Feasibility of initial treatment in elderly patients with ovarian cancer in Japan: a retrospective study

Disparities in treatment modalities and survival among older patients with high-grade serous ovarian cancer

BACKGROUND

Undertreatment of ovarian cancer is common among older women. We aimed to evaluate the treatment modalities offered to older patients and their impact on overall survival (OS).

METHODS

The study identified 5,055 patients with high-grade serous ovarian cancer and 3584 patients with advanced stage (IIIC + IV) disease from the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) database from January 1, 2010, to December 31, 2017. We performed comparisons of OS and ovarian cancer-specific survival (OCSS) across age groups using a Cox proportional hazards model.

RESULTS

Very elderly patients (≥ 75 years old) received treatment with significantly less surgical complexity, such as no lymphadenectomy (59.7% vs. 48.6%; p < 0.001) and a lower rate of optimal debulking surgery (44.0% vs. 52.7%; p < 0.001), as well as lower rates of chemotherapy (78.2% vs. 89.4%; P<0.001) and standard treatment (70.6% vs. 85%; p < 0.001). High proportions of both very elderly and elderly patients received neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NACT), with no significant difference (38.7% vs. 36.2%; P = 0.212). Patients aged ≥ 75 years had significantly worse OS and OCSS.

CONCLUSION

With increasing age, the survival rate of women with ovarian cancer decreases significantly. Noticeably fewer ovarian cancer patients aged over 75 years receive standard treatments, and more very elderly patients are treated with NACT.

Surgical Treatment Outcomes of Gynecologic Cancer in Older Patients: A Retrospective Study

This study aimed to evaluate oncologic characteristics and surgical outcomes in older patients with gynecologic cancers. This retrospective study included patients aged ≥65 years who were diagnosed with gynecologic cancers and underwent surgical treatment between 2005 and 2020. We reviewed the medical records for age at diagnosis, body mass index, American Society of Anesthesiologists score, comorbidities, postoperative complications, cancer stage, histologic type, surgical treatment, postoperative outcome, and survival rate. Data were compared between groups according to the age at the time of diagnosis: <75 years (young-old) and ≥75 years (old-old). In total, 131 patients were identified: 53 (40.5%) with ovarian or primary peritoneal cancer (OC), 44 (33.6%) with endometrial cancer (EC), 30 (22.9%) with cervical cancer, and 4 (3.1%) with leiomyosarcoma. The patients' mean age was 70 (range, 65-83) years; 106 (80.9%) were young-old and 25 (19.1%) were old-old. Postoperative complications occurred in 19 (14.5%) patients. Four patients died within six months after surgery, and three died because of disease progression. There was no difference in the survival rates between the two groups among those with OC and EC. Older patients with gynecologic cancers showed good surgical outcomes and tolerable postoperative complications. Therefore, we can safely offer surgical treatment to older patients.

Is increased chronological age a contraindication to debulking surgery for elderly patients with advanced ovarian cancer?

We collected data of elderly patients aged 65 years and older who underwent debulking surgery for advanced ovarian cancer in order to explore the impact of old age on surgical outcomes and complications. A total of 120 patients were classified as follows: group 1, 65-69 years (n = 58); group 2, 70-74 years (n = 38); group 3, 75-79 years (n = 17); group 4, ≥80 years (n = 7). There were no differences in most of the characteristics, surgical extent and outcomes, and postoperative complications between the four groups, whereas polypharmacy was more common (6 vs. 5-16; p=.02) and operation time was shorter (median, 194 vs. 285-330 min; p=.02) in group 4. Factors related to frailty rather than age, polypharmacy, preoperative albumin level, estimated blood loss and transfusion increased the risk of postoperative complications. Thus, the impact of old age on surgical extent, outcomes and postoperative complications may be minimal in elderly patients with advanced ovarian cancer. Impact StatementWhat is already known on this subject? Optimal debulking surgery is a significant factor in improving the prognosis of ovarian cancer but it is not easy to perform such radical surgery on elderly patients in fear of increasing surgical morbidity and mortality. Some studies suggest that underlying comorbidities may be a stronger contributing factor to increasing such risk rather than old age although there is not enough evidence yet.What do the results of this study add? Through this study, we could see that increased age is not the determining cause of increased morbidity and mortality in elderly patients who undergo optimal debulking surgery in ovarian cancer. There are other aspects describing a patient's health status that can predict prognosis better rather than age.What are the implications of these findings for clinical practice and/or further research? Old age need not be a contraindication when performing optimal debulking surgery in elderly patients with advanced ovarian cancer.

Current treatment status of older patients with gynecological cancers

The percentage of older patients with gynecological malignancies has recently been on the rise. Although prospective studies focusing on the treatment of older patients have been conducted for ovarian cancer, mainly in Europe, there have been scarce literature on cervical and endometrial cancers, and information on their treatment is currently lacking. One of the characteristics of older patients is that not only their performance status but also other factors, such as physical, mental and social factors, cause a large variability, and individual differences in their response to treatments. One of the major issues in the treatment of older patients is how to objectively measure these individual differences and link them to the appropriate treatment selection. In this review, clinical evidence for the guided treatment of older patients with gynecological cancer will be reviewed.

Relative Dose Intensity of Chemotherapy and Survival in Patients with Advanced Stage Solid Tumor Cancer: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

BACKGROUND

Chemotherapy-induced toxicities lead to therapy dose reduction or delay, affecting patient outcomes. This systematic review and meta-analysis evaluated the impact of relative dose intensity (RDI) on survival in adult patients with solid tumor cancer on nonadjuvant-based chemotherapy regimens.

METHODS

PubMed, Embase, and Web of Science databases were searched for peer-reviewed English journal articles or congress abstracts evaluating association between RDI and survival; observational studies, case series of ≥20 patients, and clinical trials published between 2013 and 2020 were eligible. Meta-analyses were conducted to quantify the association between RDI levels and overall survival (OS) among studies reporting a hazard ratio (HR) for OS by similar tumor types, regimens, and RDI. Forest plots represented summary HR and 95% confidence interval (CI); Cochran's Q and I2 tests evaluated study heterogeneity.

RESULTS

Overall, 919 articles were reviewed and 22 included; seven were eligible for meta-analysis. Significantly shorter OS at RDI <80% versus ≥80% and <85% versus ≥85% was observed upon meta-analysis of four carboplatin-based studies for breast, non-small cell lung, or ovarian cancer (HR 1.17; 95% CI: 1.07-1.27) and three FOLFOX-, FOLFIRI-, or FOLFIRINOX-based studies for colorectal or pancreatic cancer (HR 1.39; 95% CI: 1.03-1.89). Grade 3 or higher hematologic toxicities were higher for carboplatin-based regimens (thrombocytopenia: 14%-22%; anemia: 15%-19%; neutropenia: 24%-58%) than FOLFOX-, FOLFIRI-, or FOLFIRINOX-based regimens (thrombocytopenia: 1%-4%; anemia: 5%-19%; neutropenia: 19%-47%).

CONCLUSION

The results suggested longer OS with RDI ≥80% or ≥85% for both regimens, indicating that management of toxicities across treatment modalities may contribute to maintenance of higher RDI and benefit survival for patients with advanced solid tumors.

IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE

Chemotherapy-induced toxicities lead to dose reduction and/or treatment delay, thus affecting patient outcomes. Results of this systematic review and meta-analysis, evaluating the impact of relative dose intensity (RDI) on survival of patients with solid tumors on nonadjuvant-based chemotherapy regimens, demonstrate a longer overall survival with RDI levels of at least 80% for patients with solid tumors on carboplatin-based and FOLFOX-, FOLFIRI-, or FOLFIRINOX-based chemotherapy regimens, suggesting a protective effect of maintaining RDI ≥80% or ≥ -85%. Although grade 3 or higher hematologic toxicities occurred more in carboplatin-based studies, managing toxicities across treatment regimens may contribute to maintenance of higher RDI and ultimately benefit overall survival.

Comparing Paclitaxel-Carboplatin with Paclitaxel-Cisplatin as the Front-Line Chemotherapy for Patients with FIGO IIIC Serous-Type Tubo-Ovarian Cancer

The use of weekly chemotherapy for the treatment of patients with advanced-stage serous-type epithelial Tubo-ovarian cancer (ETOC), and primary peritoneal serous carcinoma (PPSC) is acceptable as the front-line postoperative chemotherapy after primary cytoreductive surgery (PCS). The main component of dose-dense chemotherapy is weekly paclitaxel (80 mg/m²), but it would be interesting to know what is the difference between combination of triweekly cisplatin (20 mg/m²) or triweekly carboplatin (carboplatin area under the curve 5-7 mg/mL per min [AUC 5-7]) in the dose-dense paclitaxel regimen. Therefore, we compared the outcomes of women with Gynecology and Obstetrics (FIGO) stage IIIC ETOC and PPSC treated with PCS and a subsequent combination of dose-dense weekly paclitaxel and triweekly cisplatin (paclitaxel–cisplatin) or triweekly carboplatin using AUC 5 (paclitaxel–carboplatin). Between January 2010 and December 2016, 40 women with International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics (FIGO) stage IIIC EOC, FTC, or PPSC were enrolled, including 18 treated with paclitaxel–cisplatin and the remaining 22 treated with paclitaxel–carboplatin. There were no statistically significant differences in disease characteristics of patients between two groups. Outcomes in paclitaxel–cisplatin group seemed to be little better than those in paclitaxel–carboplatin (median progression-free survival [PFS] 30 versus 25 months as well as median overall survival [OS] 58.5 versus 55.0 months); however, neither reached a statistically significant difference. In terms of adverse events (AEs), patients in paclitaxel–carboplatin group had more AEs, with a higher risk of neutropenia and grade 3/4 neutropenia, and the need for a longer period to complete the front-line chemotherapy, and the latter was associated with worse outcome for patients. We found that a period between the first-time chemotherapy to the last dose (6 cycles) of chemotherapy >21 weeks was associated with a worse prognosis in patients compared to that ≤21 weeks, with hazard ratio (HR) of 81.24 for PFS and 9.57 for OS. As predicted, suboptimal debulking surgery (>1 cm) also contributed to a worse outcome than optimal debulking surgery (≤1 cm) with HR of 14.38 for PFS and 11.83 for OS. Based on the aforementioned findings, both regimens were feasible and effective, but maximal efforts should be made to achieve optimal debulking surgery and following the on-schedule administration of dose-dense weekly paclitaxel plus triweekly platinum compounds. Randomized trials validating the findings are warranted.