PURPOSE: To examine five- and ten-year survival based on cancer-specific geriatric assessment (C-SGA) in older women with early stage breast cancer. METHODS: We evaluated 660 women ≥65-years old diagnosed with stage I-IIIA primary breast cancer and attending physician permission to contact in four geographic regions in the United States of America (USA). Data were collected over ten-years of follow-up from consenting women's medical records, telephone interviews, National Death Index and Social Security Death Index. C-SGA was described by four domains using six measures: socio-demographic (financial resources); clinical (comorbidity, obesity); function (physical function limitations); and psychosocial (general mental health, social support). Survival from all-cause and breast-cancer-specific mortality and receipt of guideline-recommended therapy was assessed for different groups of subjects with C-SGA domain deficits (cut-off ≥3 deficits). RESULTS: The proportion of women with ≥3 C-SGA deficits surviving ten-years was consistently statistically significantly lower (all-cause 26% versus 46% and breast-cancer-specific 76% versus 89%, p≤0.04). The proportion significantly decreased as number of C-SGA deficits increased (linear trend p<0.0001). Receipt of guideline-recommended therapy decreased with age but not consistently by number of C-SGA deficits. The all-cause and breast-cancer-specific death rate at five- and ten-years was consistently approximately two times higher in women with ≥3 C-SGA deficits even when fully adjusted for confounding factors (HR(5-yrAllCauseFullyAdjusted)=1.87 [1.36-2.57], HR(10-yrAllCauseFullyAdjusted)=1.74 [1.35-2.15], HR(5-yrBreastCancerFullyAdjusted)=1.95 [1.18-3.20], HR(10-yrBreastCancerFullyAdjusted)=1.99 [1.21-3.28]). CONCLUSION: Regardless of age and stage of disease, C-SGA predicts five- and ten-year all-cause and breast-cancer-specific survival in older women. Hence, C-SGA may provide an effective strategy to guide treatment decision-making and to identify risk factors for intervention.
PURPOSE: To examine five- and ten-year survival based on cancer-specific geriatric assessment (C-SGA) in older women with early stage breast cancer. METHODS: We evaluated 660 women ≥65-years old diagnosed with stage I-IIIA primary breast cancer and attending physician permission to contact in four geographic regions in the United States of America (USA). Data were collected over ten-years of follow-up from consenting women's medical records, telephone interviews, National Death Index and Social Security Death Index. C-SGA was described by four domains using six measures: socio-demographic (financial resources); clinical (comorbidity, obesity); function (physical function limitations); and psychosocial (general mental health, social support). Survival from all-cause and breast-cancer-specific mortality and receipt of guideline-recommended therapy was assessed for different groups of subjects with C-SGA domain deficits (cut-off ≥3 deficits). RESULTS: The proportion of women with ≥3 C-SGA deficits surviving ten-years was consistently statistically significantly lower (all-cause 26% versus 46% and breast-cancer-specific 76% versus 89%, p≤0.04). The proportion significantly decreased as number of C-SGA deficits increased (linear trend p<0.0001). Receipt of guideline-recommended therapy decreased with age but not consistently by number of C-SGA deficits. The all-cause and breast-cancer-specific death rate at five- and ten-years was consistently approximately two times higher in women with ≥3 C-SGA deficits even when fully adjusted for confounding factors (HR(5-yrAllCauseFullyAdjusted)=1.87 [1.36-2.57], HR(10-yrAllCauseFullyAdjusted)=1.74 [1.35-2.15], HR(5-yrBreastCancerFullyAdjusted)=1.95 [1.18-3.20], HR(10-yrBreastCancerFullyAdjusted)=1.99 [1.21-3.28]). CONCLUSION: Regardless of age and stage of disease, C-SGA predicts five- and ten-year all-cause and breast-cancer-specific survival in older women. Hence, C-SGA may provide an effective strategy to guide treatment decision-making and to identify risk factors for intervention.
Authors: A G Pallis; C Fortpied; U Wedding; M C Van Nes; B Penninckx; A Ring; D Lacombe; S Monfardini; P Scalliet; H Wildiers Journal: Eur J Cancer Date: 2010-03-12 Impact factor: 9.162
Authors: Arti Hurria; Ilene S Browner; Harvey Jay Cohen; Crystal S Denlinger; Mollie deShazo; Martine Extermann; Apar Kishor P Ganti; Jimmie C Holland; Holly M Holmes; Mohana B Karlekar; Nancy L Keating; June McKoy; Bruno C Medeiros; Ewa Mrozek; Tracey O'Connor; Stephen H Petersdorf; Hope S Rugo; Rebecca A Silliman; William P Tew; Louise C Walter; Alva B Weir; Tanya Wildes Journal: J Natl Compr Canc Netw Date: 2012-02 Impact factor: 11.908
Authors: Karin Ribi; Stéphanie Rondeau; Felicitas Hitz; Ulrich Mey; Milica Enoiu; Thomas Pabst; Anastasios Stathis; Natalie Fischer; Kerri M Clough-Gorr Journal: Support Care Cancer Date: 2017-04-13 Impact factor: 3.603
Authors: Clark Dumontier; Kerri M Clough-Gorr; Rebecca A Silliman; Andreas E Stuck; André Moser Journal: J Geriatr Oncol Date: 2016-12-13 Impact factor: 3.599
Authors: Cindy K Blair; David R Jacobs; Wendy Demark-Wahnefried; Harvey J Cohen; Miriam C Morey; Kim Robien; DeAnn Lazovich Journal: Cancer Date: 2019-08-16 Impact factor: 6.860
Authors: Supriya G Mohile; William Dale; Mark R Somerfield; Mara A Schonberg; Cynthia M Boyd; Peggy S Burhenn; Beverly Canin; Harvey Jay Cohen; Holly M Holmes; Judith O Hopkins; Michelle C Janelsins; Alok A Khorana; Heidi D Klepin; Stuart M Lichtman; Karen M Mustian; William P Tew; Arti Hurria Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2018-05-21 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: Hans Wildiers; Pieter Heeren; Martine Puts; Eva Topinkova; Maryska L G Janssen-Heijnen; Martine Extermann; Claire Falandry; Andrew Artz; Etienne Brain; Giuseppe Colloca; Johan Flamaing; Theodora Karnakis; Cindy Kenis; Riccardo A Audisio; Supriya Mohile; Lazzaro Repetto; Barbara Van Leeuwen; Koen Milisen; Arti Hurria Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2014-08-20 Impact factor: 44.544