Oncology Research and Treatment

Stahl M.K.a· Ertl S.W.a· Engelmeyer P.b· Heuer H.-C.c· Christoph D.C.a

Author affiliations

aDepartment of Medical Oncology und Hematology with Integrated Palliative Care, Evang. Kliniken Essen-Mitte, Essen, Germany
bCentre of Emergency Medicine, Universitätsklinikum Essen, Essen, Germany
cDepartment of Geriatrics, Evang. Kliniken Essen-Mitte, Essen, Germany

Log in to MyKarger to check if you already have access to this content.

Buy FullText & PDF Unlimited re-access via MyKarger Unrestricted printing, no saving restrictions for personal use read more

CHF 38.00 *
EUR 35.00 *
USD 39.00 *

Select

KAB

Buy a Karger Article Bundle (KAB) and profit from a discount!

If you would like to redeem your KAB credit, please log in.

Save over 20% compared to the individual article price.

Learn more

Rent via DeepDyve Unlimited fulltext viewing of this article Organize, annotate and mark up articles Printing and downloading restrictions apply

Start free trial

Subscribe Access to all articles of the subscribed year(s) guaranteed for 5 years Unlimited re-access via Subscriber Login or MyKarger Unrestricted printing, no saving restrictions for personal use read more

Subcription rates

Select

* The final prices may differ from the prices shown due to specifics of VAT rules.

Article / Publication Details

First-Page Preview

Received: May 12, 2022
Accepted: January 06, 2023
Published online: February 08, 2023

Number of Print Pages: 5
Number of Figures: 1
Number of Tables: 2

ISSN: 2296-5270 (Print)
eISSN: 2296-5262 (Online)

For additional information: https://www.karger.com/ORT

Abstract

Because of their individual vulnerabilities, treatment decisions for older patients can be difficult. Geriatric assessment (GA) may help to select patients for systemic treatment, but its value is still unproven. Older cancer patients (≥65 years of age) with and without complex GA followed by discussion in the geriatric-oncologic conference, who had been treated in palliative intention with standard combination chemotherapy at the Evang. Kliniken Essen-Mitte, were retrospectively evaluated. All patients had been orally informed about the treatment options and had chosen chemotherapy beside supportive care. To reduce selection bias, the method of propensity-score matching was performed. Patient groups treated in the years 2011–2013 (without GA, group 1) and in the years 2014–2015 (with GA, group 2) were compared regarding different toxicity endpoints. The primary endpoint of the study was defined as numbers of patients with unplanned admission to the hospital or death during first-line chemotherapy and GA should reduce these events by 15%. Overall, 114 patients were evaluated in both groups. The median age was 74 years. Patients suffered from gastrointestinal carcinomas (47%), lung cancer (28%), breast cancer (12%), and other cancer types (3%). Consequently, most patients were treated with platinum-based (41%), fluoropyrimidine-based (35%), or anthracycline-based (13%) combination chemotherapy. In group 2, the events were numerically lower for all toxicity endpoints. The need for a premature stop of treatment was 54.4% in group 1 compared to 29.8% in group 2 (p < 0.01) and also the treatment-related mortality was significantly lower in group 2 (17.5% vs. 5.3%; p = 0.04). The primary endpoint, the rate of unplanned hospital admission, and death was 49.1% versus 35.1% (difference 14.0%), which did not reach the predefined border of 15%. There was a nonsignificant overall survival benefit in the group with GA (22.6 vs. 18.4 months). GA appears useful to better select older patients with advanced cancer for combination chemotherapy. The significant reduction of mortality during chemotherapy justifies the efforts and costs which need to be expended. To evaluate the effect of GA on overall survival, prospective trials are required.

© 2023 S. Karger AG, Basel

References Honecker F, Huschens S, Angermund R, Kallischnigg G, Freier W, Friedrich C, et al. Patient assessment and feasibility of treatment in older patients with cancer: results from the IN-GHO® Registry. J Cancer Res Clin Oncol. 2021;147(11):3183–94. Mohile SG, Dale W, Somerfield MR, Schonberg MA, Boyd CM, Burhenn PS, et al. Practical assessment and management of vulnerabilities in older patients receiving chemotherapy: ASCO guideline for geriatric oncology. J Clin Oncol. 2018;36(22):2326–47. Ertl SW, Heuer H-C, Stahl MK. How an oncologist’s intuition compares to a geriatric assessment. Oncol Res Treat. 2021 Feb;44(3):111–8. Balducci L, Extermann M. Management of cancer in the older person: a practical approach. Oncologist. 2000;5(3):224–37. D’Agostino RB, Jr. Propensity score methods for bias reduction in the comparison of a treatment to a non-randomized control group. Stat Med. 1998;17(19):2265–81. Mahoney F, Barthel D. Funcional evaluation: the Barthel index. Md State Med J. 1965;14:61–5. Lawton MP, Brody EM. Assessment of older people: self-maintaining and instrumental activities of daily living. Gerontologist. 1969;9(3):179–86. Podsiadlo D, Richardson S. The timed “Up & Go”: a test of basic functional mobility for frail elderly persons. J Am Geriatr Soc. 1991;39(2):142–8. Tinetti ME. Performance-oriented assessment of mobility problems in elderly patients. J Am Geriatr Soc. 1986;34(2):119–26. Folstein MF, Folstein SE, McHugh PR. “Mini-mental state”. A practical method for grading the cognitive state of patients for the clinician. J Psychiatr Res. 1975;12(3):189–98. Kalbe E, Kessler J, Calabrese P, Smith R, Passmore AP, Brand M, et al. DemTect: a new, sensitive cognitive screening test to support the diagnosis of mild cognitive impairment and early dementia. Int J Geriatr Psychiatry. 2004;19(2):136–43. Charlson ME, Pompei P, Ales KL, MacKenzie CR. A new method of classifying prognostic comorbidity in longitudinal studies: development and validation. J Chronic Dis. 1987;40(5):373–83. Yesavage JA, Brink TL, Rose TL, Lum O, Huang V, Adey M, et al. Development and validation of a geriatric depression screening scale: a preliminary report. J Psychiatr Res. 1982-1983;17(1):37–49. Heidenblut S, Zank S. Develompent of a new screening instrument for geriatric depression. The depression in old age scale (DIA-S). Z Gerontol Geriat. 2010;43(3):170–6. Guigoz Y, Vellas BJ. Malnutrition in the elderly: the mini nutritional assessment (MNA). Ther Umsch. 1997;54(6):345–50. www.krebsdaten.de/Krebs/Krebs_in_deutschland (accessed Jan 31, 2022). Baumann C, Baumann R, Wedding U. The importance of a detailed geriatric functional assessment of older patients with cancer. Oncol Res Treat. 2021;44(5):221–31. Extermann M, Albrand G, Chen H, Zanetta S, Schonwetter R, Zulian GB, et al. Are older French patients as willing as older American patients to undertake chemotherapy? J Clin Oncol. 2003;21(17):3214–9. Versteeg KS, Looijaard SMLM, Slee-Valentijn MS, Verheul HMW, Maier AB, Konings IRHM. Predicting outcome in older patients with cancer: comprehensive geriatric assessment and clinical judgment. J Geriatr Oncol. 2021;12(1):49–56. Hurria A, Soto-Perez-de-Celis E, Blanchard S, Burhenn P, Yeon CH, Yuan Y, et al. A phase II trial of older adults with metastatic breast cancer receiving nab-paclitaxel: melding the fields of geriatrics and oncology. Clin Breast Cancer. 2019;19(2):89–96. Hamaker ME, Seynaeve C, Wymenga ANM, van Tinteren H, Nortier JWR, Maartense E, et al. Baseline comprehensive geriatric assessment is associated with toxicity and survival in elderly metastatic breast cancer patients receiving single-agent chemotherapy: results from the OMEGA study of the dutch breast cancer trialists’group. Breast. 2014;23(1):81–7. Corre R, Greillier L, Le Caer H, Audigier-Valette C, Baize N, Berard H, et al. Use of a comprehensive geriatric assessment for the management of elderly patients with advanced non-small-cell lung cancer: the phase III randomized ESOGIA-GFPC-GECP 08-02 study. J Clin Oncol. 2016;34(13):1476–83. Article / Publication Details

First-Page Preview

Received: May 12, 2022
Accepted: January 06, 2023
Published online: February 08, 2023

Number of Print Pages: 5
Number of Figures: 1
Number of Tables: 2

ISSN: 2296-5270 (Print)
eISSN: 2296-5262 (Online)

For additional information: https://www.karger.com/ORT

Copyright / Drug Dosage / Disclaimer Copyright: All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be translated into other languages, reproduced or utilized in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopying, recording, microcopying, or by any information storage and retrieval system, without permission in writing from the publisher.
Drug Dosage: The authors and the publisher have exerted every effort to ensure that drug selection and dosage set forth in this text are in accord with current recommendations and practice at the time of publication. However, in view of ongoing research, changes in government regulations, and the constant flow of information relating to drug therapy and drug reactions, the reader is urged to check the package insert for each drug for any changes in indications and dosage and for added warnings and precautions. This is particularly important when the recommended agent is a new and/or infrequently employed drug.
Disclaimer: The statements, opinions and data contained in this publication are solely those of the individual authors and contributors and not of the publishers and the editor(s). The appearance of advertisements or/and product references in the publication is not a warranty, endorsement, or approval of the products or services advertised or of their effectiveness, quality or safety. The publisher and the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to persons or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content or advertisements.