Large multiinstitutional databases provide opportunities to examine the impact of age on outcomes among patients selected for operations, and the study from Rivera and colleagues7 in this issue of CHEST (see page 874) makes use of the French Society of Thoracic and Cardiovascular Surgery’s prospectively collected, voluntary Epithor database to examine the impact of age on the outcome of older patients (≥70 years) compared with younger patients (<70 years) after resection for stage I and II NSCLC. Importantly, in contrast to prior similarly constructed retrospective matched cohort studies, the recent experience of the surgeons participating in the Epithor database did not demonstrate the use of less extensive resective procedures among the older cohort. A similar distribution of predominantly open resections from segmentectomies to pneumonectomies was used in both cohorts. Their data did, however, manifest less frequent radical lymphadenectomy among the elders, in favor of node sampling, when compared with their juniors. Their large numbers corroborate the ability to select older patients for resection while achieving a substantially similar incidence of similarly severe complications, also with comparable 30-day mortality. These authors’ findings corroborate similarly constructed published comparisons demonstrating that operative resection in older patients can be undertaken safely,5,6,8 “safely” defined by mortality and morbidity rates arithmetically similar to those in younger patients. But how similar do mortality or morbidity rates need to be to be clinically equivalent?