Cancer Prevention Programs for Elderly Americans Over 65

Introduction: Aging and Shifting Causes of Death in America

Over the course of the 20th century, the average life expectancy of an American has increased significantly. The major causes of death have also changed over time. The majority of Americans once died relatively young, with very few living beyond 65 years of age. However, trends have changed drastically, and far more people are now able to live beyond that threshold (Sahyoun, Lentzner, Hoyert, & Robinson, 2001).

It is worth noting that the leading cause of death among elderly people aged 65 and above is heart disease (35%), followed by cancer (22%). This trend had been evident for the preceding two decades and claimed almost one million lives of elderly Americans in 1997 alone. The third leading cause of death is stroke. However, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease and allied conditions (COPD) is the third leading cause of death for elderly white Americans (both male and female), while this ailment ranks fourth and fifth among other race-sex-age groups (Sahyoun et al., 2001).

By 2004, cancer had become the second leading cause of death among people aged 65 and above, and the overall costs of cancer treatment and prevention had also increased considerably. The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (2005) reported: "Cancer is the second leading cause of death in the United States. In 2004, about 1.4 million new cases of cancer will be diagnosed, and more than 563,700 Americans — about 1,500 people a day — will die of the disease. The financial cost of cancer is also significant. According to the National Institutes of Health, in 2003, the overall cost for cancer in the United States was $189.5 billion: $64.2 billion for direct medical expenses, $16.3 billion for lost worker productivity due to illness, and $109 billion for lost worker productivity due to premature death."

The purpose of this study is to assess the prevention and treatment programs available to elderly Americans. In light of the facts presented above, it is imperative that high-quality cancer treatment and prevention programs are not only brought into public awareness but also implemented by both the private sector and the government.

Review of Related Literature

While many programs have been initiated to minimize the spread of cancer, it is a discouraging fact that few have succeeded. For instance, in 1985, the National Cancer Institute (NCI) launched a set of carefully measured goals intended to decrease the number of cancer-related deaths by the year 2000. The program failed, as it aimed to control cancer solely through projected declines in cancer mortality rather than specifying the methods and procedures that would lead to that decline (Bergner, Marconi, & Meissner, 1992). Many other programs have been introduced since then, but they too have failed to achieve concrete results.

The purpose of this study is neither to catalog those programs nor to analyze the reasons for their failure. Rather, it is to identify the most effective program currently being implemented in America — whether by the government, the private sector, or both — and to evaluate its approach to reducing cancer's burden on the elderly population.

One model that has shown effectiveness in controlling the spread of cancer is Comprehensive Cancer Control (CCC). Its success is largely attributable to its strategy of channeling resources through collaborations among a number of influential institutions in both the public and private sectors. As the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (2005) explains: "Comprehensive cancer control is an emerging model that integrates and coordinates a range of activities to maximize the impact of limited resources and achieve desired cancer prevention and control outcomes. A key component to the success of this approach is establishing partnerships between public and private sector stakeholders whose common mission is to reduce the burden of cancer."

The Comprehensive Cancer Control Model

The fundamental principles of the Comprehensive Cancer Control program are as follows:

Scientific statistics and research are employed methodically in order to establish priorities and report them to decision makers. During survivorship, a complete range of cancer care is provided, including primary prevention, early detection and diagnosis, treatment, pain management, and support for both the patient and their family. A broad network of national agencies, institutions, and organizations — including public and medical health organizations, charitable agencies, insurance companies, businesses, government bodies, academic institutions, and patient advocates — are engaged in cancer deterrence and control throughout the United States. All activities related to cancer programs are coordinated in order to create joint endeavors. Integration of actions across multiple internal disciplines has been achieved; the major disciplines within this program include basic and applied research, program development, administration, health communications, evaluation, clinical services, public policy, surveillance, and health education.

Conclusion

While Comprehensive Cancer Control (CCC) has been a major success in establishing coordinated efforts among various potent stakeholders, it has yet to fully demonstrate its impact on controlling the spread of cancer among elderly people aged 65 and above. It is believed that unless concrete steps are taken by the policymakers responsible for planning and managing CCC, this program may ultimately share the fate of past initiatives that failed to achieve lasting results.