Radiotherapy for nonagenarians: the value of biological versus chronological age.
Chemotherapy
Comorbidities
Elderly patients
Geriatric patients
Radiotherapy
Journal
Radiation oncology (London, England)
ISSN: 1748-717X
Titre abrégé: Radiat Oncol
Pays: England
ID NLM: 101265111
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
19 May 2020
19 May 2020
Historique:
received:
23
03
2020
accepted:
05
05
2020
entrez:
21
5
2020
pubmed:
21
5
2020
medline:
27
3
2021
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
The number of nonagenarian cancer patients (≥ 90 years) is continuously increasing, and radiotherapy is performed in a relevant proportion of patients, as surgery and chemotherapy are often not feasible for these patients. However, the evidence regarding the feasibility and treatment outcomes after radiotherapy for this patient group is very limited. All nonagenarian patients receiving (chemo) radiotherapy between 2009 and 2019 at the University of Freiburg - Medical Center were analyzed for patterns of care, overall survival (OS) and therapy-associated toxicities according to the Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events. Uni- and multivariate Cox regression analyses were conducted to assess the influence of patient- and treatment-related factors on patient outcomes. One hundred nineteen patients with a total of 137 irradiated lesions were included in this analysis. After a median follow-up of 27 months, median OS was 10 months with a 3-year OS amounting to 11.1%. Univariate analyses demonstrated that a reduced performance status (HR = 1.56, 95% CI 1.00-2.45, p < 0.05), a higher burden of comorbidities (HR = 2.00, 95% CI 1.00-4.10, p < 0.05) and higher UICC tumor stages (HR = 2.21, 95% CI 1.14-4.26, p < 0.05) were associated with impaired survival rates. Split-course treatments (HR = 2.05, 95% CI 1.07-3.94, p < 0.05), non-completion of radiotherapy (HR = 7.17, 95% CI 3.88-13.26, p < 0.001) and palliative treatments (HR = 2.84, 95% CI 1.68-4.81, p < 0.05) were found to result in significantly reduced OS. In the multivariate analysis, split-course concepts (HR = 2.21, 95% CI 1.10-4.37, p < 0.05) and palliative treatments (HR = 3.19, 95% CI 1.77-5.75, p < 0.001) significantly deteriorated outcomes, while impaired ECOG status (HR = 1.49, 95% CI 0.91-2.43, p = 0.11) did not. The vast majority of patients reported either no (n = 40; 33.6%) or grade 1-2 acute toxicities (n = 66; 55.5%), and only very few higher-grade toxicities were observed in our study. Radiotherapy for nonagenarian patients is generally feasible and associated with a low toxicity profile. Given the relatively poor OS rates and the importance of the quality of life for this patient group, individualized treatment regimens including hypofractionation concepts should be considered.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
BACKGROUND
The number of nonagenarian cancer patients (≥ 90 years) is continuously increasing, and radiotherapy is performed in a relevant proportion of patients, as surgery and chemotherapy are often not feasible for these patients. However, the evidence regarding the feasibility and treatment outcomes after radiotherapy for this patient group is very limited.
METHODS
METHODS
All nonagenarian patients receiving (chemo) radiotherapy between 2009 and 2019 at the University of Freiburg - Medical Center were analyzed for patterns of care, overall survival (OS) and therapy-associated toxicities according to the Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events. Uni- and multivariate Cox regression analyses were conducted to assess the influence of patient- and treatment-related factors on patient outcomes.
RESULTS
RESULTS
One hundred nineteen patients with a total of 137 irradiated lesions were included in this analysis. After a median follow-up of 27 months, median OS was 10 months with a 3-year OS amounting to 11.1%. Univariate analyses demonstrated that a reduced performance status (HR = 1.56, 95% CI 1.00-2.45, p < 0.05), a higher burden of comorbidities (HR = 2.00, 95% CI 1.00-4.10, p < 0.05) and higher UICC tumor stages (HR = 2.21, 95% CI 1.14-4.26, p < 0.05) were associated with impaired survival rates. Split-course treatments (HR = 2.05, 95% CI 1.07-3.94, p < 0.05), non-completion of radiotherapy (HR = 7.17, 95% CI 3.88-13.26, p < 0.001) and palliative treatments (HR = 2.84, 95% CI 1.68-4.81, p < 0.05) were found to result in significantly reduced OS. In the multivariate analysis, split-course concepts (HR = 2.21, 95% CI 1.10-4.37, p < 0.05) and palliative treatments (HR = 3.19, 95% CI 1.77-5.75, p < 0.001) significantly deteriorated outcomes, while impaired ECOG status (HR = 1.49, 95% CI 0.91-2.43, p = 0.11) did not. The vast majority of patients reported either no (n = 40; 33.6%) or grade 1-2 acute toxicities (n = 66; 55.5%), and only very few higher-grade toxicities were observed in our study.
CONCLUSION
CONCLUSIONS
Radiotherapy for nonagenarian patients is generally feasible and associated with a low toxicity profile. Given the relatively poor OS rates and the importance of the quality of life for this patient group, individualized treatment regimens including hypofractionation concepts should be considered.
Identifiants
pubmed: 32430009
doi: 10.1186/s13014-020-01563-x
pii: 10.1186/s13014-020-01563-x
pmc: PMC7236131
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
113Références
Rep Pract Oncol Radiother. 2015 Sep-Oct;20(5):328-39
pubmed: 26549990
Head Neck. 2019 Apr;41(4):1053-1062
pubmed: 30549147
Radiother Oncol. 1991 Jul;21(3):163-70
pubmed: 1924851
Br J Cancer. 2017 Sep 26;117(7):925-931
pubmed: 28797032
Cancer. 2012 Mar 1;118(5):1371-86
pubmed: 21953606
Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 1997 Dec 1;39(5):1125-9
pubmed: 9392554
Radiology. 1999 Jun;211(3):829-33
pubmed: 10352612
Strahlenther Onkol. 2019 Dec;195(12):1074-1085
pubmed: 31240346
Strahlenther Onkol. 2019 Jan;195(1):62-68
pubmed: 30167713
Biomed Res Int. 2018 Jan 17;2018:3508795
pubmed: 29581971
JAMA. 2004 May 26;291(20):2441-7
pubmed: 15161894
J Clin Oncol. 2005 May 20;23(15):3366-75
pubmed: 15908648
Surgery. 2017 Sep;162(3):640-651
pubmed: 28697883
Radiat Oncol. 2020 Feb 4;15(1):31
pubmed: 32019576
Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 1998 May 1;41(2):407-13
pubmed: 9607359
Acta Oncol. 1988;27(2):147-52
pubmed: 3390345
J Clin Oncol. 2008 Jan 1;26(1):54-9
pubmed: 18165640
Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol. 2005 Jan;262(1):21-6
pubmed: 15014947
Chin J Cancer. 2016 May 09;35:43
pubmed: 27160517
Eur J Cancer. 2014 May;50(8):1490-7
pubmed: 24613621
Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 1989 Aug;17(2):279-85
pubmed: 2502508
Oncologist. 2012;17(11):1439-49
pubmed: 22941970
Int Urol Nephrol. 2015 Jul;47(7):1129-34
pubmed: 25982585
Ann Palliat Med. 2017 Apr;6(2):125-142
pubmed: 28249544
Pract Radiat Oncol. 2017 Nov - Dec;7(6):e543-e549
pubmed: 28867545
Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2001 Jul 1;50(3):675-80
pubmed: 11395235
Asia Pac J Clin Oncol. 2012 Sep;8(3):255-9
pubmed: 22897392
Support Care Cancer. 2020 May;28(5):2071-2078
pubmed: 31900613
Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 1980 Feb;6(2):175-81
pubmed: 7390892
CA Cancer J Clin. 2018 Nov;68(6):394-424
pubmed: 30207593
Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol. 2015 Mar;272(3):719-25
pubmed: 24691850
Chin J Cancer. 2017 Jul 14;36(1):56
pubmed: 28705218
Radiother Oncol. 2003 Apr;67(1):69-76
pubmed: 12758242
Chemotherapy. 2016;61(2):65-71
pubmed: 26550834