Chemotherapy in older adults with colorectal cancer

Authors:

Details:

  1. Department of Medical Oncology, Royal Melbourne Hospital, Parkville, Victoria.
  2. Department of Medical Oncology, Eliza Hall Institute of Medical Research, Parkville, Victoria.
  3. Department of Medical Oncology, Royal Melbourne Hospital, Parkville and Western Hospital Footscray, Victoria.

Abstract

Colorectal cancer is the second most common cancer in Australia, with a median age at diagnosis of 70 years. With an aging population, the significance of this condition is increasing. Recent chemotherapy trials demonstrating improved outcomes have either excluded the elderly or demonstrated effectiveness in only a highly selected (well) population of older patients. Physiological changes that occur with increasing age and differences in the biology of the cancer itself create some uncertainty regarding the true benefit of chemotherapy for the majority of elderly patients, likely resulting in considerable undertreatment, either in the form of empirical dose reductions or abstention. For adjuvant treatment of stage III disease with 5-fluorouracil, pooled subgroup analyses of the small numbers of well elderly included in clinical trials and retrospective population studies suggest the elderly derive a similar benefit. However, the addition of oxaliplatin appears to provide no additional benefit at the expense of added toxicity. There are no studies indicating the optimal treatment in frail patients, though except where predicted lifespan is very short or there is a clear contraindication, adjuvant treatment should be considered. In the metastatic setting, there is similar evidence that fit elderly profit. Frail patients can be treated successfully and derive benefit from single agent 5-fluorouracil. Further studies involving elderly patients that are more representative of the majority are needed, and there is ongoing exploration of how more comprehensive geriatric assessment may help select the patients who are most likely to benefit from treatment, while minimising toxicity.


Australia’s population is aging.  In 2011, 13.7% of Australians were aged ≥ 65 years and 1.6% were over 85; by 2056 estimates suggest 25% will be over 65 and 5-7% will be over 85.1 The incidence of colorectal cancer, the second leading cause of cancer death in Australia,2 increases with age, with a third of cases occurring in patients older than 75.3

As the elderly remain under-represented in clinical trials, including those for colorectal cancer,4,5 there remains uncertainty regarding the relevance of recent substantial treatment advances to older patients. There remains no universally accepted chronological age that defines an ‘elderly person’, making comparisons across studies that use differing definitions of elderly challenging. Further, the small numbers of elderly patients included in clinical trials represent a highly selected population, with less comorbidity and polypharmacy, and better performance status and social supports than the majority seen in clinical practice.

Background

Aging is associated with a number of physiological changes across most organ systems (table 1),6-8 some of which may influence the pharmacokinetics of chemotherapeutic agents. Many of these contribute to the reduced physiologic reserve of elderly patients and may affect both treatment tolerability and outcomes.

Table-1--Summary-of-selected-physiological-changes

Right-sided colon cancers,9 microsatellite instability (MSI),10 and BRAFV600E  mutation,11 have been reported at greater frequency with increasing age, and are thought to characterise tumorigenesis via the serrated neoplasia pathway.12 While the clinical implications have yet to be clearly defined, right-sided and BRAF-mutant tumours have been separately associated with worse survival and distinct patterns of spread.13,14 Furthermore, screening colonoscopy may confer less protection from flat tumours located in the right colon.15 Conversely, MSI has an opposing positive prognostic effect, particularly in early stage colon cancer,10,16 and is associated with a lack of benefit from adjuvant 5-fluorouracil (5FU) chemotherapy.17

Older cancer patients are a heterogenous group, with the variable reductions in physiological reserve and rates of comorbidity not reliably captured in standard measures of function such as the Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group and Karnofsky performance status scales. Comprehensive geriatric assessment, including multi-disciplinary assessment of ability to complete activities of daily living, comorbidities, cognition, psycho-social status, nutritional stations, medication use and advanced care preferences can assist in predicting life expectancy and toxicity from chemotherapy, and in reducing morbidity.18,19 While obviously time and resource-consuming, more concise, standardised and validated tools are in development.

Despite subset analyses of the elderly patients enrolled in clinical trials concluding that fit elderly patients should receive standard chemotherapy doses, empirical age-related dose reductions are frequent in routine care. For example, in a recent survey of Australian oncologists, 23% reported routinely dose reducing in the fit elderly.20 While the potential for undertreatment is concerning, particularly in the adjuvant setting, many would argue that the experience of the select elderly entered on to research studies, does not reflect the reality of what can be safely delivered for the majority of older patients.

Adjuvant treatment

5FU-based adjuvant treatment for stage III colon cancer reduces the risk of recurrence by 30% and cancer-related death by 25-30%.21 Capecitabine provides a similar benefit.22 A small additional survival benefit from the addition of oxaliplatin has also been demonstrated.23,24

Subgroup analyses of outcomes for elderly patients in clinical trials, including pooled data from seven trials involving 3351 patients,25 suggest an equal benefit for elderly patients from use of adjuvant 5FU. Compared to surgery alone, receipt of 5FU/Leucovorin Calcium (LV) was associated with a hazard ratio (HR) for death of 0.76 (95% CI 0.68-0.85), corresponding to a 7% absolute improvement in five-year survival for all patients (71% v 64%), independent of age. Furthermore, increased age was not associated with a significantly increased risk of grade 3 or 4 nausea, vomiting, stomatitis or diarrhoea. There was a trend to increased rates of severe leucopenia.

An analysis of the X-ACT trial22 demonstrated that the equivalence of capecitabine was maintained in the 396 (20%) patients aged 70-75 years. However, fewer elderly (75-80 year old) patients completed the planned course of treatment compared to younger patients (74% v 85%) with a trend for more dose modifications in older patients (61% v 51%).

In contrast to studies utilising a fluoropyrimidine alone, subgroup analyses from the two studies where oxaliplatin was added to 5FU, found no benefit from the addition of oxaliplatin in patients over 70 years of age.23,24 Further, the addition of oxaliplatin resulted in increased rates of neutropenia, thrombocytopenia and fatigue.30 Analysis of the MOSAIC trial23 found a significant increase in second cancers in older patients treated with oxaliplatin compared to younger patients (11% v 4%, p=0.001), with no age-related difference in the 5FU arm.

Retrospective analyses of cohorts from various clinical databases (table 2) have explored the benefit of 5FU/LV in ‘real world’ practice. Consistent with clinical trial data, these suggest a similar benefit for elderly patients, with infusional 5FU better tolerated than bolus.26

Unfortunately, as the patients selected for treatment are inevitably a fitter population than those not treated, the impact of non-cancer deaths is a major confounder. Indeed, a number of studies report a greater survival benefit for adjuvant treatment than was observed in clinical trials enrolling young and fit patients, which seems implausible, particularly given the frequent use of routine chemotherapy dose reductions in older patients.20,27,28 In the absence of data on recurrence rates and cancer-specific mortality, the true impact of treatment remains uncertain.

Table-2--Summary-of-selected-retrospective-population-studies-assessing-effectiveness-of-adjuvant-5FU-chemotherapy-in-CRC.

Despite data demonstrating that the survival benefit of fluoropyrimidine-based treatment is maintained in older patients, use in practice inevitably declines with advancing age in multiple international series.27,29,30 Recent Australian data of 658 patients at Victorian hospitals treated from 2003 – 2012, reports higher overall treatment rates than international series, but a similar decline in treatment use with advancing age.32 Whereas 93% of patients under 65 received adjuvant treatment, this declined to 84% and 41% for patients aged 65-75 and >75 years respectively. However, age alone was rarely the reason that patients were not treated, with increasing comorbidity the dominant reason older patients were not offered treatment. Older patients were also more likely to decline recommended treatment, including 20% of those over 75 years. So overall, age-related variation in treatment is partly due to appropriate clinical decision-making and partly due to patient preference, but there is clear evidence that chronological age is the single most important factor associated with chemotherapy receipt,27,30 even in the absence of comorbidity.33

With ongoing uncertainty regarding the benefit of adjuvant chemotherapy for stage II colon cancer in younger patients,34 routine treatment of older patients with stage II cancers cannot be recommended. Elderly patients are less likely to receive chemoradiation for locally advanced rectal cancer.36-38 The evidence is similarly limited by under-inclusion of the elderly in all clinical trials and the clear selection bias of population studies, many of which have conflicting results. In general, it appears that the select group of elderly patients who are able to complete the entire course of chemoradiation do derive a benefit,38 but their ability to do so may be limited by higher rates of toxicity compared to younger patients.39

Metastatic colorectal cancer

The recent introduction of combination chemotherapy, with oxaliplatin and irinotecan, and biologic agents such as bevacizumab and cetuximab, has consistently seen survival in clinical studies approaching two years and beyond.

As with adjuvant treatment, there are a number of retrospective observational studies and analyses of the small numbers of elderly patients from clinical trials examining the efficacy and safety of all the various chemotherapeutic and biologic options for advanced disease. With life expectancy for patients with metastatic disease being around 20 months, the likelihood of death from competing causes of mortality confounding data interpretation is much less than for adjuvant studies, where survival at and beyond five years is more the focus.

Folprecht et al retrospectively analysed data from 3825 patients who received 5FU-based treatment in 22 European trials between 1982 and 1996.40 For the 629 patients (16%) aged at least 70 years, response rates, progression-free survival and overall survival were similar to younger patients. A study of 339 patients who received second line irinotecan showed that patients over 70 years derived a similar benefit without increased toxicity.41 Ershler et al, reviewing capecitabine data from four studies, concluded that it was equally effective to 5FU/LV in elderly patients, with no evidence that the elderly experienced increased toxicity after adjustment for creatinine clearance.42 Other groups have similarly shown that the toxicity of capecitabine is not greater in the elderly if renal function is taken into account.43

A combined analysis of source data from four first-line phase 3 trials comparing irinotecan containing regimens to 5FU/LV alone, demonstrated no significant interaction between age and treatment effect. No grade 3 or 4 toxicities were more frequent among the elderly patients.44 A subset analysis of pooled data from pivotal studies concluded that this agent maintained its efficacy and safety ratio in the selected elderly patients that were enrolled.45

The MRC FOCUS 246 study, a randomised trial specifically assessing outcomes in elderly and frail patients not fit for full dose chemotherapy due to age or frailty, showed that the addition of oxaliplatin at modified doses did not produce a progression-free or overall survival benefit. In a 2×2 factorial design, 459 older patients (median age 74 years, with 13% 80 years plus) were randomised to receive oxaliplatin with a fluoropyrimidine or fluoropyrimidine alone. With treatment initiated at 80% of standard dose, in the absence of significant toxicity, 35% of patients had planned dose escalations after six weeks, with 33% continuing at their initial dose. Further analyses suggested a negative effect on quality of life with oxaliplatin receipt. Other important findings of this study included similar efficacy and quality of life for 5FU versus capecitabine as single agents, but increased toxicity with capecitabine, including nausea, vomiting, anorexia and hand-foot syndrome.

In an analysis of the 99 (21%) patients aged 75-86 years in the AGITG MAX study,47 the progression-free survival benefit of adding bevacizumab to capecitabine was maintained. Other studies have also shown that the addition of bevacizumab to single agent 5FU irinotecan/5FU and oxaliplatin-containing regimens improves progression free survival to a similar extent in patients greater than 75 years old.48-51 An increased risk of thromboembolic events has been reported in many,52-54 but not all studies in these patients,47 mainly due to myocardial infarcts and strokes, with a hazard ratio of 2.5-3.0.55 Other toxicities, such as gastrointestinal perforation, proteinuria and bleeding, do not appear to be increased in the elderly. A recent prospective study of patients aged 65 or older,56 which importantly did include a geriatric assessment at baseline, reported an increase in severe toxicity in patients receiving bevacizumab in combination with chemotherapy. While this was predominantly due to an increased rate of hypertension, which in most instances is manageable with additional medication, the selection of patients who were to receive bevacizumab (lower in patients with heart disease) confounds comparison of treatment groups.

There is no apparent impact of age on the efficacy or the toxicity of cetuximab.57-59 As an example, a study of 614 patients included 49.7% at least 66 years of age (range 18-89), with cetuximab given alone or in combination with irinotecan at the discretion of the treating physician.59 Response rate, progression-free survival and toxicity did not vary with age.

In an analysis of 2049 patients aged over 65 years using SEER-Medicare data from 2002 and 2005, 49% of patients had received 5 fluorouracil folinic acid, 25% irinotecan and 26% oxaliplatin. Survival benefits associated with receipt of oxaliplatin or irinotecan were consistent across age groups, including those over 75 years.60 Another study of 2314 patients from the South Australian Clinical Registry found that, compared to patients less than 80 years old, those over 80 were less likely to receive chemotherapy (68.2% v 29.2%), less likely to receive combination therapy (74% v 28%) and had a significantly shorter median survival (19.2 months v 8.2 months).61 However, the median survival of those over 80 years who received any chemotherapy was similar to that of younger patients.

As with adjuvant therapy, chemotherapy receipt for metastatic disease in routine clinical care is inversely associated with age. In a retrospective cohort study of consecutive patients in the Netherlands between 2002 and 2007, only 19% of patients over the age of 70 received palliative chemotherapy, whereas 64% of those less than 70 received treatment.33 Where treated, the elderly are less likely to receive initial combination treatment, or to receive oxaliplatin, irinotecan and bevacizumab at any time.62 Similar findings were reported in a series of 864 consecutive metastatic CRC patients enrolled in the prospective Australian multicentre Treatment of Recurrent and Advanced Colorectal Cancer database since mid-2009, where 507 (59%) patients were aged 65 years.63 In this cohort, 71% received first-line chemotherapy, with 47% also receiving bevacizumab. The use of first-line chemotherapy declined significantly with increasing age, from 83% in patients aged 65-75 years to 36% in those aged ≥ 85 years. Older patients were also significantly less likely to receive combination regimens or bevacizumab.

Conclusion

With the elderly continuing to be underrepresented in clinical trials, and the elderly patients that are recruited being a select population, firm conclusions are difficult to reach. In the adjuvant setting, a number of pooled analyses of elderly patients from clinical trials and observational population studies suggest fluoropyrimidine-based treatment should be considered in fit older patients. With a healthy 75 year-old currently having a predicted life expectancy of more than 13 years for females and 11 years for males,64 the vast majority are likely to live long enough for recurrent cancer to impact their survival. With further advances in age, and diminishing life expectancy, the potential benefit of adjuvant therapy is reduced, and clinicians do need to become increasingly selective in the patients to whom they recommend treatment. The addition of oxaliplatin is not beneficial in patients over 70 years of age, and is also associated with an excess of early and late toxicity.

In the metastatic clinical cases, we similarly have evidence that the fit elderly benefit from palliative chemotherapy and targeted biological agents. In particular, cetuximab therapy appears to be equally well tolerated in the elderly, and with the exception of thromboembolic events, the same can be said for bevacizumab. The FOCUS 2 study suggests that single agent treatment with 5FU is a preferred strategy in frail patients. Further studies of this nature are critical to advancing our knowledge of the optimal treatment of older patients; the reality is that the majority of elderly patients are neither fit nor frail. It is for this group that more sophisticated methods of evaluation, such as comprehensive geriatric assessment, may help guide treatment decisions in the future and this remains a very active area of research.

References

  1. Australian Bureau of Statistics. Australian Demographic Statistics June 2012. Cat No 3101.0. Nov 2012: ABS Canberra.
  2. Australian Institute of Health and Welfare & Australasian Association of Cancer Registries 2012. Cancer in Australia: an overview 2012. Cancer series no. 74. Cat. No. CAN 70. AIHW: Canberra.
  3. Australian Institute of Health and Welfare (AIHW) 2012. Australian Cancer Incidence and Mortality (ACIM) Books. AIHW: Canberra.
  4. Hutchins L, Unger J, Crowley J, Coltman C, Albain K. Underrepresentation of patients 65 years of age or older in cancer treatment trials. N Engl J Med 1999;341(27):2061-7.
  5. Townsley C, Sleby R, Siu L. Systemic review of barriers to the recruitment of older patients with cancer onto clinical trials. J Clin Oncol. 2005;23:3112-24.
  6. Klotz U. Pharmacokintetics and drug metabolism in the elderly. Drug Met Reviews 2009;41(2):67-76.
  7. Sawhney R, Sehl M, Naeim A. Physiologic Aspects of Aging: Impact on Cancer Management and Decision Making, Part 1. Cancer J 2005;11:449-460.
  8. Sawhney R, Sehl M, Naeim A. Physiologic Aspects of Aging: Impact on Cancer Management and Decision Making, Part 2. Cancer J. 2005;11:461-473.
  9. Cooper GS, Yuan Z, Landefeld CS, Johanson J, Rimtn A et al: A national population-based study of incidence of colorectal cancer and age. Implications for screening in older Americans. Cancer 1995;75:775-81
  10. Samowitz WS, Curtin K, Ma K, Schaffer L, Coleman L, Leppert M et al: Microsatellite instability in sporadic colon cancer is associated with an improved prognosis at the population level. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev. 2001;10:917- 923.
  11. Tie J, Gibbs P, Lipton L, Christie M, Jorissen R, Burgess A et al: Optimizing targeted therapeutic development: analysis of a colorectal cancer patient population with the BRAF(V600E) mutation. Int J Cancer. 2011;128:2075-84.
  12. Kambara T, Simms LA, Whitehall VLJ, Spring K, Wynter C, Walsh M et al: BRAF mutation is associated with DNA methylation in serrated polyps and cancers of the colorectum. Gut. 2004;53:1137-44.
  13. Benedix F, Kube R, Meyer F, Schmit U, Gastinger I, Lippert H: Comparison of 17.641 patients with right- and left-sided colon cancer: Differences in epidemiology, perioperative course, histology, and survival. Dis Colon Rectum. 2010;53:57-64
  14. Tran B, Kopetz S, Tie J, Gibbs P, Jiang Z, Lieu C et al: Impact of BRAF mutation and microsatellite instability on the pattern of metastatic spread and prognosis in metastatic colorectal cancer. Cancer. 2011;117:4623-32.
  15. Brenner H, Hoffmeister M, Arndt V, Stegmaier L, Altenhofen L, Haug U: Protection from right- and left- sided colorectal neoplasms after colonoscopy: Population-based study. J Natl Cancer Inst. 2010;102:89-95
  16. Popat S, Hubner R, Houlston RS: Systematic review of microsatellite instability and colorectal cancer prognosis. J Clin Oncol. 2004;23:609-618.
  17. Sargent DJ, Marsoni S, Monges G, Thibodeau S, Labianca R, Hamilton S et al: Defective mismatch repair as a predictive marker for lack of efficacy of fluorouracil-based adjuvant therapy in colon cancer. J Clin Oncol. 2010;28:3219
  18. Extermann M, Hurria A. Comprehensive geriatric assessment for older patients with cancer. J Clin Oncol. 2007:25(14):1824-31.
  19. Hurria A, Togawa K, Mohil S, Owusu C, Klepin H, Gross C et al. Predicting chemotherapy toxicity in older adults with cancer: a prospective multicentre study. J Clin Oncol. 2011;29(25):3457-65.
  20. Field K, Kosmider S, Jefford M, Michael M, Jennens R, Green M et al. Chemotherapy Dosing Strategies in the Obese, Elderly and Thin Patient: Results of a Nationwide Survey. J Oncol Practice. 2008;4(3):108-113.
  21. Gill S, Lopriniz , Sargent D, Thome S, Alberts S, Haller D et al. Pooled analysis of fluorouracil-based adjuvant therapy for stage II and III colon cancer: Who benefits and by how much? J Clin Oncol. 2004;22:1797-1806.
  22. Twelves C, Scheithauer W, McKendrick J, Seitz J, Hazel G, Wong A et al. Capecitabine versus 5- fluorouracil/folinic acid as adjuvant therapy for stage III colon cancer: final results from the X-ACT trial with analysis by age and preliminary evidence of a pharmacodynamic marker of efficacy. Ann Oncol. 2012;23(5):1190-1197.
  23. Andre T, Boni C, Mounedji-Boudiaf L, Navarro M, Tabernero J, Hickish T et al. Oxaliplatin, fluorouracil and leucovorin as adjuvant treatment for colon cancer: The Multicentre International Study of Oxaliplatin/5-Fluorouracil/Leucovorin in the Adjuvant Treatment of Colon Cancer (MOSAIC) Investigators. N Engl J Med. 2004;350:2343-2351.
  24. Yothers G, OÇonnell M, Allegra C, Kuebler J, Colangelo L, Oetrelli N et al. Oxaliplatin As Adjuvant Therapy for Colon Cancer: Updated Results of NSABP C-07 Trial, Including Survival and Subset Analyses. J Clin Oncol. 2011; 29(28):3768-3774/
  25. Sarget D, Goldberg R, Jacobsen S, Macdonald J, Labianca R, Haller D et al. A Pooled Analysis of Adjuvant Chemotherapy for Resected Colon Cancer in Elderly Patients. N Engl J Med. 2011;345(15):1091-1097.
  26. Chau I, Norman A, Cunningham D, Tait D, Ross P, Iveson T et al. A randomised comparison between 6 months of bolus fluouracil/leucovorin and 12 weeks protracted venous infusion fluouracil as adjuvant treatment in colorectal cancer. Ann Oncol. 2005;16: 549-557
  27. Sanoff H, Carpenter W, Sturmer T, Goldberg R, Martin C, Fine J et al. Effect of Adjuvant Chemotherapy on Survival of Patients With Stage III Colon Cancer Diagnosed After Age 75 Years. J Clin Oncol. 2012; 30(21):2624-2534.
  28. Steenbergen L, Lemmens V, Rutten H, Wymenga A, Nortier J, Janssen-Heijnen M. Increased adjuvant treatment and improved survival in elderly stage III colon cancer patients in The Netherlands. Ann Oncol. 2012; 23(11):2805-2811.
  29. Abraham A, Habermann E, Rothenberger D, Kwaan M, Weinberg A, Parsons H et al. Adjuvant Chemotherapy for Stage III Colon Cancer in the Oldest Old. Results Beyond Clinical Guidelines. Cancer. 2013;119(2):395-403.
  30. Jessup J, Stewart A, Greene F, Minsky B. Adjuvant chemotherapy for stage III colon cancer: implications of race/ethnicity, age and differentiation. J Am Med Assoc. 2005; 294(21): 2703.
  31. Sundararajan V, Mitra N, Jacobson J, Grann V, Heitjan D, Neugut A. Survival associated with 5- fluorouracil-based adjuvant chemotherapy among elderly patients with node positive colon cancer. Ann Int Med. 2002;136:349-357.
  32. Heong V, Wong H, Tie J, Jefford M, Field K, Kosmider S et al. Understanding why some people with stage III colon cancer do not receive adjuvant chemotherapy. Proc ASCO 2013: in press.
  33. Jonker J, Hamaker M, Soesan M, Tulner C, Kuper I. Colon Cancer treatment and adherence to guidelines: Does age still matter? J Geriatr Oncol. 2012;3(2):131-137.
  34. National Comprehensive Cancer Network: NCCN Clinical Practice Guidelines in Oncology: Colon Cancer.
  35. Hung A, Mullins C. Relative Effectiveness and Safety of Chemotherapy in Elderly and Nonelderly Patients with Stage III Colon Cancer: A Systematic Review. Oncologist. 2013;18:54-63
  36. Cohen S, Neugent A. Adjuvant therapy for rectal cancer in the elderly. Drug Aging 2004;21(7):437-451.
  37. Pasetto L, Rossi E, Jirillo A,Monfardini S. Colorectal cancer adjuvant treatment in elderly patients. Crit Rev Oncol Haem. 2005;55(3):201-206.
  38. Dobie S, Warren J, Matthews B, Schwartz D, Baldwin L, Billingsley K. Survival Benefits and Trends in Use of Adjuvant Therapy Among Elderly Stage II and III Rectal Cancer Patients in the General Population. Cancer. 2008;112(4):789-799
  39. Shahir M, Lemmens V, Poll-Franse L, Voogd A, Janssen-Heijnen M. Elderly patients with rectal cancer have a higher risk of treatment related complications and a poorer prognosis than younger patients: a population-based study. Eur J Cancer. 2006;42(17):3015-3021.
  40. Folprecht G, Cunningham D, Ross P, Glimelius B, Costanzo F, Wils J et al. Efficacy of 5-fluorouracil- based chemotherapy in elderly patients with metastatic colorectal cancer: a pooled analysis of clinical trials. Ann Oncol. 2004;15:1330-1338.
  41. Chau I, Norman A, Cunningham D, Waters J, Topham C, Middleton G et al. Elderly patients with fluoropyrimidine and thymidylate synthetase inhibitor-resistant advanced colorectal cancer derive similar benefit without excessive toxicity when treated with irinotecan monotherapy. Br J Cancer. 2004;91:1453-1458.
  42. Ershler W. Capecitabine use in geriatric oncology: An analysis of current safety, efficacy and quality of life data. Crit Rev Oncol Hematol. 2006;58:68-78.
  43. Cassidy J, Twelves C, Van Cutsem, Hoff P, Bajetta E, Boyer M et al. First-line oral capecitabine therapy in metastatic colorectal cancer: a favourable safety profile compared with intravenous 5-fluorouracil/leucovorin. Ann Oncol. 2002;13:566-575.
  44. Folprecht G, Seymore M, Saltz L, Douillard J, Hecker H, Stephens R et al. Irinotecan/Fluorouracil Combination in First-Line Therapy of Older and Younger Patients With Metastatic Colorectal Cancer: Combined Analysis of 2,691 Patients in Randomized Controlled Trials. JCO. 2008;26(9):1443-1451.
  45. Goldberg R, Tabah-Fisch I, Bleiberg, Gramont A, Tournigard C, Andre T et al. Pooled Analysis of Safety and Efficacy of Oxaliplatin Plus Fluorouracil/Leucovorin Administered Bimonthly in Elderly Patients With Colorectal Cancer. JCO. 2006;24(25):4085-4090.
  46. Seymore M, Thompson L, Wasan H, et al. Chemotherapy options in elderly and frail patients with metastatic colorectal cancer (MRC FOCUS 2): an open-label, randomised factorial trial. Lancet. 2011; 377:1749-1759.
  47. Price T, Zannino D, Wilson K, Simes R, Cassidy J, VanHazel G et al. Bevacizumab is equally effective and no more toxic in elderly patients with advanced colorectal cancer: a subgroup analysis from the AGITG MAX trial: an internation randomised controlled trial of Capecitabine, Bevacizumab and Mitomycin C. Ann Oncol. 2012;23:1531-1536.
  48. Kabbinavar F, Hurwitz H, Yi J, Sarkar S, Rosen O. Addition of bevacizumab to fluorouracil-based first line treatment of metastatic colorectal cacner: pooled analysis of cohorts from two randomised clinical trials. Am J Clin Oncol. 2009;27(2):199-205.
  49. Hurwitz H, Fehrenbacher L, Novotny W, Cartwright T, Hainsworth J, Heim W et al. Bevacizumab plus irinotecan, floerouracil and leucovorin for metastatic colorectal cancer. N Engl J Med. 2004;350:2335-2342.
  50. Satltz L, Clarke S, Daiz-Rubio E, Scheithauer W, Figer A, Wong R et al. Bevacizumab in combination with oxaliplatin-based chemotherapy as first line therapy in metastatic colorectal cancer: a randomised phase III study. Am J Clin Oncol. 2008;26:2013-2019.
  51. Giantonio B, Catalano P, Meropol N O’Dwyer P, Mitchell E, Alberts Set al. Bevascizumab in combination with oxaliplatin, fluorouracil and leucovorin (FOLFOX4) for previously treated metastatic colorectal cancer: results from the esatern cooperative oncology group study E3200. Am J Clin Oncol. 2007;25(12):1539-1544.
  52. Tebbutt N, Murphy F, Zannino D, Wilson K, Cumins M, Abdi E et al. Risk of arterial thromboembolic events in patients with advanced colorectal cancer receiving bevacizumab. Ann Oncol 2011;22(8):1384-1388.
  53. Scappaticci F, Skillings J, Holden S, Gerber H, Miller K, Kabbinavar F et al. Arterial thromboembolic events in patients with metastatic colorectal cancer treated with chemotherapy and bevacizumab. J National Cancer Inst. 2007;99(16):1232-1239.
  54. Cassidy J, Saltz L, Giantonio B, Kabbinavar F, Hurwitz H, Rohr U. Effect of bevacizumab in older patients with metastatic colorectal cancer: pooled analysis of four randomised studies. J Cancer Research Clin Oncol. 2010;136(5):737-743.
  55. Francois E, Guerin O, Follana P, Evesque L, Mari V, Aparicio. Use of bevacizumab in elderly patients with metastatic colorectal cancer: Review. J Geriatr Oncol. 2011;2(1):64-71.
  56. Mohile S, Hardt M, Tew W, Owusu C, Klepin H, Gross C et al. Toxicity of Bevacizumab in Combination with Chemotherapy in Older Patients. Oncologist. 2013;18:408-414
  57. Asmis T, Powell E, Karapetis C, Jonker D, Tu D, Jeffery M et al. Comorbidity, age and overall survival in cetuximab-treated patients with advanced colorectal cancer (ACRC)- results from NCIC CTG CO.17: a phase III trial of cetuximab versus best supportive care. Ann Oncol 2011;22(1):118-126.
  58. Bouchahda M, Macarulla T, Spano J, Bachet J, Lledo J, Andre G et al. Cetuximab efficacy and safety in a retrospective cohort of elderly patients with heavily pre- treated metastatic colorectal cancer. Crit Review Oncol Haematol. 2008;67(3):255-262.
  59. Jehn C, Bonning L, Kroning H, Possinger K, Lufner D. Cetuximab-based therapy in elderly comorbid patients with metastatic colorectal cancer. Br J Cancer. 2012;106:274-278
  60. Mullins C, Hsiao F, Onukwugha E, Pandya N, Hanna N. Comparative and Cost- Effectiveness of Oxaliplatin-Based or Irinotecan-Based Regimens Compared With 5-Fluorouracil/Leucovorin Alone Among US Elderly Stage IV Colon Cancer Patients. Cancer. 2012;118(12):3173-3181.
  61. Kumar R, Jain K, Beeke C, Price T, Townsend A, Padbury R et al. A Population-Based Study of Metastatic Colorectal Cancer in Individuals Aged > 80 Years. Cancer. 2013;119(4):722-728.
  62. McKibbin T, Frei C, Greene R, Kwan P, Simon J, Koeller J. Disparities in the Use of Chemotherapy and Monoclonal Antibody Therapy for Elderly Advanced Colorectal Cancer Patients in the Community Oncology Setting. Oncologist. 2008;13(8):876-885.
  63. Parakh S, Ali S, Wong H, Field K, Shapiro J, Nott L et al: Patterns of care of elderly patients with metastatic colorectal cancer. Proc ASCO 2013: in press.
  64. Australian Bureau of Statistics. Life Tables, States, Territories and Australia, 2009-2011. Cat No 3302.0.55.001. 2012 Nov ABS Canberra

Be the first to know when a new issue is online. Subscribe today.