Elliot was 83 when a routine checkup that included a digital rectal exam suggested prostate cancer. A biopsy then revealed that he had an aggressive form of the disease. His doctor recommended treatment despite Elliot’s age and several existing problems, including mild cases of high blood pressure, Type 2 diabetes, depression and angina, all of which were being treated with medication.
Elliot also has leg pain that limits his walking. But none of his health problems interferes with his weekly bridge game or nights out for the theater, concerts and dining. When cancer popped into the equation, Elliot, a man with a self-deprecating sense of humor always at the ready, said he was just not inclined to let it end his life.
So when the doctor suggested hormone and radiation therapy, five days a week for nine weeks, Elliot did not hesitate. Except for some radiation-induced fatigue that he noticed only after therapy was over, he sailed through the treatment. Three months after finishing his therapy, his PSA, a blood test for possible cancer, registered zero, suggesting that the malignancy was destroyed.
The outcome for Elliot is a direct assault on the oft-given advice that most cancers affecting people his age be left to take their course. The theory is that either the treatment will kill them or destroy their quality of life, or some other health problem will kill them before the cancer does.
But there is a great paucity of factual information to support either a wait-and-watch approach or an aggressive approach to treating cancer in the elderly.
Although about 60 percent of newly diagnosed cancers occur in people 65 and older, there is little research to help doctors and patients decide how, when and even whether to treat the many forms of cancer that afflict older people, especially those with other ailments that can complicate therapy.
LIMITED RESEARCH
For a variety of reasons, older cancer patients are rarely included in clinical trials that test new therapies, so relatively little is known about potential responses to treatment under various circumstances.
Research protocols commonly eliminate people with chronic health problems, in case the therapy makes those problems worse or the medications patients are taking interact poorly with the treatment being studied. Another deterrent is limited longevity in the elderly, making it difficult to determine the long-term effectiveness of a treatment.
Patients themselves can be a problem, if they fear “being experimented upon,” if they are not physically able to get to treatment facilities or if the research protocols are too difficult for them to understand and follow.
Despite the limited research, one fact is clear: There is no “one size fits all” treatment for cancer in the elderly. Whether the patient is 60, 80 or 100, a host of factors — medical, practical and emotional — must be taken into account when devising a therapeutic plan. To the distress of some families, decisions are too often based more on a patient’s chronological than physiological age.
“The doctor may be dealing with two 65-year-old patients with the same disease,” Jerome W. Yates, national vice president for research at the American Cancer Society, said in an interview. “Yet one is like a 55-year-old, healthy, strong and resilient, and the other is more like an 85-year-old, frail and chronically ill. Each should be treated differently.”
Treatment decisions should be influenced by patients’ physical and mental health, of course, but also by their financial status, living situations, family support systems and ability to get to and from the treatment facility, Yates said.
Still another consideration, Yates said, and not a small one, is what the patient wants. He described a former patient, a 78-year-old woman with diabetes who had lost a leg to osteogenic sarcoma. The cancer had spread to her lungs, and she faced possible treatment with chemotherapy that would cause nausea and hair loss and carried the risk of a fatal lung infection. Her four college-educated children agreed with the doctor’s suggestion to skip chemotherapy and administer comfort care, since treating her cancer was likely to kill her.
“But she said she wanted to be treated — she was adamant,” recalled Yates, who will be leaving the cancer society for the National Institute on Aging. “To my surprise, she had a dramatic response to the treatment. Her lung tumors all but disappeared, and she lived another two years.”
UNDERTREATING OR OVERTREATING
Barbara and Charles Given, family care cancer specialists at Michigan State University, told a national conference on cancer and aging in 2007 that older patients, “when they are selected carefully, appear to tolerate and respond well to cancer treatments.”
They added that older patients who have had surgery for lung cancer or have been treated for cancers of the colon, rectum, breast or prostate, or non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma, “all have tolerated and shown positive responses to their treatments.” And those with a life expectancy of more than five years have also benefited from additional therapies, like postoperative radiation or chemotherapy, they reported.
Still, out of fear that the side effects of cancer treatment will hasten an older patient’s death or destroy the quality of the remaining years of life, doctors often undertreat the elderly, indirectly hastening their death with less-than-optimal therapy.
In other cases, elderly cancer patients are overtreated despite the likelihood of life-threatening complications, because doctors fear being accused of giving up or are pressured by family members to provide therapy that is medically inappropriate.
One of the greatest challenges clinicians face with elderly cancer patients is incomplete information about their health.
“There is often a lack of documentation about pre-existing problems,” Yates said. “A patient may suffer from chronic alcoholism or a psychiatric condition that would interfere with cancer treatment, yet such problems are often not disclosed. Or, if an older person has five or six medical conditions, it’s not unusual for them to mention only the most prominent condition, the one that bothers them most at the moment.”
Patients should be prepared to give their full medical history, and caregivers and family members should help fill in the blanks if necessary. In addition, Yates suggested that treatment decisions for the elderly be family decisions, since older patients must often depend on their children to make therapy happen.
But he also warned that family members should not insist on aggressive treatment that the doctor considers futile. If the family has good reason to doubt the doctor’s judgment, an independent second opinion should be sought, he said.
There are nonthreatening ways to expand the conversation about treatment options, Yates said, starting with a couple of perfectly reasonable questions for the doctor: “Is this the best option? If this were your mother or father, what would be your recommendation?”
Sept.16 to Sept. 22 The “anti-communist train” with then-president Chiang Kai-shek’s (蔣介石) face plastered on the engine puffed along the “sugar railway” (糖業鐵路) in May 1955, drawing enthusiastic crowds at 103 stops covering nearly 1,200km. An estimated 1.58 million spectators were treated to propaganda films, plays and received free sugar products. By this time, the state-run Taiwan Sugar Corporation (台糖, Taisugar) had managed to connect the previously separate east-west lines established by Japanese-era sugar factories, allowing the anti-communist train to travel easily from Taichung to Pingtung’s Donggang Township (東港). Last Sunday’s feature (Taiwan in Time: The sugar express) covered the inauguration of the
The corruption cases surrounding former Taipei Mayor and Taiwan People’s Party (TPP) head Ko Wen-je (柯文哲) are just one item in the endless cycle of noise and fuss obscuring Taiwan’s deep and urgent structural and social problems. Even the case itself, as James Baron observed in an excellent piece at the Diplomat last week, is only one manifestation of the greater problem of deep-rooted corruption in land development. Last week the government announced a program to permit 25,000 foreign university students, primarily from the Philippines, Indonesia and Malaysia, to work in Taiwan after graduation for 2-4 years. That number is a
This year’s Michelin Gourmand Bib sported 16 new entries in the 126-strong Taiwan directory. The fight for the best braised pork rice and the crispiest scallion pancake painstakingly continued, but what stood out in the lineup this year? Pang Taqueria (胖塔可利亞); Taiwan’s first Michelin-recommended Mexican restaurant. Chef Charles Chen (陳治宇) is a self-confessed Americophile, earning his chef whites at a fine-dining Latin-American fusion restaurant. But what makes this Xinyi (信義) spot stand head and shoulders above Taipei’s existing Mexican offerings? The authenticity. The produce. The care. AUTHENTIC EATS In my time on the island, I have caved too many times to
In a stark demonstration of how award-winning breakthroughs can come from the most unlikely directions, researchers have won an Ig Nobel prize for discovering that mammals can breathe through their anuses. After a series of tests on mice, rats and pigs, Japanese scientists found the animals absorb oxygen delivered through the rectum, work that underpins a clinical trial to see whether the procedure can treat respiratory failure. The team is among 10 recognized in this year’s Ig Nobel awards (see below for more), the irreverent accolades given for achievements that “first make people laugh, and then make them think.” They are not