Can Comprehensive Geriatric Assessment Predict Tolerance of Radiotherapy for Localized Prostate Cancer in Men Aged 75 Years or Older?

Curative radiotherapy for prostate cancer is common in the elderly. However, concerns about potential toxicity have inhibited access to radiotherapy for this population, for whom preserving quality of life (QoL) is crucial. The primary endpoint was to identify predictors of impaired QoL in men aged 75 years or older treated with curative intent radiotherapy with or without androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) for localized prostate cancer. We prospectively performed comprehensive geriatric assessment (CGA) and administered QoL questionnaires to 208 elderly (>75 years) patients prior to, plus two and six months after, radiotherapy (NCT02876237). The median age of the patients was 77 years (range 75-89). At the start of the study, comorbidities were highlighted in 65% of patients: 23% were depressed, 23% had cognitive impairment, and 16% had reduced independence. At six months, 9% of patients had a consistently decreased QoL (>20 points), and a further 16% had a more moderate reduction (10 to 20 points) in QoL. None of the parameters studied (tumor characteristic, treatment, or oncogeriatric parameters) were predictive of a reduced QoL following radiotherapy. Though co-existing geriatric impairment was common, QoL was maintained for 75% of patients six months after radiotherapy. CGA was poorly predictive of tolerance of prostatic radiotherapy. Geriatric assessments dedicated to quality of life following radiotherapy need to be developed.

Comprehensive Geriatric Assessment and quality of life after localized prostate cancer radiotherapy in elderly patients.

INTRODUCTION: Radiotherapy can diminish quality of life (QoL) for prostate cancer patients. Our objective was to evaluate the effect of radiotherapy on QoL in men aged 75 years or older treated with radiotherapy for a localized prostate cancer, and to identify predictors of reduced QoL. PATIENTS AND METHODS: We prospectively administered a battery of geriatric (MNA, GDS, Get up and Go Test, CIRS-G, ADL, IADL, MMSE), toxicity (IPSS; IIEF 5), and QoL (QLQ C30) screening tests in 100 elderly patients before and two months after prostate cancer radiotherapy (NCT 02876237). Patients ≥ 75 years undergoing radiotherapy with a curative intent for localized prostate cancer with or without androgen deprivation therapy (ADL) were eligible for study inclusion. Correlations between patient-assessed QoL and tumor characteristics, radiotherapy treatment or CGA parameters were sought using the Fisher or the Mann and Whitney tests. Changes in QoL parameters over time were analyzed using the Wilcoxon signed-rank test. RESULTS: At study entry, scores for IADL impairments were present in 51%, reduced autonomy in activities of daily living in 16%, cognitive impairment found in 20%, depression-related symptoms in 31%, and 66% of patients had significant co-morbidities. Eight percent were judged to be at risk of fall and 2% were found to be undernourished. Severely impaired (IPSS ≥ 20) urinary function was observed in 11.2% and 13.5% of patients before and two months after completion of radiotherapy respectively. Significantly decreased QoL (> 20 points) at two months after treatment was found in 13% of patients and a moderate but clinically relevant reduction (10 to 20 points) in 17% of patients. No tumor characteristic, treatment, or oncogeriatric parameter was predictive of reduced QoL following prostate cancer radiotherapy. CONCLUSION: Despite sometimes markedly diminished oncogeriatric parameters, prostate cancer radiotherapy was generally well tolerated in these elderly patients. We found no predictive factor to determine which patients would experience impaired quality of life following radiotherapy.

How to improve the prevention of chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting? The French NAVI study.

PURPOSE: Chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting (CINV) still remain frequent. The procedure for announcing the diagnosis (PAD) was an emblematic measure of the first French Plan Cancer aiming at providing patients with time to listen, information after cancer diagnosis, and discussion on treatments and their side effects. We aimed at assessing the risk factors of CINV, focusing on patients' satisfaction with the PAD. METHODS: This prospective multicentre study assessed the frequency and intensity of CINV among chemonaïve patients during the first cycle of treatment. CINV was defined by ≥1 emetic episode or reported nausea intensity ≥3 on a 0-10 scale. Multivariate analysis was used to identify factors related to global CINV onset including satisfaction with the PAD (satisfaction score ≥the median on a 0-10 scale). RESULTS: Data from 291 patients (women, 85.2%; mean age, 57 years) were analyzed. Most patients (69.4%) received highly emetogenic chemotherapy regimens and 77.7% received antiemetic drugs consistent with international guidelines. Acute, delayed and overall CINV were experienced by 40.4, 34.8 and 52.4% of patients, respectively. Sixty-seven per cent of patients were satisfied with the PAD. No relation was noted between PAD satisfaction and CINV onset. The nausea and vomiting dimension of the QLQ-C30 questionnaire before chemotherapy (OR 3.62), motion sickness history (OR 2.73), highly emetogenic CT (OR 2.73), anxiety (OR 1.99) and younger age (OR 1.96) were independent predictive factors. CONCLUSIONS: Although patients were mostly satisfied with the PAD, half of them experienced CINV. A state of anxiety could be identified during the PAD to be managed.

Phase II study of preoperative radiation plus concurrent daily tegafur-uracil (UFT) with leucovorin for locally advanced rectal cancer.

BACKGROUND: Considerable variation in intravenous 5-fluorouracil (5-FU) metabolism can occur due to the wide range of dihydropyrimidine dehydrogenase (DPD) enzyme activity, which can affect both tolerability and efficacy. The oral fluoropyrimidine tegafur-uracil (UFT) is an effective, well-tolerated and convenient alternative to intravenous 5-FU. We undertook this study in patients with locally advanced rectal cancer to evaluate the efficacy and tolerability of UFT with leucovorin (LV) and preoperative radiotherapy and to evaluate the utility and limitations of multicenter staging using pre- and post-chemoradiotherapy ultrasound. We also performed a validated pretherapy assessment of DPD activity and assessed its potential influence on the tolerability of UFT treatment. METHODS: This phase II study assessed preoperative UFT with LV and radiotherapy in 85 patients with locally advanced T3 rectal cancer. Patients with potentially resectable tumors received UFT (300 mg/m/2/day), LV (75 mg/day), and pelvic radiotherapy (1.8 Gy/day, 45 Gy total) 5 days/week for 5 weeks then surgery 4-6 weeks later. The primary endpoints included tumor downstaging and the pathologic complete response (pCR) rate. RESULTS: Most adverse events were mild to moderate in nature. Preoperative grade 3/4 adverse events included diarrhea (n = 18, 21%) and nausea/vomiting (n = 5, 6%). Two patients heterozygous for dihydropyrimidine dehydrogenase gene (DPYD) experienced early grade 4 neutropenia (variant IVS14+1G > A) and diarrhea (variant 2846A > T). Pretreatment ultrasound TNM staging was compared with postchemoradiotherapy pathology TN staging and a significant shift towards earlier TNM stages was observed (p < 0.001). The overall downstaging rate was 42% for primary tumors and 44% for lymph nodes. The pCR rate was 8%. The sensitivity and specificity of ultrasound for staging was poor. Anal sphincter function was preserved in 55 patients (65%). Overall and recurrence-free survival at 3 years was 86.1% and 66.7%, respectively. Adjuvant chemotherapy was administered to 36 node-positive patients (mean duration 118 days). CONCLUSION: Preoperative chemoradiotherapy using UFT with LV plus radiotherapy was well tolerated and effective and represents a convenient alternative to 5-FU-based chemoradiotherapy for the treatment of resectable rectal cancer. Pretreatment detection of DPD deficiency should be performed to avoid severe adverse events.

Chemotherapy plus involved-field radiation in early-stage Hodgkin's disease.

BACKGROUND: Treatment of early-stage Hodgkin's disease is usually tailored in line with prognostic factors that allow for reductions in the amount of chemotherapy and extent of radiotherapy required for a possible cure. METHODS: From 1993 to 1999, we identified 1538 patients (age, 15 to 70 years) who had untreated stage I or II supradiaphragmatic Hodgkin's disease with favorable prognostic features (the H8-F trial) or unfavorable features (the H8-U trial). In the H8-F trial, we compared three cycles of mechlorethamine, vincristine, procarbazine, and prednisone (MOPP) combined with doxorubicin, bleomycin, and vinblastine (ABV) plus involved-field radiotherapy with subtotal nodal radiotherapy alone (reference group). In the H8-U trial, we compared three regimens: six cycles of MOPP-ABV plus involved-field radiotherapy (reference group), four cycles of MOPP-ABV plus involved-field radiotherapy, and four cycles of MOPP-ABV plus subtotal nodal radiotherapy. RESULTS: The median follow-up was 92 months. In the H8-F trial, the estimated 5-year event-free survival rate was significantly higher after three cycles of MOPP-ABV plus involved-field radiotherapy than after subtotal nodal radiotherapy alone (98% vs. 74%, P<0.001). The 10-year overall survival estimates were 97% and 92%, respectively (P=0.001). In the H8-U trial, the estimated 5-year event-free survival rates were similar in the three treatment groups: 84% after six cycles of MOPP-ABV plus involved-field radiotherapy, 88% after four cycles of MOPP-ABV plus involved-field radiotherapy, and 87% after four cycles of MOPP-ABV plus subtotal nodal radiotherapy. The 10-year overall survival estimates were 88%, 85%, and 84%, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Chemotherapy plus involved-field radiotherapy should be the standard treatment for Hodgkin's disease with favorable prognostic features. In patients with unfavorable features, four courses of chemotherapy plus involved-field radiotherapy should be the standard treatment. (ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00379041 [ClinicalTrials.gov].).

Preoperative treatment combining capecitabine with radiation therapy in rectal cancer: a GERCOR Phase II Study.

OBJECTIVE(S): To assess efficacy and tolerability of preoperative capecitabine chemoradiation in rectal cancer. METHODS: Patients received radiotherapy 45 Gy in 25 fractions over 5 weeks and capecitabine 825 mg/m(2) twice daily throughout radiotherapy. Surgery was performed 5-7 weeks after radiotherapy. The primary endpoint was pathological complete response, secondary endpoints were downstaging and tolerability. RESULTS: Fifty-one patients were enrolled in a phase II study, median age 62 years (range 35-78). Sixty-three percent of tumours involved the lower third of the rectum, 45% were fixed. The median delivered radiotherapy dose was 44.8 Gy (range 39.6-45.0 Gy) over 33-49 days. The treatment-related grade 3 adverse events were diarrhoea (12%), skin reactions (8%) and asthenia (8%), with no grade 4 toxicity. Fifty patients underwent surgery (29 conservative) and 1 patient refused. The pathological complete response rate was 20% and a further 10% of patients had minimal residual disease. Additional tumour downstaging was seen in 28% of patients and the sphincter preservation rate was 58%. CONCLUSIONS: Preoperative capecitabine chemoradiation is well tolerated and its efficacy supports further exploration, both as a single agent and as part of new therapeutic strategies.

Impact of radiation schedule and chemotherapy duration in definitive chemoradiotherapy regimen for esophageal cancer.

UNLABELLED: Impact of radiotherapy (RT) schedule on local response and duration of the 5-fluorouracil/cisplatin (5 FU/CDDP) chemotherapy (CT) on m are still questioning in chemoradiotherapy (CRT) regimen in esophageal carcinoma. AIM: Evaluate two RT schedules and two different CT durations by a retrospective comparison of the CRT regimens used by two centres between 1994 and 2000. METHODS: In centre I (regimen I), patients received 2 CT concomitantly to a continuous RT (50 Gy/25 fractions/5 weeks). In centre II (regimen II), patients received 6 CT, 3 were concomitant to a split course RT (20 Gy/10 fractions x 3 courses) and 3 CT were delivered after CRT. RESULTS: A total of 129 patients were included, 74 in centre I and 55 in centre II respectively. Main patient characteristics were similar between the two groups. Clinical complete response to CRT was significantly more frequent in regimen I (83.8% vs 65.4%; P=0.02). The median overall survival (OS) was 20 months in regimen I and 22 months in regimen II (NS). During follow-up, responder patients to CRT in regimen II experienced significant fewer metastasis (51.6% vs 27.8%; P=0.03) with a trend to an increased 5-year survival (19.4% vs 11.3%) and OS (26.5 vs 21.0 months) (NS). Grade 3-4 toxicities were not different. CONCLUSION: Clinical complete response to CRT was significantly more frequent with a continuous RT whereas additional CT after CRT significantly reduced metastasis occurrence. CRT regimen in esophageal carcinoma may be more effective using a continuous RT schedule and additional CT courses after CRT completion.