Real world data on adjuvant treatment of older HER2-positive breast cancer patients - A single institution experience through 8 years

Efficacy and safety of adjuvant therapies in older patients with breast cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis of real-world data

BACKGROUND

Insufficient data available for older patients with breast cancer complicates decision-making regarding optimal treatment. A systematic review that uses real-world data is required for assessing the effectiveness and potential adverse effects of various therapies for this age group of patients.

METHODS

Databases of PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane Library were searched. We included clinical studies that evaluated various treatments for geriatric breast cancer, including adjuvant radiation therapy, hypofractionated radiation therapy (hypo-RT) and accelerated and partial breast irradiation (APBI), endocrine therapy, chemotherapy, and targeted therapy.

RESULTS

A total of 71 studies were retrieved. Adjuvant radiation therapy significantly improved overall survival (OS) compared with no radiation [hazard ratio (HR) = 0.60, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.54-0.67]. The pooled estimates of OS for hypo-RT and APBI demonstrated no inferiority compared with conventional radiation. Both endocrine treatment (HR = 0.63, 95% CI 0.43-0.92) and chemotherapy (HR = 0.76, 95% CI 0.65-0.88) significantly increased OS compared with no treatment. Trastuzumab monotherapy significantly enhanced OS compared with no trastuzumab use (HR = 0.23, 95% CI 0.07-0.73).

CONCLUSION

Despite concerns about potential complications during treatment in older patients, proactive therapies significantly increase their survival rates. For patients who are frailer, hypo-RT and APBI offer survival rates comparable to traditional modalities. Additionally, targeted therapy as a monotherapy holds promise as a viable option for patients with HER2-positive breast cancer who cannot undergo chemotherapy. Therefore, by conducting thorough general assessments and clinical evaluations, the side effects of postoperative treatments can be effectively managed.

Frequency of use and characterization of frailty assessments in observational studies on older women with breast cancer: a systematic review

BACKGROUND

Breast cancer and frailty frequently co-occur in older women, and frailty status has been shown to predict negative health outcomes. However, the extent to which frailty assessments are utilized in observational research for the older breast cancer population is uncertain. Therefore, the aim of this review was to determine the frequency of use of frailty assessments in studies investigating survival or mortality, and characterize them, concentrating on literature from the past 5 years (2017-2022).

METHODS

MEDLINE, EMBASE and Cochrane Library were systematically queried to identify observational studies (case-control, cohort, cross-sectional) published from 2017-2022 that focus on older females (≥ 65 years) diagnosed with breast cancer, and which evaluate survival or mortality outcomes. Independent reviewers assessed the studies for eligibility using Covidence software. Extracted data included characteristics of each study as well as information on study design, study population, frailty assessments, and related health status assessments. Risk of bias was evaluated using the appropriate JBI tool. Information was cleaned, classified, and tabulated into review level summaries.

RESULTS

In total, 9823 studies were screened for inclusion. One-hundred and thirty studies were included in the final synthesis. Only 11 (8.5%) of these studies made use of a frailty assessment, of which 4 (3.1%) quantified frailty levels in their study population, at baseline. Characterization of frailty assessments demonstrated that there is a large variation in terms of frailty definitions and resulting patient classification (i.e., fit, pre-frail, frail). In the four studies that quantified frailty, the percentage of individuals classified as pre-frail and frail ranged from 18% to 29% and 0.7% to 21%, respectively. Identified frailty assessments included the Balducci score, the Geriatric 8 tool, the Adapted Searle Deficits Accumulation Frailty index, the Faurot Frailty index, and the Mian Deficits of Accumulation Frailty Index, among others. The Charlson Comorbidity Index was the most used alternative health status assessment, employed in 56.9% of all 130 studies. Surprisingly, 31.5% of all studies did not make use of any health status assessments.

CONCLUSION

Few observational studies examining mortality or survival outcomes in older women with breast cancer incorporate frailty assessments. Additionally, there is significant variation in definitions of frailty and classification of patients. While comorbidity assessments were more frequently included, the pivotal role of frailty for patient-centered decision-making in clinical practice, especially regarding treatment effectiveness and tolerance, necessitates more deliberate attention. Addressing this oversight more explicitly could enhance our ability to interpret observational research in older cancer patients.