Do elderly patients benefit from enrollment into Phase I Trials?. Issue 3 (May 2015)
- Record Type:
- Journal Article
- Title:
- Do elderly patients benefit from enrollment into Phase I Trials?. Issue 3 (May 2015)
- Main Title:
- Do elderly patients benefit from enrollment into Phase I Trials?
- Authors:
- Tai, Wai Meng
Lim, Cindy
Ahmad, Aziah
Ong, Whee Sze
Choo, Su Pin
Lim, Wan Teck
Tan, Eng Huat
Kanesvaran, Ravindran
Tan, Daniel Shao Weng - Abstract:
- <abstract abstract-type="author" id="ab0005"> <title id="st0005">Abstract</title> <sec> <title id="st0010">Background</title> <p id="sp0005">Despite the significant burden of cancer in the older population, their outcomes in the context of phase I studies have been poorly studied. While the Royal Marsden Hospital (RMH) prognostic score (albumin, lactate dehydrogenase [LDH], number of metastatic sites) is validated in this setting, its utility among the elderly is uncertain.</p> </sec> <sec> <title id="st0015">Methods</title> <p id="sp0010">A total of 296 consecutive patients who were treated in 20 phase I trials from 2005 to 2012 in our unit were analysed. Clinical characteristics and outcomes between young (&lt; 65, n = 202) and older patients (≥ 65, n = 94) were compared.</p> </sec> <sec> <title id="st0020">Results</title> <p id="sp0015">The median age of the older patients was 69 years (65–84) and 71% were males. Although elderly patients had more co-morbidities and lower albumin levels at baseline, there was no significant difference in survival (8.8 months versus 9.9 months, p = 0.68) and clinical benefit rate (69% versus 56%, p = 0.07) compared to younger patients after median follow-up of 7.1 months (0.36–50.6 months). Age (p = 0.23) did not have any bearing on occurrence of grade 3/4 toxicities. Twenty-six percent of elderly patients experienced grade 3/4 toxicities. The prognostic factors for overall survival (OS) identified in multivariate analysis were prior lines<abstract abstract-type="author" id="ab0005"> <title id="st0005">Abstract</title> <sec> <title id="st0010">Background</title> <p id="sp0005">Despite the significant burden of cancer in the older population, their outcomes in the context of phase I studies have been poorly studied. While the Royal Marsden Hospital (RMH) prognostic score (albumin, lactate dehydrogenase [LDH], number of metastatic sites) is validated in this setting, its utility among the elderly is uncertain.</p> </sec> <sec> <title id="st0015">Methods</title> <p id="sp0010">A total of 296 consecutive patients who were treated in 20 phase I trials from 2005 to 2012 in our unit were analysed. Clinical characteristics and outcomes between young (&lt; 65, n = 202) and older patients (≥ 65, n = 94) were compared.</p> </sec> <sec> <title id="st0020">Results</title> <p id="sp0015">The median age of the older patients was 69 years (65–84) and 71% were males. Although elderly patients had more co-morbidities and lower albumin levels at baseline, there was no significant difference in survival (8.8 months versus 9.9 months, p = 0.68) and clinical benefit rate (69% versus 56%, p = 0.07) compared to younger patients after median follow-up of 7.1 months (0.36–50.6 months). Age (p = 0.23) did not have any bearing on occurrence of grade 3/4 toxicities. Twenty-six percent of elderly patients experienced grade 3/4 toxicities. The prognostic factors for overall survival (OS) identified in multivariate analysis were prior lines of chemotherapy (0–2 versus ≥ 3), baseline sodium levels (≥ 135 versus &lt; 135 mmol/L) and platelet levels (≤ 400 versus &gt; 400 × 10<sup>9</sup>). We developed a risk nomogram based on the factors prognostic of survival with concordance index of 0.65. The RMH model yielded a concordance index of 0.635.</p> </sec> <sec> <title id="st0025">Conclusion</title> <p id="sp0020">Elderly patients enrolled into phase I clinical trials had similar survival outcomes and toxicity profiles compared to younger patients. Risk scoring models to aid patient selection need further clarification.</p> </sec> </abstract> … (more)
- Is Part Of:
- Journal of geriatric oncology. Volume 6:Issue 3(2015)
- Journal:
- Journal of geriatric oncology
- Issue:
- Volume 6:Issue 3(2015)
- Issue Display:
- Volume 6, Issue 3 (2015)
- Year:
- 2015
- Volume:
- 6
- Issue:
- 3
- Issue Sort Value:
- 2015-0006-0003-0000
- Page Start:
- 241
- Page End:
- 248
- Publication Date:
- 2015-05
- Subjects:
- Geriatric oncology -- Periodicals
Neoplasms -- Periodicals
Aged -- Periodicals
Geriatric oncology
Electronic journals
Periodicals
618.976994005 - Journal URLs:
- http://www.clinicalkey.com.au/dura/browse/journalIssue/18794068 ↗
http://www.clinicalkey.com/dura/browse/journalIssue/18794068 ↗
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/journal/18794068 ↗
http://www.sciencedirect.com/ ↗ - DOI:
- 10.1016/j.jgo.2015.02.003 ↗
- Languages:
- English
- ISSNs:
- 1879-4068
- Deposit Type:
- Legaldeposit
- View Content:
- Available online (eLD content is only available in our Reading Rooms) ↗
- Physical Locations:
- British Library DSC - BLDSS-3PM
British Library STI - ELD Digital store - Ingest File:
- 3172.xml