[COSA 80: Oncologic surgery in the elderly patients]. / COSA 80 : chirurgie oncologique du sujet âgé de plus de 80 ans.

INTRODUCTION: Due to longer life expectancy, an increasing number of older people are at risk of developing cancer. Surgical resection of a non-metastatic and resectable digestive tumor remains the main therapeutic weapon. The objective of our study is to assess the possibility of curative oncological surgery in patients over 80years of age, to study its impact in terms of morbidity and mortality, and to look for risk factors for the occurrence of complications. PATIENTS AND METHODS: The study-included patients aged 80 and over operated on for digestive cancer in a curative situation. This was a multicenter prospective cohort study. A total of 230 patients were included in the study. In addition to demographic and medical data, the patients all benefited from an onco-geriatric assessment with the performance of various tests: WHO score, G8 score, IADL score, ADL score, mobility score, nutritional assessment, clock, thymic evaluation (Mini-GDS). Data collection of geriatric scores was repeated 3months postoperatively. RESULTS: Of a total of 230 patients, 51% were male and 49% female. The average age was 84.7years. Tumor localization was mainly colorectal (65.81%). Age had no influence on the mortality rate, with a mean age with no significant difference in the event of an unfavorable outcome or not (84.6 vs. 85years). The results at the different scores were then analyzed in search of a significant difference between preoperative and at 3months. The only significant difference found was in the number of patients with a WHO status of 0 (P=0.021). CONCLUSION: Our study shows that curative oncological surgery is possible in elderly patients without any adverse effect on their quality of life and level of postoperative autonomy. The multidisciplinary geriatric approach to the patient must make it possible to distinguish the patients who will benefit from a curative treatment and those in whom the benefit-risk balance is unfavorable.

How did we take care of our older cancer patients during the first COVID-19 wave? The French experience.

BACKGROUND: The management of older cancer patients has been highly challenging for clinicians in a health-care system operating at maximum capacity during the COVID-19 pandemic. PATIENTS AND METHODS: We analyzed data from 9 different institutions. The primary endpoint was to assess the prevalence of adapted patient care during the pandemic for elderly cancer patients. The secondary endpoint was to assess the incidence of hospitalization and mortality due to COVID-19. All patients were older than 65years of age. RESULTS: We analyzed data from 332 outpatients' case files between 9th of March and 30th of April 2020. The median age was 75years (range: 65-101) and 53% were male. Because of the COVID-19 pandemic, more than half of the outpatients received modified patient care, defined as postponement or cancellation of surgery, irradiation scheme adapted, systemic treatment or the use of telemedicine. Among patients with localized cancer, 60% had a change in management strategy due to the pandemic. Changes in management strategy were made for 53% of patients at the metastatic stage. GCSF was used , in 83% of patients, increasing considerably in the context of the pandemic. Sixty-nine percent of physicians used telemedicine. In the final analysis, only one patient was hospitalized for COVID-19 infection. No deaths due to COVID-19 were reported in elderly cancer patients during this time period. CONCLUSION: Our study is the first to assess modification of patient care in elderly cancer outpatients during an epidemic. With this unprecedented crisis, our objective is to protect our patients from infection via protective barrier measures and social distancing, but also to guarantee the continuity of cancer care without overexposing this fragile population. Physicians were able to adapt their practice and used new forms of management, like telemedicine.

[New therapies in oncogeriatrics]. / Nouvelles thérapeutiques en oncogériatrie.

Cancer management is changing rapidly. Changes in practices are not all transferable to the elderly population, which is heterogeneous. The description of the intrinsic toxicity of anti-cancer treatments is insufficient in the elderly. Recent studies dedicated to the elderly incorporate composite evaluation criteria combining efficacy and toxicity with a broad definition including, among other things, loss of functional autonomy. These new data acquired, as well as new organisations integrating the new profession of advanced practice nurse in oncogeriatrics will enable us to better respond to the challenge of caring for elderly patients in the future.

Evaluation of medical practices in oncology in the context of the COVID-19 pandemic in France: Physicians' point of view: the PRATICOVID study.

The cancer population seems to be more susceptible to COVID-19 infection and have worse outcomes. We had to adapt our medical practice to protect our patients without compromising their cancer prognosis. The national PRATICOVID study aims to describe the adaptation of cancer patient care for this population. We analyzed data from nine different institutions. The primary endpoint was to assess the prevalence of adapted patient care during the pandemic. The secondary endpoints were to describe the point of view of clinicians and patients during and after the pandemic. We analyzed 435 medical procedures between 9th of March and 30th of April. Because of the COVID-19 pandemic, 47.6% of the outpatients received modified patient care. Twenty-four percent of scheduled surgeries were postponed, or were performed without perioperative chemotherapy, 18.4% followed a hypofractioned schedule, and 57% had an adaptive systemic protocol (stopped, oral protocol, and spacing between treatments). Seventy percent of physicians used telemedicine. During this period, 67% of the physicians did not feel distressed taking care of their patients. However, 70% of physicians are worried about the aftermath of the lockdown, as regards future patient care. The PRATICOVID study is the first to assess modification of patient care in cancer outpatients during an epidemic. With this unprecedented crisis, physicians were able to adapt their practice in order to protect their patients against the virus while ensuring continuity of patient care. But physicians are worried about the aftereffects of the lockdown specifically in regard to care pathway issues.

Impact of the addition of bevacizumab, oxaliplatin, or irinotecan to fluoropyrimidin in the first-line treatment of metastatic colorectal cancer in elderly patients.

INTRODUCTION: The clinical benefit of double-front-line therapy (including oxaliplatin or irinotecan or bevacizumab plus 5-fluorouracil (5FU) or capecitabine) compared to monotherapy (5FU or capecitabine) in elderly (> 70 years) patients with metastatic colorectal cancer (MCRC) is controversial. We performed a meta-analysis of published randomized studies. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The selection of the studies was carried out using PubMed with the following keywords: "metastatic colorectal cancer," "elderly," "oxaliplatin," "irinotecan," "bevacizumab," "survival." The efficacy endpoints were overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS). Hazard ratios (HRs) with their 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were collected from the studies and pooled. By convention, an HR < 1 was a result in favor of biotherapy. RESULTS: This meta-analysis (MA) included ten studies: three assessing irinotecan (FFCD 2001-02, CAIRO, and an already published MA by Folprecht), three assessing oxaliplatin (FOCUS2, FFCD 2000-05, and a published study by De Gramont), and four assessing bevacizumab (PRODIGE-20, AVEX, AGITG-MAX, and "AVF2192g" by Kabbinavar). Our MA included 1652 patients (62% of men). Concerning age, we chose a cut-off of 70 years or a cut-off of 75 years, corresponding to the available data for each study. The performance index (PS) was 0-1 for about 90% of patients, with the exception of FFCD 2001-02 and FOCUS2 which included 30% of patients with PS2. Overall, the addition of bevacizumab to fluoropyrimidin statistically improves both OS and PFS (HR = 0.78; CI 0.63-0.96 and HR = 0.55; CI 0.44-0.67, respectively). The addition of oxaliplatin did not statistically improve OS (= 0.99; CI 0.85-1.17) but improves PFS (HR = 0.81; CI 0.67-0.97) as well as the addition of irinotecan (HR = 1.01; CI 0.84-1.22 and HR = 0.82; CI 0.68-1.00, respectively). CONCLUSION: In previously untreated elderly patients with MCRC, the addition of bevacizumab to fluoropyrimidin appears more effective in terms of OS or PFS than the addition of oxaliplatin or irinotecan.

[FRancilian Oncogeriatric Group (FROG)'s focus on management of elderly patients with bladder cancer]. / Mise au point du FRancilian Oncogeriatric Group (FROG) pour la prise en charge du cancer de vessie du sujet âgé

Bladder cancer is diagnosed more often in the elderly. The most effective treatment strategies are mostly very aggressive and are not applicable to all patients in a very heterogeneous population. However, effective options exist to treat the most vulnerable subjects. A multidisciplinary approach including a geriatric assessment is essential for optimal adaptation of treatment. The FRancilian Oncogeriatric Group (FROG) conducted a comprehensive literature search in order to review the applicable therapeutic options according to oncological and geriatric settings. International recommendations are essential to harmonize the management of elderly patients with bladder cancer.