Matti Aapro

Comprehensive Geriatric Assessment Adds Information to Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group Performance Status in Elderly Cancer Patients: An Italian Group for Geriatric Oncology Study

PURPOSE To appraise the performance of Comprehensive Geriatric Assessment (CGA) in elderly cancer patients (> or = 65 years) and to evaluate whether it could add further information with respect to the Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status (PS). PATIENTS AND METHODS We studied 363 elderly cancer patients (195 males, 168 females; median age, 72 years) with solid (n = 271) or hematologic (n = 92) tumors. In addition to PS, their physical function was assessed by means of the activity of daily living (ADL) and instrumental activities of daily living (IADL) scales. Comorbidities were categorized according to Satarianos index. The association between PS, comorbidity, and the items of the CGA was assessed by means of logistic regression analysis. RESULTS These 363 elderly cancer patients had a good functional and mental status: 74% had a good PS (ie, lower than 2), 86% were ADL-independent, and 52% were IADL-independent. Forty-one percent of patients had one or more comorbid conditions. Of the patients with a good PS, 13.0% had two or more comorbidities; 9.3% and 37.7% had ADL or IADL limitations, respectively. By multivariate analysis, elderly cancer patients who were ADL-dependent or IADL-dependent had a nearly two-fold higher probability of having an elevated Satarianos index than independent patients. A strong association emerged between PS and CGA, with a nearly five-fold increased probability of having a poor PS (ie, > or = 2) recorded in patients dependent for ADL or IADL. CONCLUSION The CGA adds substantial information on the functional assessment of elderly cancer patients, including patients with a good PS. The role of PS as unique marker of functional status needs to be reappraised among elderly cancer patients.

Proposal for classifying the acute emetogenicity of cancer chemotherapy.

PURPOSE To propose a classification of the acute emetogenicity of antineoplastic chemotherapy agents, and to develop an algorithm to define the emetogenicity of combination chemotherapy regimens. METHODS A Medline search was conducted to identify (1) clinical trials that used chemotherapy as single-agent therapy, and (2) major reviews of antiemetic therapy. The search was limited to patients who received commonly used doses of chemotherapy agents, primarily by short (< 3 hours) intravenous infusions. Based on review of this information and our collective clinical experience, we assigned chemotherapy agents to one of five emetogenic levels by consensus. A preliminary algorithm to determine the emetogenicity of combination chemotherapy regimens was then designed by consensus. A final algorithm was developed after we analyzed a data base composed of patients treated on the placebo arms of four randomized antiemetic trials. RESULTS Chemotherapy agents were divided into five levels: level 1 (< 10% of patients experience acute [< or = 24 hours after chemotherapy] emesis without antiemetic prophylaxis); level 2 (10% to 30%); level 3 (30% to 60%); level 4 (60% to 90%); and level 5 (> 90%). For combinations, the emetogenic level was determined by identifying the most emetogenic agent in the combination and then assessing the relative contribution of the other agents. The following rules apply: (1) level 1 agents do not contribute to the emetogenic level of a combination; (2) adding > or = one level 2 agent increases the emetogenicity of the combination by one level greater than the most emetogenic agent in the combination; and (3) adding level 3 or 4 agents increases the emetogenicity of the combination by one level per agent. CONCLUSION The proposed classification schema provides a practical means to determine the emetogenic potential of individual chemotherapy agents and combination regimens during the 24 hours after administration. This system can serve as a framework for the development of antiemetic guidelines.

Management of elderly patients with breast cancer: updated recommendations of the International Society of Geriatric Oncology (SIOG) and European Society of Breast Cancer Specialists (EUSOMA)

As the mean age of the global population increases, breast cancer in older individuals will be increasingly encountered in clinical practice. Management decisions should not be based on age alone. Establishing recommendations for management of older individuals with breast cancer is challenging because of very limited level 1 evidence in this heterogeneous population. In 2007, the International Society of Geriatric Oncology (SIOG) created a task force to provide evidence-based recommendations for the management of breast cancer in elderly individuals. In 2010, a multidisciplinary SIOG and European Society of Breast Cancer Specialists (EUSOMA) task force gathered to expand and update the 2007 recommendations. The recommendations were expanded to include geriatric assessment, competing causes of mortality, ductal carcinoma in situ, drug safety and compliance, patient preferences, barriers to treatment, and male breast cancer. Recommendations were updated for screening, primary endocrine therapy, surgery, radiotherapy, neoadjuvant and adjuvant systemic therapy, and metastatic breast cancer.

Management of breast cancer in elderly individuals: recommendations of the International Society of Geriatric Oncology.

Breast cancer is the most commonly diagnosed cancer and the leading cause of cancer mortality in women worldwide. Elderly individuals make up a large part of the breast cancer population, and there are important specific considerations for this population. The International Society of Geriatric Oncology created a task force to assess the available evidence on breast cancer in elderly individuals, and to provide evidence-based recommendations for the diagnosis and treatment of breast cancer in such individuals. A review of the published work was done with the results of a search on Medline for English-language articles published between 1990 and 2007 and of abstracts from key international conferences. Recommendations are given on the topics of screening, surgery, radiotherapy, (neo)adjuvant hormone treatment and chemotherapy, and metastatic disease. Since large randomised trials in elderly patients with breast cancer are scarce, there is little level I evidence for the treatment of such patients. The available evidence was reviewed and synthesised to provide consensus recommendations regarding the care of breast cancer in older adults.

Practical guidance for the management of aromatase inhibitor-associated bone loss

BACKGROUND Recent studies indicate that women with breast cancer are at increased risk of fracture compared with their age-matched peers. Current treatment guidelines are inadequate for averting fractures in osteopenic women, especially those receiving aromatase inhibitor (AI) therapy. Therefore, we sought to identify clinically relevant risk factors for fracture that can be used to assess overall fracture risk and to provide practical guidance for preventing and treating bone loss in women with breast cancer receiving AI therapy. METHODS Systematic review of pertinent information from published literature and meeting abstracts through December 2007 was carried out to identify factors contributing to fracture risk in women with breast cancer. An evidence-based medicine approach was used to select risk factors that can be used to determine when to initiate bisphosphonate treatment of aromatase inhibitor-associated bone loss (AIBL). RESULTS Fracture risk factors were chosen from large, well-designed, controlled, population-based trials in postmenopausal women. Evidence from multiple prospective clinical trials in women with breast cancer was used to validate AI therapy as a fracture risk factor. Overall, eight fracture risk factors were validated in women with breast cancer: AI therapy, T-score <-1.5, age >65 years, low body mass index (BMI <20 kg/m(2)), family history of hip fracture, personal history of fragility fracture after age 50, oral corticosteroid use >6 months, and smoking. Treatment recommendations were derived from randomized clinical trials. CONCLUSIONS The authors recommend the following for preventing and treating AIBL in women with breast cancer. All patients initiating AI therapy should receive calcium and vitamin D supplements. Any patient initiating or receiving AI therapy with a T-score >/=-2.0 and no additional risk factors should be monitored every 1-2 years for change in risk status and bone mineral density (BMD). Any patient initiating or receiving AI therapy with a T-score <-2.0 should receive bisphosphonate therapy. Any patient initiating or receiving AI therapy with any two of the following risk factors-T-score <-1.5, age >65 years, low BMI (<20 kg/m(2)), family history of hip fracture, personal history of fragility fracture after age 50, oral corticosteroid use >6 months, and smoking-should receive bisphosphonate therapy. BMD should be monitored every 2 years, and treatment should continue for at least 2 years and possibly for as long as AI therapy is continued. To date, the overwhelming majority of clinical evidence supports zoledronic acid 4 mg every 6 months to prevent bone loss in women at high risk. Although there is a trend towards fewer fractures with zoledronic acid, studies completed to date have not been designed to capture significant differences in fracture rate, and longer follow-up is needed.

Anticipatory nausea and vomiting

A commonly reported consequence of post-treatment nausea or vomiting is the development of anticipatory nausea and vomiting (ANV). In most published work, nausea is reported to occur before chemotherapy drugs are administered by approximately 20% of patients at any one chemotherapy cycle and by 25–30% of patients by their fourth chemotherapy cycle. Most studies in adult patients strongly support the view that the development of ANV involves elements of classical conditioning. The best method to avoid development of ANV is to adequately prevent both vomiting and nausea from the first exposure to chemotherapy. If anticipatory side effects develop, behavioral treatment techniques, such as systematic desensitization, have been shown effective. Benzodiazepines used in combination with behavioral techniques or antiemetics may also be useful. The evidence on which these conclusions are based is reviewed in this article.

Treatment of advanced non-small-cell lung cancer in the elderly: results of an international expert panel.

The best treatment for elderly patients with advanced non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) is still debated. To guide clinical management of these patients and suggest the priorities for clinical research in this field, an International Expert Panel met in Naples, Italy, on April 19 to 20, 2004. Results and conclusions based on a review of evidence available in the literature to date are presented in this article. A comprehensive geriatric assessment is recommended to better define prognosis and to predict tolerance to treatment. In the first randomized study dedicated to elderly NSCLC patients, single-agent vinorelbine showed superiority over supportive care alone, both in terms of survival and quality of life. In a large randomized trial, gemcitabine plus vinorelbine failed to show any advantage over either agent alone. Subset analyses suggest that the efficacy of platinum-based combination chemotherapy is similar in fit older and younger patients, with an acceptable increase in toxicity for elderly patients. These data should be interpreted cautiously because retrospective subgroup analyses are encumbered by selection bias; hence, randomized trials dedicated to platinum-based chemotherapy for nonselected elderly patients are warranted. Several promising biologic therapies are under investigation; however, with present data, target-based agents as first-line treatment for elderly NSCLC patients are not yet recommended. Clinical research, with trials specifically designed for elderly patients, is mandatory. With the current evidence, single-agent chemotherapy with a third-generation drug (vinorelbine, gemcitabine, a taxane) should be the recommended option for nonselected elderly patients with advanced NSCLC. Platinum-based chemotherapy is a viable option for fit patients with adequate organ function. Best supportive care remains important, in addition to chemotherapy or as the exclusive option for patients who are unsuitable for more aggressive treatment.

EORTC Cancer in the Elderly Task Force guidelines for the use of colony-stimulating factors in elderly patients with cancer.

Increasing age is not, in itself, a contraindication to cancer chemotherapy. Myelosuppression, however, a common adverse consequence of the administration of many standard-dose chemotherapy regimens to both young and elderly patients with cancer, increases with age. The risk of development of febrile neutropenia may contribute to a reluctance to administer chemotherapy in the elderly patient population. We conducted a detailed literature search (1992-2002) to derive evidence-based conclusions on the value of prophylactic colony-stimulating factor (CSF) administration in elderly patients receiving chemotherapy. Sufficient evidence allows us to affirm that prophylactic granulocyte colony-stimulating factor (G-CSF) reduces the incidence of chemotherapy-induced neutropenia, febrile neutropenia and infections in elderly patients receiving myelotoxic chemotherapy for non-Hodgkins lymphoma (NHL), small-cell lung cancer (SCLC) or urothelial tumours. Lack of available trial data does not allow similar conclusions to be drawn for other cancers studied, but it is likely that similar benefits would accrue from the use of prophylactic G-CSF. There is insufficient evidence to extend this recommendation to include the use of granulocyte-macrophage colony-stimulating factor (GM-CSF). There are insufficient data available to allow the evaluation of the impact of prophylactic CSF on the incidence of toxic deaths in elderly patients with cancer and this is a crucial question for geriatric oncology practice. There is no evidence in elderly patients that the delivery of standard-dose chemotherapy on schedule improves efficacy measures. The data show that febrile neutropenic events are more likely to occur during the first and second cycles of chemotherapy, thus prophylactic measures should be considered early in the course of treatment. Furthermore, since systematic dose reduction can impact on outcome, primary prophylactic use of G-CSF for all elderly patients receiving curative myelotoxic chemotherapy (cyclophosphamide, doxorubicin, vincristine and prednisolone (CHOP) or CHOP-like) is indicated and we suggest a risk-adapted strategy with primary prophylactic G-CSF administration in high-risk patients. Dose intensification, through dose interval reduction, facilitated by prophylactic G-CSF, improved survival in elderly patients with some specific diseases. There is a need for further well-designed studies to identify the elderly patients who will benefit most from prophylactic G-CSF. To achieve this, we strongly urge the design of and participation in further trials.

Bone health in cancer patients: ESMO Clinical Practice Guidelines

There are three distinct areas of cancer management that make bone health in cancer patients of increasing clinical importance. First, bone metastases are common in many solid tumours, notably those arising from the breast, prostate and lung, as well as multiple myeloma, and may cause major morbidity including fractures, severe pain, nerve compression and hypercalcaemia. Through optimum multidisciplinary management of patients with bone metastases, including the use of bone-targeted treatments such as potent bisphosphonates or denosumab, it has been possible to transform the course of advanced cancer for many patients resulting in a major reduction in skeletal complications, reduced bone pain and improved quality of life. Secondly, many of the treatments we use to treat cancer patients have effects on reproductive hormones, which are critical for the maintenance of normal bone remodelling. This endocrine disturbance results in accelerated bone loss and an increased risk of osteoporosis and fractures that can have a significant negative impact on the lives of the rapidly expanding number of long-term cancer survivors. Finally, the bone marrow micro-environment is also intimately involved in the metastatic processes required for cancer dissemination, and there are emerging data showing that, at least in some clinical situations, the use of bone-targeted treatments can reduce metastasis to bone and has potential impact on patient survival.

September 2007 Update on EORTC Guidelines and Anemia Management with Erythropoiesis-Stimulating Agents

Anemia is frequently experienced by cancer patients receiving chemotherapy and can negatively impact the patients prognosis. Blood transfusions, iron supplementation (in absolute or functionally iron-deficient anemias), and erythropoiesis-stimulating agents (ESAs) are among the treatment options for anemia. Treatment options for anemia management should be selected based on the best benefit-to-risk ratio for each individual patient. In September 2007, the working party of the European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) updated their guidelines on the use of ESAs, which are summarized in this paper. ESAs reduce the number of transfusions required and significantly improve quality of life in patients with chemotherapy-induced anemia. A sustained hemoglobin level of about 12 g/dl should be the target for treatment with ESAs. ESAs should be used according to the EORTC guidelines and within label with carefully considered exceptions.