Search

Introduction: Retrospective studies have shown an increased risk of second primary lung cancer in patients with a history of head and neck cancer (HNC). No population-based study has examined the overall survival (OS) outcomes of patients with second primary non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) after HNC comparison with patients with first primary NSCLC., Patients and Methods: Individuals with histologically confirmed NSCLC diagnosed after nonmetastatic squamous-cell carcinoma of the head and neck (HNC-NSCLC; n = 3597) were identified in Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results 18 registries (1988-2013). OS and baseline characteristics were compared in patients with first primary NSCLC (NSCLC-1; n = 365,551) in the same registries., Results: Squamous NSCLC was more common in HNC-NSCLC (n = 745 [64.1%] localized, n = 833 [71.9%] regional, and n = 811 [63.5%] distant) than in the NSCLC-1 (n = 30,901 [38.3%] localized, n = 50,557 [48.2%] regional, and n = 53,720 [29.8%] distant; P < .001). The leading cause of death in HNC-NSCLC was NSCLC (n = 2183; 60.6%), and median OS after localized, regional, and distant NSCLC diagnosis was 2.50 years, 1.17 years, and 5 months, respectively. For NSCLC-1, median OS was 4.58 years, 1.58 years, and 6 months, respectively. These differences were significant (P < .001). In multivariable analysis, a history of HNC remained associated with worse OS for localized (hazard ratio [HR], 1.40; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.29-1.51; P < .001), regional (HR, 1.26; 95% CI, 1.19-1.35; P < .001) and distant (HR, 1.11; 95% CI, 1.04-1.18; P < .01) stage NSCLC., Conclusion: A history of HNC adversely affects OS in patients who subsequently develop NSCLC. This OS decrement might have implications for NSCLC surveillance and NSCLC therapy selection in this population., (Copyright © 2019 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Introduction: Metastatic prostate cancer (MPC) prognosis is variable. Few population-based studies have examined the impact of particular visceral metastatic sites on MPC survival outcomes. We investigated this using the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) database., Materials and Methods: We analyzed the overall survival (OS) and prostate cancer mortality (PCM) risk of 12,180 patients, from SEER 18 registries, diagnosed with MPC from 2010 to 2014. We identified those with metastatic disease in bone, brain, liver, and lung. Kaplan-Meier analyses, competing risks regression, and Cox proportional hazards models were used to assess the impact of visceral metastatic disease sites on OS and PCM., Results: Most patients were coded as having metastatic disease in the bone without disease in the brain, liver, or lung (bone group, n = 10,620; 87% of total). On Cox multivariable regression analysis, patients with lung metastases, with or without bone metastases, did not differ significantly from patients in the bone group with respect to OS (hazard ratio, 0.82; 95% confidence interval, 0.63-1.06; P = .13 and hazard ratio, 1.12; 95% confidence interval, 0.98-1.28; P = .10, respectively). These patients also did not differ from the bone group with respect to PCM incidence on competing risks regression analysis., Conclusions: This study suggests that patients with MPC confined to bone and/or lung may have improved survival relative to those with MPC affecting other visceral sites. Although it was anticipated that patients with bone metastases would represent a favorable subgroup, the favorable outcomes in patents with lung metastases (with or without bone metastases) was unexpected. These findings may inform future therapeutic investigations to improve the prognosis of patients with MPC., (Copyright © 2019 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)