ABSTRACT
PURPOSE: This study aimed at describing the feasibility and oncological outcomes of standard cisplatin-based neoadjuvant chemotherapy (C-NAC) for muscle-invasive bladder cancer (MIBC) in patients aged ≥ 75 and assess the impact of baseline geriatric parameters. METHODS: This retrospective study included patients with stage cT2-4NanyM0 MIBC aged 75 and older treated with ≥ 1 cycle of C-NAC from 2011 to 2021 at a high-volume academic center. Primary outcome was overall survival (OS). Secondary outcomes were chemotherapy feasibility (administration of ≥ 4 cycles), safety, and pathological downstaging. RESULTS: Fifty-six patients were included. Median age was 79 (range 75-90). C-NAC regimen was ddMVAC in 41 patients and GC in 15. Seventy-three percent of patients received ≥ 4 cycles of C-NAC. Grade ≥ 3 toxicity was observed in 55% of patients. The febrile neutropenia rate was 7%. Thirty patients underwent cystectomy, and 13 underwent chemoradiotherapy. Three-year OS was 63%. Geriatric parameters polypharmacy, undernutrition, and age-adjusted Charlson comorbidity index ≥ 8 predicted worse OS. CONCLUSION: Standard-of-care C-NAC and local treatments are feasible in selected elderly MIBC patients, with efficacy and safety findings similar to that observed in pivotal trials with younger patients. The prognostic impact of geriatric parameters underlines the need for specialized evaluation before treatment initiation.
Subject(s)
Urinary Bladder Neoplasms , Aged , Humans , Retrospective Studies , Urinary Bladder Neoplasms/drug therapy , Urinary Bladder Neoplasms/surgery , Cisplatin/therapeutic use , Prognosis , Neoadjuvant Therapy , Chemotherapy, Adjuvant , Cystectomy , Muscles , Neoplasm InvasivenessABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: In older patients with cancer, depression is difficult to assess because of its heterogeneous clinical expression. The 4-item version of the Geriatric Depression Scale (GDS-4) is quick and easy to administer but has not been validated in this population. The present study was designed to test the diagnostic performance of the GDS-4 in a French cohort of older patients with cancer before treatment. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Our cross-sectional analysis of data from the Elderly Cancer Patient cohort covered all patients with cancer aged ≥70 years and referred for geriatric assessment at two centers in France between 2007 and 2018. The GDS-4's psychometric properties were evaluated against three different measures of depression: the geriatrician's clinical diagnosis (based on a semistructured interview), the 4th edition of the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, and a cluster analysis. The scale's sensitivity, specificity, positive and negative likelihood ratios, and area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUROC) were calculated. RESULTS: In a sample of 2,293 patients (median age, 81 years; women, 46%), the GDS-4's sensitivity and specificity for detecting physician-diagnosed depression were, respectively, 90% and 89%. The positive and negative likelihood ratios were 8.2 and 0.11, and the AUROC was 92%. When considering the subset of patients with data on all measures of depression, the sensitivity and specificity values were, respectively, ≥90% and ≥72%, the positive and negative likelihood ratios were, respectively, ≥3.4 and ≤ 0.11, and the AUROC was ≥91%. CONCLUSION: The GDS-4 appears to be a clinically relevant, easy-to-use tool for routine depression screening in older patients with cancer. IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE: Considering the overlap between symptoms of cancer and symptoms of depression, depression is particularly difficult to assess in older geriatric oncology and is associated with poor outcomes; there is a need for a routine psychological screening. Self-report instruments like the 4-item version of the Geriatric Depression Scale appears to be a clinically relevant, easy-to-use tool for routine depression screening in older patients with cancer. Asking four questions might enable physicians to screen older patients with cancer for depression and then guide them toward further clinical evaluation and appropriate care if required.
Subject(s)
Depression , Neoplasms , Aged , Aged, 80 and over , Cohort Studies , Cross-Sectional Studies , Depression/diagnosis , Early Detection of Cancer , Female , France/epidemiology , Geriatric Assessment , Humans , Mass Screening , Neoplasms/complications , Neoplasms/diagnosis , Psychiatric Status Rating Scales , Sensitivity and SpecificityABSTRACT
INTRODUCTION: Depression symptoms, frequently diagnosed in older patients with cancer, impacts on oncological treatment feasibility. The Francophone Society of Geriatric Oncology (SOFOG) has initiated a systematic review on depression treatment in older patients with cancer, to advocate guidelines. DATA SOURCES: Medline via PubMed, Embase, CENTRAL. METHODS: We included randomized and non-randomized controlled trials, reviews and meta-analysis, retrospective and prospective cohort studies, qualitative studies, and guidelines published between January 2013 and December 2018 that involved depression with cancer in which the entire sample or a sub-group aged 65 and above. Efficacy and tolerance of depression treatment were examined, as a primary or secondary outcome, among articles published in French or English. RESULTS: Of 3171 references, only seven studies met our eligibility criteria. This systematic review reveals a lack of evidence-based knowledge in this field, preventing from making any recommendations on drug and non-drug therapies. It has highlighted the need for multidisciplinary collaboration with the French and Francophone Society of Psycho-Oncology. CONCLUSION: In clinical practice, we advise health professionals to use the screening process not as a result but rather as an opportunity to engage with the patient and also to question the need for antidepressants and non-drug therapies.
Subject(s)
Depression/etiology , Depression/therapy , Depressive Disorder, Major/etiology , Depressive Disorder, Major/therapy , Neoplasms/psychology , Age Factors , Aged , Antidepressive Agents/therapeutic use , Depression/diagnosis , Depressive Disorder, Major/diagnosis , Humans , Meta-Analysis as Topic , Prospective Studies , Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic , Retrospective StudiesABSTRACT
Older cancer patients have an elevated risk of sarcopenia. The aim was to estimate the prevalence of four criteria for sarcopenia case finding, assessment, diagnosis, and severity determination: abnormal strength, assistance with walking, rising from a chair, climbing stairs, and falls (SARC-F), low hand-grip strength (HGS), low arm circumference (AC, a muscle mass proxy), and low physical performance (PP). Sarcopenia (low HGS and AC) and severe sarcopenia (low HGS, AC, and PP) and their predictive values for 6-month mortality were estimated in the whole population and by metastatic status. We analyzed data from the NutriAgeCancer French nationwide study of cancer patients aged ≥70 referred for geriatric assessment before anti-cancer treatment. We performed Cox proportional hazards analysis for each criterion separately and all criteria combined. Overall, 781 patients from 41 geriatric oncology clinics were included (mean age: 83.1; females: 53%; main cancer types: digestive (29%) and breast (17%); metastases: 42%). The prevalence of abnormal SARC-F, low HGS, a low AC, low PP, sarcopenia, and severe sarcopenia were, respectively, 35.5%, 44.6%, 44.7%, 35.2%, 24.5%, and 11.7%. An abnormal SARC-F and/or low HGS, sarcopenia, and severe sarcopenia were associated with 6-month mortality in patients with metastases (adjusted hazard ratios [95% confidence interval]: 2.72 [1.34-5.49], 3.16 [1.48-6.75] and 6.41 [2.5-16.5], respectively). Sarcopenia was strongly predictive of 6-month mortality in patients with metastatic cancer.
Subject(s)
Neoplasms , Sarcopenia , Aged , Female , Humans , Aged, 80 and over , Sarcopenia/epidemiology , Sarcopenia/diagnosis , Prospective Studies , Prevalence , Surveys and Questionnaires , Hand Strength/physiology , Geriatric Assessment , Neoplasms/complicationsABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: There is limited information describing the characteristics and outcomes of hospitalized older patients with confirmed coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). METHOD: We conducted a multicentric retrospective cohort study in 13 acute COVID-19 geriatric wards, from March 13 to April 15, 2020, in Paris area. All consecutive patients aged 70 years and older, with confirmed COVID-19, were enrolled. RESULTS: Of the 821 patients included in the study, the mean (SD) age was 86 (7) years; 58% were female; 85% had ≥2 comorbidities; 29% lived in an institution; and the median [interquartile range] Activities of Daily Living scale (ADL) score was 4 [2-6]. The most common symptoms at COVID-19 onset were asthenia (63%), fever (55%), dyspnea (45%), dry cough (45%), and delirium (25%). The in-hospital mortality was 31% (95% confidence interval [CI] 27-33). On multivariate analysis, at COVID-19 onset, the probability of in-hospital mortality was increased with male gender (odds ratio [OR] 1.85; 95% CI 1.30-2.63), ADL score <4 (OR 1.84; 95% CI 1.25-2.70), asthenia (OR 1.59; 95% CI 1.08-2.32), quick Sequential Organ Failure Assessment score ≥2 (OR 2.63; 95% CI 1.64-4.22), and specific COVID-19 anomalies on chest computerized tomography (OR 2.60; 95% CI 1.07-6.46). CONCLUSIONS: This study provides new information about older patients with COVID-19 who are hospitalized. A quick bedside evaluation at admission of sex, functional status, systolic arterial pressure, consciousness, respiratory rate, and asthenia can identify older patients at risk of unfavorable outcomes.
Subject(s)
COVID-19/therapy , Geriatric Assessment , Hospitalization , Outcome Assessment, Health Care , Pneumonia, Viral/therapy , Aged , Aged, 80 and over , COVID-19/epidemiology , COVID-19/mortality , Female , Hospital Mortality , Humans , Male , Pandemics , Paris/epidemiology , Pneumonia, Viral/epidemiology , Pneumonia, Viral/mortality , Pneumonia, Viral/virology , Retrospective Studies , SARS-CoV-2ABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: The impact of aging on the effectiveness of immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) remains controversial, and little is known on the subject in adults aged ≥ 75 years. OBJECTIVE: The objective of this comprehensive meta-analysis was to assess the efficacy of ICIs in patients aged ≥ 75 years. METHODS: We performed a meta-analysis of published randomized controlled trials concerning ICIs (as monotherapy or in combination) versus standard therapy in patients with advanced solid tumors between January 2010 and January 2020. We compared overall survival between older (aged ≥ 75 years) and younger (< 75 years) patients. Hazard ratios (HRs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were collected and pooled. The secondary endpoint focused on the impact of the use of ICIs in first- and second-line settings. RESULTS: In total, 15 phase III studies evaluating anti-programmed cell death 1 (anti-PD-1) (nivolumab or pembrolizumab), anti-programmed cell death ligand 1 (anti-PD-L1) (atezolizumab or avelumab), or anti-cytotoxic T lymphocyte antigen 4 (anti-CTLA-4) (ipilimumab) therapies were included. Enrolled patients had non-small-cell lung cancer, renal cell carcinoma, melanoma, head and neck squamous cell carcinoma, or gastric cancer. Eight studies assessed treatment in the first-line setting and seven in the second-line setting. The median age was 64 years, with 906 patients aged ≥ 75 years (552 in first line, 354 in second line) and 8741 were aged < 75 years (4992 in first line, 3749 in second line). In the first-line setting, HRs for death were 0.78 (95% CI 0.61-0.99) in patients aged ≥ 75 years versus 0.84 (95% CI 0.71-1.00) in those aged < 75 years. In the second-line setting, HRs for death were 1.02 (95% CI 0.77-1.36) in patients aged ≥ 75 years versus 0.68 (95% CI 0.61-0.75) in those aged < 75 years, with a statistically significant difference observed between subgroups (p = 0.009 for interaction). CONCLUSIONS: ICIs appear to be effective in patients aged ≥ 75 years. However, the survival benefit is mainly observed in first-line treatment and remains unclear in the second-line setting.
Subject(s)
Antibodies, Monoclonal/therapeutic use , Antineoplastic Combined Chemotherapy Protocols/therapeutic use , Immune Checkpoint Inhibitors/therapeutic use , Neoplasms/drug therapy , Aged , Antibodies, Monoclonal/administration & dosage , Antineoplastic Combined Chemotherapy Protocols/administration & dosage , B7-H1 Antigen/antagonists & inhibitors , CTLA-4 Antigen/antagonists & inhibitors , Female , Humans , Immune Checkpoint Inhibitors/administration & dosage , Male , Neoplasms/immunology , Neoplasms/mortality , Programmed Cell Death 1 Receptor/antagonists & inhibitors , Proportional Hazards Models , Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic , Survival Analysis , Treatment OutcomeABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Results from large randomized controlled trials combining docetaxel, abiraterone, celecoxib, or bisphosphonates with androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) in hormone-sensitive prostate cancer have emerged. However, in our knowledge, few data are available in patients older than 70 years. Therefore, we undertook a meta-analysis of all published phase III studies. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We performed a PubMed search using the keywords: "hormone sensitive prostate cancer," "phase III studies," "docetaxel," "abiraterone," "celecoxib," and "bisphosphonates." We also screened American Society of Clinical Oncology and European Society for Medical Oncology proceedings. Combination therapies were compared with ADT alone. The efficacy outcomes 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. A hazard ratio of less than 1.00 favored the combination group. RESULTS: This meta-analysis included 8 studies: 3 assessed docetaxel (CHAARTED, STAMPEDE arm E and C), 2 others assessed abiraterone (LATITUDE and STAMPEDE arm G); 2 others assessed celecoxib (STAMPEDE arm D and F), and the last one assessed zoledronic acid alone (STAMPEDE arm B). Our meta-analysis included 2264 patients (86% with metastases). Concerning age, we chose a cutoff of 70 years, corresponding to the available data for each study. The performance index was 0 to 1 for about 90% of patients. Overall, in patients > 70 years old, the addition of docetaxel statistically improved PFS (HR, 0.51; 95% CI, 0.42-0.61) but not OS (HR, 0.86; 95% CI, 0.69-1.07). The addition of abiraterone to ADT also statistically improved PFS (HR, 0.49; 95% CI, 0.37-0.64) but not OS (HR, 0.85; 95% CI, 0.67-1.08), as well as the addition of celecoxib (HR, 0.67; 95% CI, 0.53-0.85 and HR, 0.95; 95% CI, 0.73-1.25, respectively). The addition of zoledronic acid did not improve PFS or OS (HR, 0.78; 95% CI, 0.61-1.00 and HR, 0.99; 95% CI, 0.71-1.38, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: The addition of docetaxel, abiraterone, or celecoxib to ADT significantly increased PFS in older men with hormone-sensitive advanced prostate cancer. However, the benefit in OS is not statistically significant. Further studies are needed to define the best first-line strategy in this subgroup.
Subject(s)
Androgen Antagonists/therapeutic use , Antineoplastic Agents/therapeutic use , Antineoplastic Combined Chemotherapy Protocols/therapeutic use , Prostatic Neoplasms/drug therapy , Age Factors , Aged , Aged, 80 and over , Androstenes/therapeutic use , Celecoxib/therapeutic use , Clinical Trials, Phase III as Topic , Disease-Free Survival , Docetaxel/therapeutic use , Humans , Male , Survival Analysis , Treatment Outcome , Zoledronic Acid/therapeutic useABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: The G8 screening tool has been developed to identify older cancer patients requiring a geriatric assessment for tailoring therapy. Little is known about its prognostic value, particularly by tumour site. An optimised version has been recently developed, but no prognostic information is available. We compared the prognostic value of both instruments overall and by tumour site. METHODS: Data were from a prospective cohort of cancer patients ≥70 years old referred to 1 of 6 French geriatric oncology clinics between 2007 and 2014 (n = 1333). Endpoints were overall 1- and 3-year survival. Cox proportional-hazards models were built to assess the predictive value of abnormal G8 and modified-G8 scores, based on published cut-offs or by classes of increasing risk. Sensitivity analyses involved adjusting for age, gender, treatment, metastasis, and tumour site (digestive, breast, urinary tract, prostate, other solid cancers, and haematological malignancies) and stratifying by tumour site and metastatic status. RESULTS: Abnormal scores were independently associated with overall 1-year survival: adjusted hazard ratio [aHR] = 4.3[G8]/4.9[modified-G8] and 3-year survival: aHR = 2.9/2.6; all p <0.0001. Associations persisted after stratifying by metastatic status and in most cancer sites (exceptions: colorectal (G8) and upper digestive cancer (both tools) [1-year analysis]; digestive cancers (both tools) [3-year analysis]). For both tools, classes of increasing risk showed a graded relationship with mortality (p < 0.0001). CONCLUSIONS: Our results identified both abnormal G8 and modified-G8 scores as strong and consistent predictors of overall survival, regardless of metastatic status or tumour site. These findings strengthen the clinical utility of these instruments in the geriatric oncology setting.
Subject(s)
Geriatric Assessment/methods , Neoplasms/mortality , Aged , Aged, 80 and over , Female , Health Status , Humans , Male , Neoplasms/complications , Predictive Value of Tests , Prognosis , Proportional Hazards Models , Prospective StudiesABSTRACT
In developed countries, the population is getting older and the prevention of infectious diseases is therefore a major public health issue for elderly. Infectious diseases preventable by vaccination, including influenza, pneumococcal infection, pertussis, herpes zoster infections, and to a lesser extent, diphtheria and poliomyelitis, are direct or indirect causes of hospitalization. Few data are available on the proportion of vaccinated elderly, the impact of the under nutrition, or immunosenescence on the quality of the immune response to vaccination and the level of protection. The infectious diseases preventable by vaccination are considered in this article, and the epidemic risk related to infectious diseases in older adults living in community, the specific vaccine recommendations, the vaccines available in France, the vaccine coverage of elderly, factors interfering with vaccine response, and future prospects in this area.