Differences in treatment and survival between elderly patients with thoracic esophageal cancer in metropolitan areas and other areas

To address the major issue of regional disparity in the treatment for elderly cancer patients in an aging society, we compared the treatment strategies used for elderly patients with thoracic esophageal cancer and their survival outcomes in metropolitan areas and other regions. Using the national database of hospital‐based cancer registries in 2008‐2011, patients aged 75 years or older who had been diagnosed with thoracic esophageal cancer were enrolled. We divided the patients into two groups: those treated in metropolitan areas (Tokyo, Kanagawa, Osaka, Aichi, Saitama, and Chiba prefectures) with populations of 6 million or more and those treated in other areas (the other 41 prefectures). Compared were patient backgrounds, treatment strategies, and survival curves at each cancer stage. In total, 1236 (24%) patients from metropolitan areas and 3830 (76%) patients from nonmetropolitan areas were enrolled. Patients in metropolitan areas were treated at more advanced stages. There was also a difference in treatment strategy. The 3‐year survival rate among cStage I patients was better in metropolitan areas (71.6% vs. 63.7%), and this finding mainly reflected the survival difference between patients treated with radiotherapy alone. For cStage II‐IV patients, there were no differences. Multivariable Cox proportional hazard analysis including interaction terms between treatment areas, cStage, and the first‐line treatments revealed that treatments in the metropolitan areas were significantly associated with better survival among patients treated with radiotherapy alone for cStage I cancer. Treatment strategies for elderly patients with thoracic esophageal cancer and its survival outcomes differed between metropolitan areas and other regions.