ABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Data regarding characteristics, safety and survival outcomes of patients aged 80 or older treated with immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICI) in routine oncology practice are limited. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We retrospectively collected data of patients aged 80 and older with advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) or melanoma treated with anti-PD1, anti-PD-L1 or anti-CTLA-4 regardless of the treatment line, in 14 institutions, between January 2014 and June 2017. Progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) were estimated with the Kaplan Meier method. Toxicity was assessed according to CTCAE 5.0. Multivariate analyses were performed with the Cox model. RESULTS: Eighty-two patients were included (36 with NSCLC, 45 with melanoma). Their median age was 82 years (range 80-93). Nivolumab and pembrolizumab were mainly used. In the NSCLC group, median PFS and OS were 2.3 months (95%CI 1.8-6.1) and 8.8 months (95%CI 5.5-18.1), respectively. In the melanoma group, median PFS and OS were 10.2 months (95%CI 4.5-20.0) and 24.5 months (95%CI 14.1-NR), respectively. The albumin level was found to be independently associated with a better OS in both groups. Grade 3-4 toxicities occurred in 15 patients (18.5%). One patient died from ICI-induced pulmonary toxicity. CONCLUSION: Our study findings suggest that treatment with ICI in elderly patients with NSCLC and melanoma has a risk-benefit ratio that supports its use. However, we report in this cohort that one in five patients has a grade 3-4 IRAEs leading to treatment discontinuation. Geriatric assessment prior to initiation of therapy and during therapy should be routine in patients aged 80 years and older.
Subject(s)
Carcinoma, Non-Small-Cell Lung , Lung Neoplasms , Melanoma , Aged, 80 and over , Humans , Immune Checkpoint Inhibitors/adverse effects , Retrospective StudiesABSTRACT
The treatment landscape in metastatic renal cell carcinoma has changed fundamentally over the last decade by the development of antiangiogenic agents, mammalian target of rapamycin inhibitors and immunotherapy. Outside of the context of a clinical trial, the treatments are used sequentially. We describe results under real-life conditions of a sequential treatment strategy, before the era of immunotherapy. All patients were treated according to their prognostic score (either Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center or International Metastatic Renal Cell Carcinoma Database Consortium) for advanced renal cell carcinoma. A treatment strategy involving 1 to 4 lines was determined including a rechallenge criterion for the repeat use of a treatment class. Three hundred forty-four patients were included over 3 years. Overall survival was 57 months in patients with good or intermediate prognosis and 19 months in patients with poor prognosis. In the former group, the proportions of patients treated with 2 to 4 treatment lines were 70%, 38% and 16%, respectively. The best objective response rates for lines 1 to 4 were 46%, 36%, 16% and 17%, respectively. Grade III/IV toxicity did not appear to be cumulative. The recommended strategy was followed in 68% of patients. A large proportion of patients with good or intermediate prognosis who progress after two lines of treatment still have a performance status good enough to receive a systemic treatment, which justifies such a strategy. Overall survival of patients with good and intermediate prognosis was long, suggesting a benefit from the applied approach. These results might be used as selection criterion for the treatment of patients in the era of immune checkpoint inhibitors.
Subject(s)
Angiogenesis Inhibitors/therapeutic use , Antineoplastic Combined Chemotherapy Protocols/therapeutic use , Carcinoma, Renal Cell/drug therapy , Kidney Neoplasms/drug therapy , Protein Kinase Inhibitors/therapeutic use , Adult , Aged , Aged, 80 and over , Bevacizumab/therapeutic use , Carcinoma, Renal Cell/mortality , Everolimus/therapeutic use , Female , France/epidemiology , Humans , Kidney Neoplasms/mortality , Male , Middle Aged , Molecular Targeted Therapy/adverse effects , Molecular Targeted Therapy/methods , Patient Selection , Prognosis , Prospective Studies , Risk Factors , Survival Analysis , Time FactorsABSTRACT
INTRODUCTION: The Cancer Observatory, from the OMEDITs (Observatory for Medicines and Medical Devices and Treatment Innovations) of Bretagne and Pays de la Loire areas has conducted a survey aiming to know and map the current practices of management of patients by Oral Anti-cancer Drug (OAD) in inter-region. METHODS: Forty eight cancer centers received by e-mail in July and October 2016 a questionnaire concerning the management of OADs : from prescription by the specialist of oncology, to the intervention of the pharmacist (analysis and pharmaceutical consulting), to follow-up by nurse, as well as the financing of this activity and the feelings of the actors about this organizational set up. RESULTS: Fifty-seven professionals from 31 centers, including the most important ones, responded to the survey. As a result, half of the establishments carry out a pharmaceutical analysis for some or all of the OAD prescriptions and only 30% carry out a pharmaceutical consulting. The nurse consultation is, on the other hand, more largely implanted (74% of the centers) as well as the telephone follow-up (6%). More than 90% of professionals believe that the organizational set up could be improved and more secure by, at least, the stronger involvement of pharmacists, the development of tools for nurse (for monitoring, therapeutic education ) and by improving the city-hospital link. CONCLUSION: This survey shows the variability in the management of patients under OAD because of the lack of resources to ensure the fairness and sustainability of the organizational set up. The hospital/city link could still be optimized to secure patient care.
