Factors that influence whether patients receive potentially curative treatment for early stage lung cancer were explored in an analysis of 583 patients diagnosed with stage I and II lung cancer in 2011–2018 in the New Zealand Midland Cancer Network region. 71.9% of patients were treated with curative intent, including 46.7% who underwent curative surgery, which resulted in a 2-year survival rate of 87.8% and a 5-year survival rate of 69.6%. Survival rates were similar for patients treated with stereotactic ablative body radiotherapy. There was no difference in treatment or survival rates between Māori and non- Māori. Factors associated with patients not receiving potentially curative treatment included older age, poor performance status, poor lung function and cancer type other than non-small cell lung cancer.
Two great things in this paper. First it reports good news in terms of equal treatment and equitable outcomes (survival). Second it provides an update on new, innovative treatments. These findings must be considered, of course, in the context of higher rates for lung cancer among Māori compared with New Zealand Europeans. I understand that there is an interesting piece of work being undertaken in the area of lung cancer screening which has the potential to change this field yet again.
Independent commentary by Dr. Matire Hardwood
Dr Matire Harwood (Ngapuhi) has worked in Hauora Māori, primary health and rehabilitation settings as clinician and researcher since graduating from Auckland Medical School in 1994. She also holds positions on a number of boards, committees and advisory groups including the Health Research Council. Matire lives in Auckland with her whānau including partner Haunui and two young children Te Rangiura and Waimarie.
Research Review publications are intended for New Zealand health professionals.
Disclaimer: This publication is not intended as a replacement for regular medical education but to assist in the process. The reviews are a summarised interpretation of the published study and reflect the opinion of the writer rather than those of the research group or scientific journal. It is suggested readers review the full trial data before forming a final conclusion on its merits.
