This was also in line with the findings of other studies (11,12). Massard et al (11) reported that the survival of LCSPM patients was associated with the stage of lung cancer.…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 91%

“…It should be noted that lung cancer here referred only to NSCLC, and the prognosis of dual primary cancer patients with SCLC as a second primary malignancy had no relation to the FPC. Kim et al (12) observed that cancer patients with another primary malignancy in the head and neck tended to have a worse prognosis than these patients with another primary malignancy elsewhere. Unfortunately, due to so few cases (less than 1.3%) with FPC in the head and neck, our study did not separately compare the prognosis of these patients with those of other patients, which may result in different results.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Dual Primary Cancer Patients With Lung Cancer as a Second Primary Malignancy: A Population-Based Study

Song

Wang

et al. 2020

Front. Oncol.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: Research on patients with lung cancer as a second primary malignancy (LCSPM) remains limited. This study aims to determine the clinical characteristics, prognosis, and temporal relationship of other cancers to lung cancer in these patients. Methods: This study retrospectively analyzed 3465 patients with dual primary cancers from the 5253 patients with LCSPM retrieved from the Surveillance, Epidemiology and End Results (SEER) database from 2010 to 2015. Results: 2285 eligible patients were further analyzed in this study cohort with 59.3% of 1year OS, 34.7% of 3-year OS, and 25.2% of 5-year OS. The most common first primary cancer (FPC) in dual primary cancer patients with LCSPM was prostate cancer, followed by female breast cancer and urinary bladder cancer. In the entire study population, the median interval between the two primary malignancies was 21 months (range: 3.5-52 months). Age, sex, FPC location, surgery, stage, and histology of lung cancer were regarded as independent prognostic factors for these patients. The prognosis of patients with urinary bladder cancer as FPC was the worst in the univariate (p = 0.024) and multivariate (p < 0.001) Cox analyses. Lung cancer-directed surgery could significantly improve long-term survival (HR = 0.22, p < 0.001). Additionally, the C-index of the established nomogram with acceptable calibration curves was 0.760 (95% CI: 0.744-0.776) in the training cohort and was 0.759 (95% CI: 0.737-0.781) in the validation cohort, showing an ideal model discrimination ability. The corresponding decision curve analysis (DCA) indicated the nomogram had relatively ideal clinical utility. Conclusions: Cancer patients still have the risk of developing a new primary lung cancer. Close, lifelong follow-up is recommended for all these patients. Early detection for surgical treatment will significantly improve the prognosis of dual primary cancer patients with

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 91%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Dual Primary Cancer Patients With Lung Cancer as a Second Primary Malignancy: A Population-Based Study

Song

Wang

et al. 2020

Front. Oncol.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Alterations in pulmonary and cardiovascular functions, impaired wound healing, diminished immune response, increased risk of infections and bleeding episodes, delaying in administration of neoadjuvant therapy, increased recurrence, second primaries, and high mortality are all associated with smoking and alcohol consumption. [22][23][24][25] These changes can be reversed to some extent by discontinuation in pre-operative period. Counseling with administration of continuous nicotine replacement therapy and Vareniciline either alone or in combination may be helpful in cessation.…”

Section: Role Of Smoking and Alcohol Cessation In Surgical Prehabilitmentioning

confidence: 99%

Role of Prehabilitation in Patients Undergoing Cancer Surgeries

Ahuja¹,

Garg²

2017

Anesthesiol Open J

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Cancer is the second leading cause of death worldwide and nearly 1 in 6 deaths is due to cancer. It accounts for 8.8 million deaths in 2015. The occurrence of cancer is increasing and new cases are expected to rise by about 70% over the next 2 decades.1 With the advances in diagnostic and therapeutic procedures, more number of cancer patients will undergo curative surgical procedures. However, the mortality and morbidity rates after major oncological surgical resection are still high and range between 4%-10% and 20%-60%, respectively.2,3 These high mortality and morbidity rates may be attributed to the patients' physical status, combined stressful impact of malignancy, neoadjuvant therapies (NAT), or the surgical procedure on patient during peri-operative period.The post-operative period is not only associated with 20%-40% reduction in physiological and functional capacity, but also increased risk of post-operative complications which may have long-term effect on morbidity and mortality. 4 In order to overcome current situation, the concept of 'prehabilitation' is increasingly being implemented. "Prehabilitation" in the pre-operative period provides an option to increase the physiologic reserve and functional capacity of the patient in order to hasten recovery and improve outcomes recovery and improve outcomes (Figure 1). Cancer prehabilitation is "a process on the cancer continuum of care, that occurs between the time of cancer diagnosis and the beginning of acute treatment and includes; physical and psychological assessments that establish a baseline functional level, identify impairments, and provide interventions that promote physical and psychological health to reduce the incidence and/or severity of future impairments". 5 The optimal outcome for a cancer surgery requires panned protocol in the peri-operative period, starting from the pre-operative period and continued through the post-operative period, (Figure 2).

show abstract

“…MPMs are further divided into synchronous and metachronous malignancies. The synchronous group is defined as the diagnosis of a second malignancy within six months of initial primary, and the metachronous group is defined as diagnosis after six months of initial primary [2]. It is important for the clinician to distinguish between MPMs and metastatic spread, as this has impacts on both prognosis and subsequent treatment.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Kim et al showed that advanced lung cancer was an independent poor prognostic factor in both synchronous and metachronous groups. In the metachronous group, head and neck cancer as an MPM was a poor prognostic factor [2]. Other studies have demonstrated smoking as a risk factor for MPMs.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Analysis of Overall Survival in Patients With Multiple Primary Malignancies: A Single-center Experience

Skelton¹,

Ali²,

Skelton³

et al. 2019

Cureus

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Introduction Multiple primary malignancies (MPMs) are seen in ~5% of all tumors. The aim of this study was to determine the quantitative impact on overall survival (OS) and treatment choices in patients with MPMs. Methods A retrospective analysis to determine patients with MPMs was conducted over a six-year period. Patients were defined as simultaneous MPMs if the second malignancy was discovered within 60 days of the first, and as sequential MPMs if discovered after 60 days of the first. Results Fifty-six patients with MPMs as defined above were identified, 38 (68%) simultaneous and 18 (32%) sequential. Development of second malignancy did not affect treatment in 47 (84%) of patients. Median OS after diagnosis of first malignancy was 13.0 months (95% confidence interval (CI) 10.3-15.8 months), compared to 10.6 months (95% CI 7.1-13.9 months) after the diagnosis of second malignancy. Median OS for the simultaneous MPM group was 13.5 months (95% CI 7.1-19.9 months), compared to 3.2 months (95% CI 0.0-9.8 months) for the sequential MPM group. Conclusions The development of a second malignancy impacts OS and treatment decisions. Patients who developed sequential MPM performed poorer than those who developed simultaneous MPM. This was likely in part due to effects of existing treatment on performance status as well as treatment preferences when second MPM is diagnosed (as many patients opted for supportive care after second MPM). Further analysis with larger patient cohorts is necessary to ascertain the aforementioned effects of OS and treatment options with respect to tumor pathology, stage, and performance status.

show abstract

Multiple primary cancers involving lung cancer at a single tertiary hospital: Clinical features and prognosis

Cited by 16 publications

References 24 publications

Dual Primary Cancer Patients With Lung Cancer as a Second Primary Malignancy: A Population-Based Study

Dual Primary Cancer Patients With Lung Cancer as a Second Primary Malignancy: A Population-Based Study

Role of Prehabilitation in Patients Undergoing Cancer Surgeries

Analysis of Overall Survival in Patients With Multiple Primary Malignancies: A Single-center Experience

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About