The 20th century has witnessed
the aging of a significant portion of the population, with major changes in the social structure, particularly
in developed countries. The world’s elderly population is growing at a rate of
2.4% per year. Sweden has the highest proportion of elderly, with 17.5% of
its population aged 65 years and older in 1997. This age shift is the result of
reduced birth rates, improvements in health and nutrition, and increased
The aging population has a direct effect on health-care delivery
because it is associated with new disease patterns as well as transitions in
economic, social, and even ethical issues. Medical policy makers are calling for
health promotion and disease prevention initiatives aimed at the population
older than 50 years.
The concept of "elderly" seems to be an inadequate
generalization that covers a wide range of years as well as a diverse population
from the personal and social points of view. Age definitions are relevant in
gynecologic oncology because ovarian, endometrial, and vulvar cancers tend to be
diseases of "older" women in their postmenopausal years. Elderly women
are usually defined as being more than 70 to 75 years of age in the few studies
that address this particular issue. Women older than age 80 to 85 years are
considered the "old-old" or "very old." This group comprises
22% of the overall elderly population in developed countries.
As baby boomers born between 1945 and 1964 enter menopause, they
will have a direct effect on clinical practice. By the year 2010, the number of
postmenopausal women will exceed the number of women of reproductive age for the
first time in the history of the United States. On average, in developed
countries, women outlive men by 5 to 7 years. According to the United States
Bureau of the Census in 1997, the life expectancy of a female at birth was 79.5
years vs 72.8 years for a male. Women account for about two-thirds of the
population aged 75 years and older, and the number of women aged 85 or older is
expected to double between 2030 and 2050.
The risk of developing a gynecologic tumor is highest in elderly
women. When compared with women aged 40 to 65 years, those over age 65 have a
higher risk of developing cancer of the uterus (twofold), ovaries (threefold),
and cervix (10% increased risk). There is also an increased risk of
cancer-related death in elderly women that seems to be independent of the
increased incidence. One possible explanation is related to stage of disease.
Ovarian, endometrial, and cervical cancers tend to be diagnosed at a more
advanced stage in elderly women.[6,7] Biological differences are possible, but
other factors, including decreased screening, have been reported.[8-10]
Elderly women fail to undergo routine gynecologic examinations
and screening procedures.[8,9,11] Even in the presence of symptoms, Kennedy and
colleagues found the diagnosis of cancer delayed by 8.3 months and no previous
pelvic examination performed for an average of 4.5 years. Although women’s
awareness of health problems appears to be increasing, preventive screening
rates do not seem to be changing accordingly. A recent survey found that 66% of
all respondents said they had undergone a clinical breast examination and
Papanicolaou (Pap) smear within the previous year.
Many barriers to compliance with cancer screening procedures
exist, including socioeconomic, cultural, and educational factors as well as
physician attitudes. After age 65 years, the number of medical office visits
decreases by about half when compared to women aged 45 to 64 years (7.3% vs
13.6%). Thus, any physician visit should be taken as a major opportunity to
educate patients and offer screening services. Physician recommendation is a
major predictor of compliance with screening tests.
The Pap Test: The Pap test continues to be the gold standard
screening test for cervical carcinoma. Implementation of Pap testing is
considered to be the main reason for the decrease in the incidence and mortality
of cervical carcinoma in women in the United States, with two exceptions: older
women and black women. Women over age 65 years have the highest percentage of
late-stage cervical cancer at diagnosis regardless of race or ethnic
background.[16,17] Most patients diagnosed with invasive cervical carcinoma have
not had a recent Pap test, even at early stages of the disease.
The false-negative rate of Pap smears is about 20%. Sampling
errors contribute greatly to the incidence of false-negative tests. Recession of
the squamocolumnar junction in postmenopausal patients results in limited
sampling of cells. Cervical stenosis resulting from atrophy also limits sampling
of the transformation zone.
HPV Testing: Human papillomavirus (HPV) testing with the
Hybrid Capture II has proven to be a sensitive marker for detecting dysplasia in
the presence of a minimally abnormal Pap test result. Persistent HPV
infection has been associated with a higher risk of cervical carcinoma. The
rate of HPV positivity and distribution of HPV types has been found to be
similar between tumors developing in younger and older patients.
In a population-based study, the prevalence of high-grade
squamous intraepithelial lesions was found to have a bimodal distribution with
peaks at age 30 and 65 years and older. Human papillomavirus was found in 89% of
high-grade squamous intraepithelial lesions and 88% of cancers. One of the
likely general screening applications for HPV DNA testing would be the
evaluation of mildly abnormal Pap tests with atypical squamous cells of
undetermined significance (ASCUS). This application would also be valid for
Screening methods for ovarian cancer continue to be
investigated. Early diagnosis is difficult because of lack of symptoms and the
difficulty of detecting small adnexal masses on pelvic examination.
Three-quarters of patients have stage III and IV disease at the time of initial
diagnosis. Symptoms in the months preceding diagnosis are nonspecific and
include bloating, abdominal pain, frequent indigestion, a feeling of fullness,
CA-125 Screening: CA-125 is the most extensively studied
antigen associated with ovarian cancer. A normal value is generally considered
to be 35 U/mL or less. CA-125 is elevated in 90% of women with stage III
and IV ovarian cancer, but in only 50% of women with stage I disease. The test
has a low specificity because the level of the antigen may be elevated in other
pelvic and gastrointestinal malignancies as well as in benign conditions,
including endometriosis, pelvic inflammatory disease, pregnancy, and
leiomyomas. Therefore, CA-125 has no application for screening of the
The role of CA-125 as a screening tool in postmenopausal women
was evaluated in a study conducted at the Royal London Hospital. This
prospective study of 22,000 postmenopausal women used serum CA-125 measurements
as a primary screening method for ovarian cancer. Although the test was
associated with high specificity (98%), for each case of ovarian cancer
diagnosed, 50 false-positives occurred. Further analysis of the data
demonstrated that elevation of CA-125 over 100 U/mL significantly increases the
relative risk of developing an index cancer.
Transvaginal Ultrasonography: Much effort has been dedicated
to the evaluation of transvaginal ultrasonography as a screening tool for
ovarian cancer. The potential success of sonography is based on its ability to
detect early morphologic changes that cannot be detected by examination. Because
stage I disease has an excellent 5-year survival (approximately 90%), requires
less radical surgery, and often does not require adjuvant chemotherapy, any
intervention that can accurately detect early-stage disease would have the
greatest effect on outcomes.
Morphologic scoring systems have been developed to increase the
specificity of transvaginal ultrasound. The most reliable criteria are ovarian
size or volume, presence of papillary projections, and cyst complexity.
Papillary projections correlate highly with malignancy. A recent report from
a large study defined the utility of ultrasound in detecting ovarian cancer in
asymptomatic women. Annual transvaginal ultrasound was performed in 14,469
asymptomatic women aged 50 years and over and in women with a family history of
ovarian cancer aged 25 and older. As expected, a large number of ultrasounds
(57,214) had to be performed in order to detect a few ovarian cancers. The
sensitivity of the screening was 81% and the specificity was 98.9%.
On the other hand, it was possible to detect early-stage disease
in 72% of the cancers identified. A survival advantage was also demonstrated. In
screened patients, the 5-year survival for epithelial cancer was 86.6% vs 50% in
unscreened patients. Although color Doppler imaging may reduce the
false-positive rate in ovarian cancer detection, its utility as a primary
screening tool is limited, and the expenses are significant.
1. Kinsella K, Suzman R, Robine JM, et al: Demography of older
populations in developed countries, in Grimley Evans J, Franklin Williams T,
Lynn Beattie B, et al (eds): Oxford Textbook of Geriatric Medicine, 2nd edition,
pp 7-19. United Kingdom, Oxford University Press, 2000.
2. Berg RL, Cassells JS (eds): The Second Fifty Years: Promoting
Health and Preventing Disability. Report of a study undertaken by the Committee
on Health Promotion and Disease Prevention for the Second Fifty, Institute of
Medicine. Washington, DC, National Academy Press, 1990.
3. Pearse WH, Snyder Taggart M: The female patient in the 21st
century; demographics, disease risks, and defining characteristics. Female
Patient 25:23-37, 2000.
4. US Bureau of the Census: Statistical Abstract of the United
States: 1998, 118th ed. Washington, DC, 1998.
5. National Cancer Institute: Annual cancer statistics review,
including cancer trends: 1950-1985. Bethesda, Md, National Institutes of Health,
6. Holmes FF, Hearne E: Cancer stage-to-age relationship:
Implications for cancer screening in the elderly. J Am Geriatr Soc 29:55-57,
7. Goodwin JS, Samet JM, Key CR, et al: Stage at diagnosis of
cancer varies with the age of the patient. J Am Geriatr Soc 34:20-26, 1986.
8. Celentano DD, Shapiro S, Weisman CS: Cancer preventive
screening behavior among elderly women. Prev Med 11:454-463, 1982.
9. Grover SA, Cook EF, Adam J, et al : Delayed diagnosis of
gynecologic tumors in elderly women: Relation to national medical practice
patterns. Am J Med 86:151, 1989.
10. Yancik R, Ries LG, Yates JW: Ovarian cancer in the elderly:
An analysis of surveillance, epidemiology, and end results program data. Am J
Obstet Gynecol 154:639-647, 1986.
11. Kennedy AW, Flagg JS, Webster KD: Gynecologic cancer in the
very elderly. Gynecol Oncol 32:49-54, 1989.
12. Health Concerns Across a Woman’s Lifespan: The
Commonwealth Fund 1998 Survey of Women’s Health. New York, The Commonwealth
13. Womeodu RJ, Bailey JE: Barriers to cancer screening. Med
Clin North Am 80:115-133, 1996.
14. Woodwell DA: National Ambulatory Medical Care Survey: 1996
Summary. Advance Data From Vital and Health Statistics, No. 295. Hyattsville,
Md, National Center for Health Statistics, 1997.
15. Mandelblatt JS, Yabroff KR: Breast and cervical cancer
screening for older women: Recommendations and challenges for the 21st century.
J Am Med Womens Assoc 55:210-215, 2000.
16. Chen F, Trapido EJ, Davia K: Differences in stage at
presentation of breast and gynecologic cancers among whites, blacks, and
Hispanics. Cancer 73:2838-2842, 1994.
17. Ferrante JM, Gonzalez EC, Roetzheim RG, et al: Clinical and
demographic predictors of late-stage cervical cancer. Arch Fam Med 9:439-445,
18. Parazzini F, Negri E, La Vecchia C, et al: Screening
practices and invasive cervical cancer risk in different age strata. Gynecol
Oncol 38:76-80, 1990.
19. Boyce JG, Fruchter RG, Romanzi L, et al: The fallacy of the
screening interval for cervical smears. Obstet Gynecol 76:627-632, 1990.
20. McGonigle KF, Lagasse LD, Karlan BY: Ovarian, uterine and
cervical cancer in the elderly woman. Clin Geriatr Med 9:115-130, 1993.
21. Manos MM, Kinney WK, Hurley LB, et al: Identifying women
with cervical neoplasia: Using human papillomavirus DNA testing for equivocal
Papanicolaou results. JAMA 281:1605-1610, 1999.
22. Melkert PW, Hopman E, van den Brule AJ, et al: Prevalence of
HPV in cytomorphologically normal cervical smears, as determined by the
polymerase chain reaction, is age-dependent. Int J Cancer 53:919-923, 1993.
23. Gostout BS, Podratz KC, McGovern RM, et al: Cervical cancer
in older women: A molecular analysis of human papillomavirus types, HLA types,
and p53 mutations. Am J Obstet Gynecol 179:56-61, 1998.
24. Herrero R, Hildesheim A, Bratti C, et al: Population-based
study of human papillomavirus infection and cervical neoplasia in rural Costa
Rica. J Natl Cancer Inst 92:464-474, 2000.
25. Lin CT, Tseng CJ, Lai CH, et al: High-risk HPV DNA detection
by Hybrid Capture II. An adjunctive test for mildly abnormal cytologic smears in
women ³ 50 years of age. J Reprod Med 45:345-350, 2000.
26. Squatrito RC, Buller RE: Use of serum CA 125 for monitoring
and prognosticating outcome in patients with epithelial ovarian cancer. Female
Patient 19:14, 1994.
27. Jacobs I, Davies AP, Bridges J, et al: Prevalence screening
for ovarian cancer in postmenopausal women by CA-125 measurement and
ultrasonography. Br Med J 306:1030-1034, 1993.
28. Jacobs IJ, Skates S, Davies AP, et al: Risk of diagnosis of
ovarian cancer after raised serum CA-125 concentration: A prospective cohort
study. Br Med J 313:1355-1358, 1996.
29. Granberg S, Wikland M, Jansson I: Macroscopic
characterization of ovarian tumors and the relation to the histological
diagnosis: Criteria to be used for ultrasound evaluation. Gynecol Oncol
30. van Nagell JR Jr, DePriest PD, Reedy MB, et al: The efficacy
of transvaginal sonographic screening in asymptomatic women at risk for ovarian
cancer. Gynecol Oncol 77:350-356, 2000.
31. Grimes DA: Diagnostic office curettage; heresy no longer.
Contemp Obstet Gynecol 27:96, 1986.
32. Fisher B, Constantino JP, Redmond CK, et al: Endometrial
cancer in tamoxifen-treated breast cancer patients: Findings from the National
Surgical Adjuvant Breast and Bowel Project (NSABP) B-14. J Natl Cancer Inst
33. Barakat RR, Gilewski TA, Almadrones L, et al: Effect of
adjuvant tamoxifen on the endometrium in women with breast cancer: A prospective
study using office endometrial biopsy. J Clin Oncol 18:3459-3463, 2000.
34. Gerber B, Krause A, Muller H, et al: Effects of adjuvant
tamoxifen on the endometrium in postmenopausal women with breast cancer: A
prospective long-term study using transvaginal ultrasound. J Clin Oncol
35. Ganz PA: Does (or should) chronologic age influence the
choice of cancer treatment? Oncology 6:45-49, 1992.
36. Lash AF: Surgical geriatric gynecology. Am J Obstet Gynecol
37. Lichtinger M, Averette H, Penalver M, et al: Major surgical
procedures for gynecologic malignancy in elderly women. South Med J
38. Lawton FG, Hacker NF: Surgery for invasive gynecologic
cancer in the elderly female population. Obstet Gynecol 76:287-289, 1990.
39. Susini T, Scambia G, Margariti PA, et al: Gynecologic
oncologic surgery in the elderly: A retrospective analysis of 213 patients.
Gynecol Oncol 75:437-443, 1999.
40. Averette H, Lichtinger M, Sevin BU, et al: Pelvic
exenteration: A 15-year experience in a general metropolitan hospital. Am J
Obstet Gynecol 150:179-184, 1984.
41. Van Rijswijk RE, Vermorken JB: Drug therapy for
gynecological cancer in older women. Drugs Aging 17:13-32, 2000.
42. Balducci L, Stanta G: Cancer in the frail patient: A coming
epidemic. Hematol Oncol Clin North Am 14:235-250, 2000.
43. Thyss A, Saudes L, Otto J, et al: Renal tolerance of
cisplatin in patients more than 80 years old. J Clin Oncol 12:2121-2125, 1994.
44. Lichtman Sm, Egorin M, Rosner G: Clinical pharmacology of
paclitaxel in relation to patient age: CALGB 9762 (abstract). Proc Am Soc Clin
Oncol 18:732a, 1999.
45. Wasil T, Lichtman SM, Gupta V, et al: Radiation therapy in
cancer patients 80 years of age and older. Am J Clin Oncol 23:526-530, 2000.
46. Mitchell PA, Waggoner S, Rotmensch J, et al: Cervical cancer
in the elderly treated with radiation therapy. Gynecol Oncol 71:291-298, 1998.
47. Greenlee RT, Hill-Harmon MB, Murray T, et al: Cancer
statistics, 2001. CA Cancer J Clin 51:15-36, 2001.
48. Young RC, Brady MF, Walton LA, et al: Localized ovarian
cancer in the elderly. The Gynecologic Oncology Group experience. Cancer
49. Scarabelli C, Gallo A, Francheschi S, et al: Primary
cytoreductive surgery with rectosigmoid colon resection for patients with
advanced epithelial ovarian carcinoma. Cancer 88:389-397, 2000.
50. Averette HE, Janicek MF, Menck HR: The National Cancer Data
Base report on ovarian cancer. Cancer 76:1096-1103, 1995.
51. Higtower RD, Nguyen HN, Averette HE, et al: National survey
of ovarian carcinoma. IV: Patterns of care and related survival for older
patients. Cancer 73:377-383, 1994.
52. Sengupta PS, Jayson GC, Slade RJ, et al: An audit of primary
surgical treatment for women with ovarian cancer referred to a cancer center. Br
J Cancer 80:444-447, 1999.
53. McGuire WP, Hoskins WJ, Brady MF, et al: Cyclophosphamide
and cisplatin compared with paclitaxel and cisplatin in patients with stage III
and IV ovarian cancer. N Engl J Med 334:1-6, 1996.
54. Ozols RF: Paclitaxel plus carboplatin in the treatment of
ovarian cancer. Semin Oncol 26:84-89, 1999.
55. Farley JH, Nycum LR, Birrer MJ, et al: Age-specific survival
of women with endometrioid adenocarcinoma of the uterus. Gynecol Oncol 79:86-89,
56. Goff BA, Goodman A, Muntz HG, et al: Surgical stage IV
endometrial carcinoma: A study of 47 cases. Gynecol Oncol 52:237-240, 1994.
57. Aalders J, Abeler V, Kolstad P, et al: Postoperative
external irradiation and prognostic parameters in stage I endometrial carcinoma.
Obstet Gynecol 56:419-427, 1980.
58. Smales E, Perry CM, Ashby MA, et al: The influence of age on
prognosis in carcinoma of the cervix. Br J Obstet Gynecol 94:784-787, 1987.
59. Van Nagell JR, Grenwell N, Powell DF, et al: Microinvasive
carcinoma of the cervix. Am J Obstet Gynecol 145:981-991, 1983
60. Averette HE, Nguyen HN, Donato DM, et al: Radical
hysterectomy for invasive cervical cancer. A 25-year prospective experience with
the Miami technique. Cancer 71:1422-437, 1993.
61. Geisler JP, Geisler HE: Radical hysterectomy in patients 65
years of age and older. Gynecol Oncol 53:203-211, 1994.
62. Sakurai H, Mitsuhashi N, Takahashi M, et al: Radiation
therapy for elderly patient with squamous cell carcinoma of the uterine cervix.
Gynecol Oncol 77:116-120, 2000.
63. Lindegaard JC, Thranov IR, Engelholm SA: Radiotherapy in the
management of cervical cancer in elderly patients. Radiother Oncol 56:9-15,
64. Thomas GM: Concurrent chemotherapy and radiation for locally
advanced cervical cancer: the next standard of care. Semin Radiat Oncol
65. Wagner W, Prott FJ, Weissmann J, et al: Vulvar carcinoma: A
retrospective analysis of 80 patients. Arch Gynecol Obstet 262:99-104, 1999.
66. Hacker NF, Leuchter RS, Berek JS, et al: Radical vulvectomy
and bilateral inguinal lymphadenectomy through separate groin incisions. Obstet
Gynecol 58:574, 1981.
67. Society of Gynecologic Oncologists: Guidelines for referral
to a gynecologic oncologists: Rationale and benefits. Gynecol Oncol 78:S1-S13,