DS05 Overtreatment of skin cancer: how can we ensure those treated for basal cell carcinoma receive more benefit than harm?

Zoe C Venables,Birgitta van Bodegraven,James B Powell
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/bjd/ljae090.200
IF: 11.113
2024-06-28
British Journal of Dermatology
Abstract:Abstract For over a decade, international reports have highlighted how thousands of patients treated for basal cell carcinoma (BCC) die within a few years of a diagnosis, which questions how much benefit surgical treatment had. The current British Association of Dermatologists guidelines for basal cell carcinoma (BCC) have limited discussions on conservative, active surveillance, or no-treatment options. BCCs are often slow growing and minimally symptomatic, and therefore treatments such as curettage, cryotherapy, radiotherapy or topical therapy may be more appropriate in patients with limited life expectancy. Although associated with higher risk of recurrences, these treatments can be performed closer to home and may have lower associated morbidity than a complex excision. This abstract reports the incidence and survival following a first BCC diagnosis in England from the National Disease Registration Service Get Data Out (GDO) website, stratified by age. Survival is reported for first-ever tumours only, so subsequent tumours are excluded. For those aged ≥ 80 years, GDO reporting is separated by site; we chose facial BCC to represent survival outcomes in this age group. From 2013 to 2015 in England there were 271 473 first BCCs, of which 68 869 (25.4%) occurred in those aged ≥ 80 years. Kaplan–Meier overall survival rates at 3 and 5 years for patients of all ages following a first BCC were 90.3% [95% confidence interval (CI) 90.2–90.4] and 83.1% (95% CI 82.9–83.2), respectively. For those aged ≥ 80 years with a facial BCC, Kaplan–Meier overall survival rates at 3 and 5 years survival fell to 73.9% (95% CI 73.4–74.4) and 56.2% (95% CI 55.7–56.8), respectively, with similar findings at other sites. Net survival was consistently around 100% for various sites and age groups for first BCC; for example, in those aged 70–79 years with a facial BCC, 5-year net survival is 100.5% (95% CI 100.1–101). Net survival uses published life tables to compare survival of a person with a BCC to a person without a BCC accounting for variables including age, sex, deprivation and geography. The 5-year net survival for BCC was consistently around 100%. This implies that BCCs do not affect survival, and therefore, when considering BCC treatment, we must consider primarily the morbidity of no treatment vs. treatments. Overall survival analysis identified that 26.1% of patients aged ≥ 80 years with facial BCC die within 3 years and 43.8% die within 5 years of diagnosis. Better understanding this cohort of patients with limited life expectancy, who are less likely to benefit from treatment, is critical to patient care. Age alone is an incomplete predictor of limited life expectancy, but validated frailty scoring tools can assist in identifying patients who would benefit from a more informed conversation about the risks and benefits of treatment.
dermatology
What problem does this paper attempt to address?