Relationship between marital status and survival in patients with lung adenocarcinoma: A SEER-based study.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT: Abstract
Numerous studies have focused on whether the marital status has an impact on the prognosis in patients with non-small cell lung cancer, but none have focused on lung adenocarcinoma.We selected 61,928 eligible cases with lung adenocarcinoma from the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results database from 2004 to 2016 and analyzed the impact of marital status on cancer-specific survival (CSS) using Kaplan-Meier and Cox regression analyses.We confirmed that sex, age, race, cancer TNM stage and grade, therapeutic schedule, household income, and marital status were independent prognostic factors for lung adenocarcinoma CSS. Multivariate Cox regression showed that widowed patients had worse CSS (hazard ratio 1.26, 95% confidence interval 1.20-1.31, P < .001) compared with married patients. Subgroup analysis showed consistent results regardless of sex, age, cancer grade, and TNM stage. However, the trend was not significant for patients with grade IV cancer.These results suggest that marital status is first identified as an independent prognostic factor for CSS in patients with lung adenocarcinoma, with a clear association between widowhood and a high risk of cancer-specific mortality. Psychological and social support are thus important for patients with lung adenocarcinoma, especially unmarried patients.
SUBMITTER: Wu Y
PROVIDER: S-EPMC8735761 | biostudies-literature |
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Similar Datasets
Project description:Marital status was found to be an independent prognostic factor for survival in various cancer types. In this study, we used the Surveillance, Epidemiology and End Results database to analyze the survival difference among different marital status in the United States. Gastric adenocarcinoma patients from 2004-2012 were enrolled for study. The 5-year cause specific survival (CSS) was our primary endpoint. Totally 29,074 eligible patients were identified. We found that more male patients were married than female. Asian patients had the highest percentages of married than the other races. More married patients were covered by the insurance. Married patients had better 5-year CSS than unmarried, 30.6% vs 25.7%, P < 0.001. The median overall CSS was 17.87 and 13.61 months for the married and unmarried patients, hazard ratio: 1.09 (95% confidence interval: 1.01-1.17), P = 0.027. The survival difference was significant in the insured but not in the uninsured patients. Widowed patients had the worst prognosis compared with other groups even though they had more stage I disease and more well / moderate differentiated tumors. These results indicated that unmarried gastric adenocarcinoma patients were at greater risk of cancer specific mortality. We recommend every patient should have access to best available gastric cancer therapy.
| S-EPMC4753440 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundMarital status influences the presentation and outcome of various cancers. We explored the relationship between marital status and survival of uveal melanoma (UM) and factors influencing this relationship.MethodsWe conducted a retrospective cohort study on patients diagnosed with UM and registered in the Surveillance Epidemiology and End Results program between 1973 and 2017. Cox regression model was conducted to calculate the hazard ratio of overall and cancer-specific survival rate and delineate the effect of each confounder.ResultsThe study involved 10,557 patients with a male-to-female ratio of 1:1.1. Most of the diagnosed patients were aged between 40 and 79 years (81%). Married patients (62%) represented the majority, followed by singles (12%), widowed (11%), and then divorced patients (7%). Single patients were the youngest group (mean age of 59.3 years) while widowed patients were the oldest (mean age of 75.8 years). In the Cox regression model for overall survival, married and single patients exhibited the best overall survival (no significant difference in between them), both surpassing divorced and widowed patients. Married patients were at a significantly lower risk to die from UM than divorced patients. Female patients and younger age groups showed the best overall and cancer-specific survival.ConclusionMaintained marriages improved the survival of UM patients. Widowed and divorced patients should be included in specially designed support programs during their cancer management.
| S-EPMC9617958 | biostudies-literature
Project description:To examine the impact of marital status on stage at diagnosis, use of definitive therapy, and cancer-specific mortality among each of the 10 leading causes of cancer-related death in the United States.We used the Surveillance, Epidemiology and End Results program to identify 1,260,898 patients diagnosed in 2004 through 2008 with lung, colorectal, breast, pancreatic, prostate, liver/intrahepatic bile duct, non-Hodgkin lymphoma, head/neck, ovarian, or esophageal cancer. We used multivariable logistic and Cox regression to analyze the 734,889 patients who had clinical and follow-up information available.Married patients were less likely to present with metastatic disease (adjusted odds ratio [OR], 0.83; 95% CI, 0.82 to 0.84; P < .001), more likely to receive definitive therapy (adjusted OR, 1.53; 95% CI, 1.51 to 1.56; P < .001), and less likely to die as a result of their cancer after adjusting for demographics, stage, and treatment (adjusted hazard ratio, 0.80; 95% CI, 0.79 to 0.81; P < .001) than unmarried patients. These associations remained significant when each individual cancer was analyzed (P < .05 for all end points for each malignancy). The benefit associated with marriage was greater in males than females for all outcome measures analyzed (P < .001 in all cases). For prostate, breast, colorectal, esophageal, and head/neck cancers, the survival benefit associated with marriage was larger than the published survival benefit of chemotherapy.Even after adjusting for known confounders, unmarried patients are at significantly higher risk of presentation with metastatic cancer, undertreatment, and death resulting from their cancer. This study highlights the potentially significant impact that social support can have on cancer detection, treatment, and survival.
| S-EPMC4878087 | biostudies-other
Project description:Background: Whether location mattered remained controversial in early-stage non-small cell lung cancer. Methods: We conducted a retrospective study with the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) database. Overall survival (OS) and lung cancer-specific survival (LCSS) with landmark analysis and restricted mean survival time (RMST) were compared between patients with a tumor in upper lobe and non-upper lobe. The multivariable Cox analysis was applied to evaluate multiple prognostic factors. Results: Tumor in non-upper lobe had worse OS (hazard ratio [HR]: 1.354, p < 0.001) and LCSS (HR: 1.476, p = 0.005) than the upper lobe in stage IB adenocarcinoma in 32-month landmark and IA3 (OS, HR: 1.300, p < 0.001; LCSS, HR: 1.413, p = 0.004) adenocarcinoma in 48-month landmark, but not in stage IA1 and IA2 adenocarcinoma. The results remained positive in subgroups of < 4, ≥ 4 and ≥ 11 LN examined in stage IB tumor and ≥ 4 LN examined in stage IA3 tumor. For SCC, non-upper lobar tumor had similar OS and LCSS with upper lobar tumor in all stages. The multivariate Cox analysis confirmed that the non-upper lobe was an independent risk factor in stage IA3-IB adenocarcinoma, but not in SCC. Adjuvant chemotherapy (ACT) could improve OS in stage IB adenocarcinoma (HR: 0.586, p < 0.001) and SCC (HR: 0.708, p = 0.030) located in non-upper lobe. Conclusions: Non-upper lobar adenocarcinoma in stage IA3-IB was associated with worse prognosis. ACT may improve prognosis in stage IB tumor located in non-upper lobe.
| S-EPMC8317522 | biostudies-literature
Project description:The appeal to enroll patients with primary breast and lung cancer in clinical trials is increasing, but survival of these two primary cancers remains to be elucidated. This study analyzed the prognosis of primary breast duct carcinoma with subsequent lung adenocarcinoma (BCLA) and primary breast duct carcinoma with prior lung adenocarcinoma (LABC). Cohorts of 3,515 patients with BCLA and 654 patients with LABC were identified from the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results database. Patients were classified into simultaneous two primary cancer (sTPC), metachronous two primary cancer (mTPC1), or mTPC2 groups when the interval times between breast and lung cancer were within 6 months, between 7 and 60 months, or over 60 months, respectively. The propensity score matching program (PSM) was applied to determine the survival of BCLA/LABC relative to single breast/lung cancer. Cox proportional hazard regression model and competing risk modes were performed to identify confounders associated with all-cause and cancer-specific death, respectively. Survival of patients with LABC/BCLA relative to single breast/lung cancer was accessed via median survival time. The survival of patients with BCLA/LABC was generally poor compared with the survival of those with single breast cancer. The PSM-estimated HR in the sTPC group with BCLA and in the mTPC1 and mTPC2 groups with LABC were 0.75 (95% CI 0.62-0.90), 0.52 (95% CI 0.27-0.98), and 0.36 (95% CI 0.20-0.65), respectively, whereas the SHRs were 0.80 (95% CI 0.66-0.97), 0.68 (95% CI 0.34-1.34), and 0.46 (95% CI 0.27-0.80), respectively, compared with those in the single lung cancer group. By contrast, the survival rates of the remaining patients did not differ. The median survival times since secondary malignancy were 42, 23, and 20 months in the sTPC, mTPC1, and mTPC2 groups with BCLA, respectively, and 18, 60, and 180 months in those with LABC, respectively. For patients with BCLA, the adjusted Cox regression suggested incidences of all-cause deaths in mTPC1group were statically higher than those in sTPC group, whereas the incidences of all-cause and cancer-specific death in the mTPC1 and mTPC2 groups were statistically lower than those in the sTPC group. The prognosis of patients with breast cancer and subsequent lung cancer of over 18 months was not significantly different than that of single lung cancer, which supported the profound appeal to increase the involvement of these two primary cancers in potential beneficial clinical trials. For patients with lung cancer and prior breast cancer of within 6 months and subsequent breast cancer of over 18 months, prognosis was improved relative to single lung cancer. Therefore, additional attention is needed to eliminate the potential bias may when these patients are recruited in the clinical trials.
| S-EPMC8292419 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundMarital status has been reported as an independent prognostic factor in various types of malignancies. However, the association between marital status and outcomes of patients with adenocarcinoma of the esophagogastric junction (AEG) has not been fully explored. To this end, we aimed to investigate the effect of marital status on survival of AGE patients.MethodsThe Surveillance Epidemiology and End Results (SEER) database (2010-2015) was used to extract eligible patients with Siewert type II AEG. Meanwhile, propensity score matching was performed to match 1576 unmarried patients with 1576 married patients. Kaplan-Meier method with log-rank test was used to plot survival curves, univariate and multivariate Cox regression analyses were adopted to investigate the association of marital status with overall survival (OS) and cancer-specific survival (CSS) in AEG patients before and after matching.ResultsMultivariate analysis in the unmatched cohort revealed that marital status was an independent prognostic factor in patients with Siewert type II AEG. Unmarried patients had poorer OS (hazard ratio [HR]: 1.22, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.12-1.29, P < .001) and poorer CSS (HR: 1.19, 95% CI: 1.10-1.29, P < .001) than married patients before matching. Additionally, widowed patients had the poorest OS (HR: 1.26, 95% CI: 1.11-1.44, P < .001) and CSS (HR: 1.29, 95% CI: 1.12-1.48, P < .001) compared with married patients. Furthermore, unmarried status remained as an independent prognostic for both OS (HR: 1.20, 95% CI: 1.10-1.31, P < .001) and CSS (HR: 1.18, 95% CI: 1.08-1.30, P < .001) in 1:1 propensity score-matched analysis. Subgroup analysis further revealed that OS and CSS rates were significantly higher in married patients than unmarried ones in most subgroups stratified by different variables.ConclusionsThis population-based study identified that marital status was an independent prognostic indicator for AEG patients. Married AEG patients had better prognosis than their unmarried counterparts.
| S-EPMC8689606 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Purpose: We aimed to reveal the effects of marital status on survival outcomes in patients with penile cancer. Methods: Patients with penile cancer who were diagnosed between 2004 and 2015 were identified by using the Surveillance, Epidemiology and End Results (SEER) database. Kaplan-Meier and Cox regressions were used to analyse the effects of marital status on overall survival (OS) and cancer-specific survival (CSS). Results: Among 3,195 eligible patients with penile cancer, 1,951 (61.1%) patients were married, 365 (11.4%) were divorced or separated, 327 (10.2%) were widowed and 552 (17.3%) were single. The widowed patients had the worst OS median survival time (22 months) and CSS median survival time (23.5 months). Marital status was an independent prognostic factor for OS and CSS of penile cancer patients. The multivariate Cox regression showed that widowed patients exhibited the poorest OS (hazard ratio [HR]: 1.73; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.48-2.03, p < 0.001) and the poorest CSS (HR: 1.64; 95% CI: 1.144-1.279, p < 0.001) compared with married patients. Similar results were observed in our centre database and the subgroup analyses based on the SEER stage and grade. Conclusions: In our study, we found that marital status was an independent prognostic factor for survival in patients with penile cancer. Additionally, widowed patients had the lowest OS and CSS compared with married patients.
| S-EPMC6584924 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Background:An ocular or periocular malignancy can profoundly impact patients' lives as they cope with the challenges of a potentially life-threatening diagnosis and the exhaustive treatment process it entails. An amalgam of biopsychosocial factors can influence prognosis. This study aims to determine whether marital status impacts the long-term survival of patients with these malignancies. Methods:A retrospective analysis of the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) database was performed. Patients with ocular and periocular malignancies diagnosed between 1973 and 2015 were included. The association between survival and marital status was assessed using univariate and multivariate Cox regression. Adjusted covariates included demographic, tumor, and treatment data. Results:A total of 3159 patients with a mean±SD follow-up period of 6.47±4.62 (range 0-17.9) years were studied. At the time of diagnosis, 63.4% (2004/3159) of the cohort were married, 12.9% (409/3159) were single, 16.3% (514/3159) were widowed, and 7.3% (232/3159) were divorced. The mean±SD age of the cohort was 64.4±15.17 (range 26-100) years, with histology distributed as 14.6% (462/3159) melanoma, 84.5% (2669/3159) lymphoma, and 0.9% (28/3159) plasmacytoma. Adjusted all-cause mortality risk was higher in single (HR, 1.885, 95% CI 1.535 to 2.314; P<0.001), widowed (HR, 1.382, 95% CI 1.169 to 1.635; P<0.001), and divorced (HR, 1.637, 95% CI 1.271 to 2.109; P<0.001) individuals compared to married individuals. Similarly, adjusted cause-specific mortality risk was higher in single (HR, 1.835, 95% CI 1.332 to 2.528; P<0.001), widowed (HR, 1.376, 95% CI 1.025 to 1.847; P=0.033), and divorced (HR, 1.873, 95% CI 1.272 to 2.758; P=0.001) individuals compared to married individuals. Conclusion:Unmarried (single, widowed, and divorced) individuals with ocular or periocular malignancies have unmet social support needs resulting in poorer long-term outcomes. Understanding the prognostic role of such psychosocial factors is necessary to improve the identification of and care for patients with inadequate support.
| S-EPMC7186878 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundTo investigate the impact of marital status on overall survival (OS) and create a prognostic nomogram predicting OS in distant-metastatic bladder cancer (DMBC) patients.MethodsThe Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) database was explored to recruit DMBC patients from 2010 to 2015. Kaplan-Meier survival analysis was used to compare survival differences among different marital status. Univariate and multivariate analyses were used to screen for prognostic factors and then constructed the nomogram based on Cox proportional hazard regression models. Calibration plot diagrams and concordance index (C-index) were used to verify the prognostic nomogram.ResultsKaplan-Meier curves suggested the significant differences of OS among different marital status existed in total (P < 0.001), female (P = 0.011) and male (P = 0.001) DMBC patients, respectively. Multivariate analysis indicated marital status was an independent prognostic factor for OS of DMBC patients. Nomogram showed the contribution of marital status to predicting OS was small. Other independent prognostic factors included age, grade, histology type, surgery of primary site, chemotherapy, and metastasis pattern. By combining seven factors, we constructed a prognostic nomogram for DMBC patients. The C-index of this nomogram for OS prediction was 0.722 (95% CI 0.712-0.732). The calibration curves showed perfect consistency between observed and predictive survival.ConclusionsMarital status was an independent prognostic factor for OS of DMBC patients, but its contribution to predicting OS was small. The prognostic nomogram will provide an individualized evaluation of OS and guidance for suitable treatments in DMBC patients.
| S-EPMC7654226 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundLung adenocarcinoma (ADC) is the main cause of death related to lung cancer. The aim of this study was to identify poor prognostic factors for overall survival (OS) in patients with stage IV lung ADC in real-world clinical practice.MethodsPatients were selected from the Surveillance Epidemiology and End Results (SEER) database. Chi-square bivariate analysis was used for the association of binary qualitative variables. A multivariate Cox regression analysis was performed to determine the impact of these prognostic factors on OS.ResultsA total of 46 030 patients were included (51.3% men, mean age 67.03 ± 11.6), of whom 41.3% presented with metastases in bone, 28.9% in brain, 17.1% in liver and 31.8% in lung. Patients with liver metastases presented with two or more metastatic sites more frequently than patients without liver metastases (P < 0.001). Male sex (HR 0.78, 95% CI: 0.76-0.80), age ≥ 65 years (HR 1.37, 95% CI: 1.33-1.40), lack of family support (HR 0.80, 95% CI: 0.78-0.81) and presence of liver (HR 1.45, 95% CI: 1.40-1.50), bone (HR 1.21, 95% CI: 1.18-1.24) or brain metastases (HR 1.18, 95% CI: 1.15-1.21) were identified as poor prognostic factors for OS. Patients with liver metastasis showed the highest hazard ratio value (P < 0.001).ConclusionsThe presence of liver metastases was the worst prognostic factor for patients with metastatic lung ADC. This factor should be considered as a stratification factor for future studies evaluating new cancer treatments including immunotherapy.Key pointsSIGNIFICANT FINDINGS OF THE STUDY: Regression analysis identified poor prognostic factors for overall survival. Factors were male sex, age ≥ 65 years, lack of family support and presence of liver, bone and brain metastases. Patients with liver metastasis showed the highest HR (HR = 1.45 95% CI: 1.40-1.50). This study included the highest number of adenocarcinoma patients analyzed so far (N = 46 030). What this study adds The presence of liver metastases should be considered as a stratification factor for future studies evaluating new cancer treatments including immunotherapy.
| S-EPMC7606019 | biostudies-literature