Background for the proposal of SIOG guidelines for the management of prostate cancer in senior adults
The incidence of prostate cancer increases with age, with a median age at diagnosis of 68 years. Owing to increased life expectancy, the management of prostate cancer in senior adult men (i.e., aged 70 years or older) represents an important public health concern and a major challenge for the future. No specific guidelines have previously been published on the management of prostate cancer in older men. The SIOG has developed a proposal of recommendations in this setting.
A systematic bibliographical search focused on screening, diagnostic procedures, treatment options for localised, locally advanced and metastatic prostate cancer in senior adults was performed. Specific aspects of the geriatric approach were emphasised, including evaluation of health status (nutritional, cognitive, thymic, physical and psycho-social) and screening for vulnerability and frailty. Attention was drawn to the consequences of androgen deprivation and complications of local treatment, mainly incontinence. The collected material has been reviewed and discussed by a scientific panel including urologists, radiation oncologists, medical oncologists and geriatricians from both Europe and North America.
The consensus is to use either European Association of Urology or National Comprehensive Cancer Network clinical recommendations for prostate cancer treatment and to adapt them to health status based on instrumental activities of daily living (IADL) and activities daily living (ADL), comorbidity evaluation by Cumulative Illness Scoring Rating-Geriatrics and screening for malnutrition. Patients in Group 1 (no abnormality) are 'fit' and should receive the same treatment as younger patients; patients in Group 2 (one impairment in IADL or one uncontrolled comorbidity or at risk of malnutrition) are 'vulnerable' and should receive standard treatment after medical intervention; patients in Group 3 (one impairment in ADL or more than one uncontrolled comorbidity or severe malnutrition) are 'frail' and should receive adapted treatment; patients in Group 4 (dependent) should receive only symptomatic palliative treatment.
Treatment of prostate cancer in senior adults should be adapted to health status. Specific prospective studies in this setting are warranted.
Available from: Linda Sharp
- "PSA values at diagnosis were unavailable, thus the risk stratification was determined by Gleason score alone. Finally, we did not have access to factors such as fitness for treatment, functional, dependence or nutritional status, which may be important determinants of treatment (Droz et al, 2010a). Nevertheless, there seemed to be a very definite change in treatment allocation at age 70, unlikely to be entirely accounted by these factors. "
[Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
Geriatric oncology guidelines state that fit older men with prostate cancer should receive curative treatment. In a population-based study, we investigated associations between age and non-receipt of curative treatment in men with localised prostate cancer, and the effect of clinical variables on this in different age groups.
Clinically localised prostate cancers (T1–T2N0M0) diagnosed from 2002 to 2008 among men aged ⩾40 years, with hospital in-patient episode(s) within 1 year post-diagnosis, were included (n=5456). Clinical and socio-demographic variables were obtained from cancer registrations. Comorbidity was determined from hospital episode data. Logistic regression was used to investigate associations between age and non-receipt of treatment, adjusting for confounders; the outcome was non-receipt of curative treatment (radical prostatectomy or radiotherapy).
The percentage who did not receive curative treatment was 9.2%, 14.3%, 48.2% and 91.7% for men aged 40–59, 60–69, 70–79 and 80+ years, respectively. After adjusting for clinical and socio-demographic factors, age remained the main determinant of treatment non-receipt. Men aged 70–79 had a significant five-fold increased risk of not having curative treatment compared with men aged 60–69 (odds ratio (OR)=5.5; 95% confidence interval 4.7, 6.5). In age-stratified analyses, clinical factors had a higher weight for men aged 60–69 than in other age strata. Over time, non-receipt of curative treatment increased among men aged 40–59 and decreased among men aged 70–79.
Age remains the dominant factor in determining non-receipt of curative treatment. There have been some changes in clinical practice over time, but whether these will impact on prostate cancer mortality remains to be established.
British Journal of Cancer 05/2013; 109(1). DOI:10.1038/bjc.2013.268 · 4.84 Impact Factor
Available from: Hans Garmo
- "A total of 1515 (71%) of men who did not receive chemotherapy in this study had little or no comorbidity, indicating undertreatment. A geriatric assessment tool including biological and clinical correlates of aging may improve decision-making in old cancer patients [32,33]. "
[Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
Chemotherapy prolongs life and relieves symptoms in men with castration resistant prostate cancer (CRPC). There is limited information on a population level on the use of chemotherapy for CRPC.
Material and methods.
To assess the use of chemotherapy in men with CRPC we conducted a register-based nationwide population-based study in Prostate Cancer data Base Sweden (PCBaSe) and a nationwide in-patient drug register (SALT database) between May 2009 and December 2010. We assumed that men who died of prostate cancer (PCa) underwent a period of CRPC before they died.
Among the 2677 men who died from PCa during the study inclusion period, 556 (21%) had received chemotherapy (intravenous or per oral) detectable within the observation period in SALT database. Specifically, 239 (61%) of men < 70 years had received chemotherapy, 246 (30%) of men between 70 and 79 years and 71 (5%) men older than 80 years. The majority of men 465/556 (84%) had received a docetaxel-containing regimen. Among chemotherapy treated men, 283/556 (51%) received their last dose of chemotherapy during the last six months prior to death. Treatment with chemotherapy was more common among men with little comorbidity and high educational level, as well as in men who had received curatively intended primary treatment.
A majority of men younger than 70 years with CRPC were treated with chemotherapy in contrast to men between 70 and 79 years of whom half as many received chemotherapy. Chemotherapy treatment was often administered shortly prior to death. The low uptake of chemotherapy in older men with CRPC may be caused by concerns about tolerability of treatment, as well as treatment decisions based on chronological age rather than global health status.
Acta oncologica (Stockholm, Sweden) 02/2013; 52(8). DOI:10.3109/0284186X.2013.770164 · 3.00 Impact Factor
Available from: Jean-Marc Ferrero
- "In this setting, survival should perhaps not be the main parameter used to assess studies, although this requires a cultural change extolling a geriatric oncology approach. This approach is now recommended by the International Society of Geriatric Oncology (SIOG) which recommends that therapeutic strategies are decided after a geriatric assessment for vulnerable patients . "
[Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: The incidence of prostate cancer increases with age and because of its high prevalence this disease has become a major public health concern. Despite advances in our understanding of the biological mechanisms responsible for the development of this cancer, the transition to the hormone refractory stage (HRPC) and metastatic progression pose real problems of clinical management. Currently, docetaxel chemotherapy has been shown to have a slight but significant impact on survival, though the gain in median survival is still less than three months. Research is therefore continuing to improve treatment outcomes. The progression of prostate cancer is accompanied by the overexpression of EGFR (epidermal growth factor receptor) in a very large majority of cases, suggesting that this may play a mechanistic role. Unfortunately, although preclinical findings seem to be promising for therapies targeting the EGFR in HRPC, current clinical results are disappointing. These results should however encourage us to look for different ways of using anti-EGFR agents or combining them with other targeted therapies.
Pharmaceuticals 07/2010; 3(7). DOI:10.3390/ph3072238
Data provided are for informational purposes only. Although carefully collected, accuracy cannot be guaranteed. The impact factor represents a rough estimation of the journal's impact factor and does not reflect the actual current impact factor. Publisher conditions are provided by RoMEO. Differing provisions from the publisher's actual policy or licence agreement may be applicable.