1
|
Simsek C, Esin E, Yalcin S. Metronomic Chemotherapy: A Systematic Review of the Literature and Clinical Experience. JOURNAL OF ONCOLOGY 2019; 2019:5483791. [PMID: 31015835 PMCID: PMC6446118 DOI: 10.1155/2019/5483791] [Citation(s) in RCA: 78] [Impact Index Per Article: 15.6] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/27/2018] [Revised: 12/24/2018] [Accepted: 02/05/2019] [Indexed: 02/07/2023]
Abstract
Metronomic chemotherapy, continuous and dose-dense administration of chemotherapeutic drugs with lowered doses, is being evaluated for substituting, augmenting, or appending conventional maximum tolerated dose regimens, with preclinical and clinical studies for the past few decades. To date, the principle mechanisms of its action include impeding tumoral angiogenesis and modulation of hosts' immune system, affecting directly tumor cells, their progenitors, and neighboring stromal cells. Its better toxicity profile, lower cost, and easier use are main advantages over conventional therapies. The evidence of metronomic chemotherapy for personalized medicine is growing, starting with unfit elderly patients and also for palliative treatment. The literature reviewed in this article mainly demonstrates that metronomic chemotherapy is advantageous for selected patients and for certain types of malignancies, which make it a promising therapeutic approach for filling in the gaps. More clinical studies are needed to establish a solidified role for metronomic chemotherapy with other treatment models in modern cancer management.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Cem Simsek
- Department of Internal Medicine, Hacettepe University, Ankara, Turkey
| | - Ece Esin
- Department of Medical Oncology, A.Y. Ankara Training Hospital, Ankara, Turkey
| | - Suayib Yalcin
- Department of Medical Oncology, Hacettepe University, Ankara, Turkey
| |
Collapse
|
2
|
Puts MTE, Hardt J, Monette J, Girre V, Springall E, Alibhai SMH. Use of geriatric assessment for older adults in the oncology setting: a systematic review. J Natl Cancer Inst 2012; 104:1133-63. [PMID: 22851269 PMCID: PMC3413614 DOI: 10.1093/jnci/djs285] [Citation(s) in RCA: 240] [Impact Index Per Article: 20.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 12/11/2011] [Revised: 05/14/2012] [Accepted: 05/17/2012] [Indexed: 01/23/2023] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND Geriatric assessment is a multidisciplinary diagnostic process that evaluates the older adult's medical, psychological, social, and functional capacity. No systematic review of the use of geriatric assessment in oncology has been conducted. The goals of this systematic review were: 1) to provide an overview of all geriatric assessment instruments used in the oncology setting; 2) to examine the feasibility and psychometric properties of those instruments; and 3) to systematically evaluate the effectiveness of geriatric assessment in predicting or modifying outcomes (including the impact on treatment decision making, toxicity of treatment, and mortality). METHODS We searched Medline, Embase, Psychinfo, Cinahl, and the Cochrane Library for articles published in English, French, Dutch, or German between January 1, 1996, and November 16, 2010, reporting on cross-sectional, longitudinal, interventional, or observational studies that assessed the feasibility or effectiveness of geriatric assessment instruments. The quality of articles was evaluated using relevant quality assessment frameworks. RESULTS We identified 83 articles that reported on 73 studies. The quality of most studies was poor to moderate. Eleven studies examined psychometric properties or diagnostic accuracy of the geriatric assessment instruments used. The assessment generally took 10-45 min. Geriatric assessment was most often completed to describe a patient's health and functional status. Specific domains of geriatric assessment were associated with treatment toxicity in 6 of 9 studies and with mortality in 8 of 16 studies. Of the four studies that examined the impact of geriatric assessment on the cancer treatment decision, two found that geriatric assessment impacted 40%-50% of treatment decisions. CONCLUSION Geriatric assessment in the oncology setting is feasible, and some domains are associated with adverse outcomes. However, there is limited evidence that geriatric assessment impacted treatment decision making. Further research examining the effectiveness of geriatric assessment on treatment decisions and outcomes is needed.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- M T E Puts
- Lawrence S. Bloomberg Faculty of Nursing, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada.
| | | | | | | | | | | |
Collapse
|
3
|
New chemotherapy strategies and biological agents in the treatment of childhood ependymoma. Childs Nerv Syst 2009; 25:1275-82. [PMID: 19212772 PMCID: PMC2738756 DOI: 10.1007/s00381-009-0809-7] [Citation(s) in RCA: 27] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 12/10/2008] [Indexed: 02/05/2023]
Abstract
INTRODUCTION With the limited role of current treatment regimens and potential associated side effects of radiation in young children with ependymoma, considerable effort is being focused on new chemotherapeutic strategies and biologic agents. DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSION Identification of those molecular changes underlying the development of ependymoma may, in time, lead to the development of not only novel therapeutic agents, but also specific patient-tailored therapies directed against known cell-signaling pathways.
Collapse
|
4
|
Owonikoko TK, Ragin CC, Belani CP, Oton AB, Gooding WE, Taioli E, Ramalingam SS. Lung Cancer in Elderly Patients: An Analysis of the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results Database. J Clin Oncol 2007; 25:5570-7. [DOI: 10.1200/jco.2007.12.5435] [Citation(s) in RCA: 420] [Impact Index Per Article: 24.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/20/2022] Open
Abstract
Purpose To study the burden and outcome of lung cancer in the elderly, particularly for patients aged 80 years and older. Patients and Methods The national Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results database was analyzed for lung cancer outcomes during the period 1988 to 2003. A comparison was carried out between patients with lung cancer 80 years and older, 70 to 79 years, and younger than 70 years for demographics; stage distribution; 5-year relative survival; and survival based on histology, sex, race, stage, and treatment. The temporal trends in survival during the years 1988 to 1997 and 1998 to 2003 were also analyzed. Results Of 316,682 patients eligible for the analysis, 45,912 (14%) were 80 years or older (ie, very elderly); 103,963 (33%) were 70 to 79 years; and 166,807 (53%) were younger than 70 years. The distribution by stage and histology was comparable for all the three groups. Overall survival rate at 5 years was lower in the very elderly (7.4% v 12.3% v 15.5%; P < .0001) across sex, histologic subtypes, stages, and racial categories. Patients aged 80 years or older were less likely to receive local therapy (no surgery or radiation) than younger patients (47% v 28% and 19% for the age subgroups ≥ 80 years, 70 to 79 years, and < 70 years, respectively). Overall outcomes for patients who underwent surgical therapy or radiation were comparable across the three age groups. In general, survival outcomes for the subgroup aged 70 to 79 years were similar to those of the subgroup aged 80 years and older who received single modality local therapy. Conclusion Patients 80 years or older account for 14% (70 years or older accounted for 47%) of all lung cancers, are less likely to be subjected to surgery or radiation, and have inferior outcomes when compared with younger patients.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Taofeek K. Owonikoko
- From the Division of Hematology/Oncology, Department of Medicine, University of Pittsburgh; the Department of Epidemiology Graduate School of Public Health and the Division of Cancer Prevention and Population Science, University of Pittsburgh Cancer Institute; the Department of Biostatistics, University of Pittsburgh and University of Pittsburgh Cancer Institute, Pittsburgh, PA
| | - Camille C. Ragin
- From the Division of Hematology/Oncology, Department of Medicine, University of Pittsburgh; the Department of Epidemiology Graduate School of Public Health and the Division of Cancer Prevention and Population Science, University of Pittsburgh Cancer Institute; the Department of Biostatistics, University of Pittsburgh and University of Pittsburgh Cancer Institute, Pittsburgh, PA
| | - Chandra P. Belani
- From the Division of Hematology/Oncology, Department of Medicine, University of Pittsburgh; the Department of Epidemiology Graduate School of Public Health and the Division of Cancer Prevention and Population Science, University of Pittsburgh Cancer Institute; the Department of Biostatistics, University of Pittsburgh and University of Pittsburgh Cancer Institute, Pittsburgh, PA
| | - Ana B. Oton
- From the Division of Hematology/Oncology, Department of Medicine, University of Pittsburgh; the Department of Epidemiology Graduate School of Public Health and the Division of Cancer Prevention and Population Science, University of Pittsburgh Cancer Institute; the Department of Biostatistics, University of Pittsburgh and University of Pittsburgh Cancer Institute, Pittsburgh, PA
| | - William E. Gooding
- From the Division of Hematology/Oncology, Department of Medicine, University of Pittsburgh; the Department of Epidemiology Graduate School of Public Health and the Division of Cancer Prevention and Population Science, University of Pittsburgh Cancer Institute; the Department of Biostatistics, University of Pittsburgh and University of Pittsburgh Cancer Institute, Pittsburgh, PA
| | - Emanuela Taioli
- From the Division of Hematology/Oncology, Department of Medicine, University of Pittsburgh; the Department of Epidemiology Graduate School of Public Health and the Division of Cancer Prevention and Population Science, University of Pittsburgh Cancer Institute; the Department of Biostatistics, University of Pittsburgh and University of Pittsburgh Cancer Institute, Pittsburgh, PA
| | - Suresh S. Ramalingam
- From the Division of Hematology/Oncology, Department of Medicine, University of Pittsburgh; the Department of Epidemiology Graduate School of Public Health and the Division of Cancer Prevention and Population Science, University of Pittsburgh Cancer Institute; the Department of Biostatistics, University of Pittsburgh and University of Pittsburgh Cancer Institute, Pittsburgh, PA
| |
Collapse
|