Implications for determining the optimal treatment for locally advanced rectal cancer in elderly patients aged 75 years and older

Evaluation of treatment outcomes and tolerability in older patients with rectal cancer treated with radiotherapy accompanied by the G-8 geriatric score: TROD13-003 multicenter study

INTRODUCTION

The choice of treatment for rectal cancer often differs in older and younger patients, with the rate of radiotherapy use lower among older adults. In our daily practice, when evaluating a frail older patient with rectal cancer, we usually choose to give less treatment. This may be due to concern that the patient will not be able to tolerate radiotherapy. The Geriatric 8 score (G8GS) is a guide to evaluating treatment tolerability as it relates to frailty in older adults with cancer. The aim of this study was to evaluate treatment outcomes and tolerability in older patients with rectal cancer treated with radiotherapy (RT) accompanied by G8GS.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Patients aged 65 and older with stage I-III rectal adenocarcinoma who were treated with RT and had a G8 evaluation were included in this multicenter retrospective study. Prognostic factors related to G8GS were calculated using Chi-square and logistic regression tests and survival rates were calculated by the Kaplan-Meier test using the SPSS v24.0 software. All p-values ≤0.05 were considered statistically significant.

RESULTS

A total of 699 patients from 16 national institutions were evaluated. The median age was 72 years (range 65-96), and the median follow-up was 43 (range 1-190) months. Four hundred and fifty patients (64%) were categorized as frail with G8GS ≤14 points. Frail patients had higher ages (p = 0.001) and more comorbidities (p = 0.001). Ability to receive concomitant and/or adjuvant chemotherapy rates were significantly higher in fit patients (p = 0.002 and p = 0.001, respectively). No significant difference was observed in terms of grade 3-4 early and late toxicity for both groups. Cancer-related death was higher (p = 0.003), and 5- and 8-year survival rates were significantly lower (p = 0.001), in the frail group. Age and being frail were significantly associated with survival.

DISCUSSION

Radiotherapy is a tolerable and effective treatment option for older adults with rectal cancer even with low G8GS. Being in the frail group according to G8GS and having multiple comorbidities was negatively associated with survival. Addressing the medical needs of frail patients through a comprehensive geriatric assessment prior to radiotherapy may improve G8GS, allowing for standard treatment and increased survival rates.

Association of age with outcomes in locally advanced rectal cancer treated with neoadjuvant therapy followed by surgery

INTRODUCTION

We aimed to assess the association of age with outcomes in patients with Locally Advanced Rectal Cancer (LARC) who received neoadjuvant therapy followed by major surgery.

METHODS

Retrospective review of 328 patients with LARC, N = 99 < 70 years (younger) versus N = 229 ≥ 70 years (elderly) from 2004 to 2018.

RESULTS

Elderly patients had a higher American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) score, Charlson Comorbidity Index (CCI), length of stay and 30-day readmissions (p < 0.05). They also had worse overall survival (OS) & disease-free survival (DFS) (p < 0.001), but similar disease-specific survival (DSS) compared to younger group. Age was not associated with hazard of death (HR 1.01, 0.98-1.03). Rather, CCI (HR 1.29, 1.01-1.5), extramural vascular invasion (HR 4.98, 2.84-8.74), and adjuvant therapy (0.37, 0.21-0.64) were significantly associated with the hazard of death; when controlled for stage, tumor distance from anal verge, and neoadjuvant completion.

CONCLUSION

Comorbidities and lower rates of adjuvant therapy, and not chronologic age, are associated with poor OS of elderly patients with LARC treated with neoadjuvant therapy and major surgery.

Geriatric Radiation Oncology: What We Know and What Can We Do Better?

Elderly patients represent a growing subgroup of cancer patients for whom the role of radiation therapy is poorly defined. Older patients are still clearly underrepresented in clinical trials, resulting in very limited high-level evidence. Moreover, elderly patients are less likely to receive radiation therapy in similar clinical scenarios compared to younger patients. However, there is no clear evidence for a generally reduced radiation tolerance with increasing age. Modern radiation techniques have clearly reduced acute and late side effects, thus extending the boundaries of the possible regarding treatment intensity in elderly or frail patients. Hypofractionated regimens have further decreased the socioeconomic burden of radiation treatments by reducing the overall treatment time. The current review aims at summarizing the existing data for the use of radiation therapy or chemoradiation in elderly patients focusing on the main cancer types. It provides an overview of treatment tolerability and outcomes with current standard radiation therapy regimens, including possible predictive factors in the elderly population. Strategies for patient selection for standard or tailored radiation therapy approaches based on age, performance score or comorbidity, including the use of prediction tests or geriatric assessments, are discussed. Current and future possibilities for improvements of routine care and creation of high-level evidence in elderly patients receiving radiation therapy are highlighted.

Rectal cancer treatment and outcomes in elderly patients treated with curative intent

The elderly population comprises a significant proportion of patients diagnosed with rectal cancer. However, there is a lack of evidence to guide treatment decisions in this group. Thus, this multicentre study compares the histopathology, treatment patterns and outcomes between the elderly and young populations with non-metastatic rectal cancer. The present study reported on the clinicopathological variables, treatment modalities and survival outcomes in 736 patients diagnosed with non-metastatic rectal cancer between 2006 and 2015. Patients were divided into the following two groups, <70 and ≥70 years of age, which were compared using Chi-square and survival outcome analysis using Kaplan-Meier. Elderly patients made up nearly half of the cohort and were less likely to undergo trimodality therapy or be discussed in a multidisciplinary meeting. Surgery in the elderly patients was associated with increased mortality. Elderly patients had worse cancer-specific survival (75 vs. 85%), which was particularly evident in stage III disease (hazard ratio, 2.1). Elderly patients in this subgroup treated with trimodality therapy had similar survival outcomes to younger patients. Elderly patients with locally advanced rectal cancer comprise a large proportion of the patient cohort. Consideration should be given for trimodality therapy in this group, taking into account biological age, especially in the context of increasing life expectancy and improvement in the management of age-related comorbidities.

Oncologic and survival outcomes in elderly patients with locally advanced rectal cancer receiving neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy and total mesorectal excision

BACKGROUND

The efficacy of the addition of neoadjuvant chemotherapy to neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy and total mesorectal excision for locally advanced rectal cancer in elderly patients has not been established.

METHODS

A total of 3096 locally advanced rectal cancer patients who received neoadjuvant chemotherapy, along with neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy and total mesorectal excision, with or without adjuvant chemotherapy, between January 2010 and December 2018, were studied retrospectively. Patients were divided into elderly (>75 years) and younger (≤75 years) groups, and propensity score matching was used to balance a potentially confounding clinical bias. Overall survival, cancer-specific survival, disease-free survival, distant metastasis-free survival and local recurrence-free survival rates for the two groups were compared. Hazard ratios (HR) with 95% confidence intervals (CI) for different clinicopathological variables were calculated to determine predictors of 3-year overall survival.

RESULTS

Mean follow-up was 39.0 (range, 5-140) months. The overall 3-year overall survival, cancer-specific survival, disease-free survival, distant metastasis-free survival and locoregional relapse-free survival rates were 86.1, 87.6, 80.0, 82.4 and 95.4%, respectively. Only 3-year overall survival rates differed significantly between the elderly (77.2%) and younger (88.9%) groups (P = 0.01). Cancer-specific survival, disease-free survival, distant metastasis-free survival and locoregional relapse-free survival rates did not differ significantly between the two groups. Significant negative independent prognostic factors for 3-year overall survival were age >75 years (HR = 2.016, 95% CI 1.157-23.511, P = 0.01) and high pathologic TNM stage (yp stage III, P < 0.001).

CONCLUSION

For elderly locally advanced rectal cancer patients who have good health and performance status, the addition of neoadjuvant chemotherapy to neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy and total mesorectal excision can result in disease-related survival rates and oncological outcomes similar to those experienced by younger patients. The decision to use this treatment approach in elderly patients should not be based solely on chronological age.

Short-Course Radiotherapy in Locally Advanced Rectal Cancer

To date, we do not know the best therapeutic scheme in locally advanced rectal cancer when patients are older or have comorbidities.

Safety and efficacy of preoperative chemoradiotherapy in fit older patients with intermediate or locally advanced rectal cancer evaluated by comprehensive geriatric assessment: A planned interim analysis of a multicenter, phase II trial

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE

Comprehensive geriatric assessment (CGA) is a diagnostic method to assess the physical and mental health status of older patients. The purpose of this study was to assess the safety and efficacy of preoperative concurrent chemoradiotherapy (preCRT) for intermediate or locally advanced rectal cancer in older people who were classified as "fit" by CGA. The interim analysis focusing on safety was reported here as the first part of this trial.

METHODS AND MATERIALS

This is a single arm, multicenter, phase II trial. The eligible patients for this study were aged 70 years or above that fulfilled the standard of intermediate or locally advanced risk category, and met the standard of fit (SIOG1) evaluated by CGA. All patients received preCRT (50 Gy) with Raltitrexed (3 mg/m2 on d1 and d22). Qualitative and quantitative variables were described using descriptive statistics. The surgery adherence predicting was analyzed by multivariate logistic regression.

RESULTS

Thirty-nine fit patients were enrolled. All patients except one finished radiotherapy without dose reduction. Thirty-two patients finished the prescribed Raltitrexed therapy as scheduled. A serious toxicity was observed in 12 patients (30.8%), and only six patients (15.4%) experienced non-hematological side effects.

CONCLUSION

Overall, our results showed that preCRT was feasible and safe in older patients with rectal cancer who were evaluated as fit based on CGA, supporting the use of CGA to tailor oncological treatment and predict the tolerance of a specific therapy. Completing this trial as planned would provide further valuable insights.

Neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy or radiotherapy in patients aged 75 years or older with locally advanced rectal cancer

Background: To evaluate the efficacy and treatment related morbidity of neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy or radiotherapy in elderly patients (aged 75 years or older) with locally advanced rectal cancer (LARC).

Methods: We reviewed clinical records of elderly patients with LARC treated with neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy or radiotherapy between January 2008 and June 2017 at our institute. A dose of 45-50Gy in 25 fractions was delivered to pelvis. The primary tumor received a dose of 55Gy concomitantly for patients receiving intensity modulated radiotherapy (IMRT). The concurrent chemotherapy included capecitabine alone and capecitabine plus oxaliplatin (Xelox). Surgery was performed for suitable patients at least 6 weeks after neoadjuvant treatment. Overall survival (OS), disease specific survival (DSS), disease free survival (DFS) and local control (LC) were calculated with Kaplan-Meier method.

Results: A total of 85 patients were enrolled in this study, the median age was 80 years old (range: 75-90 years). After neoadjuvant treatment, surgery was performed in 56 patients (65.9%). Downstaging rate was 85.7% (48/56) with T downstaging in 35 patients (62.5%) and N downstaging in 36 patients (64.3%). Twelve patients (21.4%) obtained pathological complete response (pCR). The incidence of grade 3 or greater acute hematological, gastrointestinal and genitourinary toxicities were 10.7%, 5.2% and 1.8%, respectively. Seven patients (12.5%) experienced postoperative complications. The median follow-up duration was 35.7 months (range: 4.3-100.3 months), The 3-year and 5-year OS, DSS, DFS, LC were 68.9% and 47.2%, 75.8% and 60.4%, 68.2% and 56.1%, 83.9% and 78.3%, respectively.

Conclusion: In patients aged 75 years or older with LARC, neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy followed by surgery was well tolerated with promising survival outcomes, which should be strongly suggested if medically suitable.

Treatment of Rectal Cancer in Older Adults

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Rectal cancer is predominantly a disease of older adults but current guidelines do not incorporate the associated specific challenges leading to wide variation in the delivery of cancer care to this subset of population. Here, we will review the current data available regarding the management of rectal cancer in older adults.

RECENT FINDINGS

The greatest challenge arises in the management of stage II/III disease as it involves tri-modality treatment that can be harder to tolerate by frail older patients. Response to neoadjuvant treatment is being used as a new marker to tailor further therapy and possibly avoid surgery. Oxaliplatin can be omitted from the adjuvant treatment without compromising outcomes. Physicians should perform geriatric assessment utilizing many validated tools available to help predict treatment tolerability and outcomes in older adults that can help personalize subsequent management. Most older adults can undergo standard therapy for stages I, II, or III rectal cancer with curative intent. Increasing evidence suggests that patients with a clinical complete response to neoadjuvant treatment may be observed closely with the possibility of avoiding surgery. Studies are evaluating alternate systemic treatments for advanced metastatic disease with the hope of maintaining quality of life without compromising cancer outcomes.

Management of locally advanced rectal cancer in the elderly: a critical review and algorithm

Colorectal cancer incidence and death rates have been declining over the past 10 years. However, it remains the second leading cause of death in men ages 60-79 and the third leading cause of death in men over 80 and in women over 60 years old. However, there is little data specific to the treatment of the elder patient, since few of these patients are included in trials. With the advent of improved therapies, there are many alternative options available. Still, no definitive consensus or guidelines have been defined for this particular patient population. The goal of this study is to review the literature on the management of rectal cancer in the elderly and to propose treatment algorithms to help the oncology team in treatment decision-making.

Decision-Making Strategy for Rectal Cancer Management Using Radiation Therapy for Elderly or Comorbid Patients

Rectal cancer predominantly affects patients older than 70 years, with peak incidence at age 80 to 85 years. However, the standard treatment paradigm for rectal cancer oftentimes cannot be feasibly applied to these patients owing to frailty or comorbid conditions. There are currently little information and no treatment guidelines to help direct therapy for patients who are elderly and/or have significant comorbidities, because most are not included or specifically studied in clinical trials. More recently various alternative treatment options have been brought to light that may potentially be utilized in this group of patients. This critical review examines the available literature on alternative therapies for rectal cancer and proposes a treatment algorithm to help guide clinicians in treatment decision making for elderly and comorbid patients.

The impacts of surgery of the primary cancer and radiotherapy on the survival of patients with metastatic rectal cancer

The role of surgery of the primary cancer and radiation in metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) is still controversial currently, and evidence implied that colon cancer (CC) and rectal cancer (RC) should be treated with difference. Hence we focused on metastatic rectal cancer (mRC) solely to compare the cancer cause-specific survival (CSS) of patients receiving varied treatments of the primary cancer: no treatment, surgery only, radiation only, and surgery plus radiation, based on the records of the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) database. A total of 8669 patients were included. Results demonstrated that the 2-year CSS was 28.1% for no treatment group, 30.7% for only radiation group, 50.2% for only surgery group, and 66.5% for surgery plus radiation group, reaching statistical difference (P < 0.001). Furthermore, the CSSs of mRC patients in the surgery group were similar regardless of resection ranges (P = 0.44). Besides, we analyzed the prognostic factors for mRC and found carcinoembryonic antigen (CEA) level, metastasis (M) stage, Tumor (T) stage, tumor size, differentiate grade, age and marital status should be taken into consideration when estimating the prognosis. Particularly, patients with normal CEA level or M1a stage showed a significant survival advantage. Overall, present study suggested that surgery of the primary cancer and radiation might help to improve the survival of mRC patients, especially when both treatments were conducted. Our results may assist clinicians to make better treatment strategy for patients with mRC.