Rishi Jain1, Jia-Llon Yee2, Talha Shaikh2, Cherry Au2, Elizabeth Handorf3, Joshua E Meyer4, Efrat Dotan2. 1. Department of Hematology/Oncology, Fox Chase Cancer Center, Philadelphia, PA, United States of America. Electronic address: rishi.jain@fccc.edu. 2. Department of Hematology/Oncology, Fox Chase Cancer Center, Philadelphia, PA, United States of America. 3. Biostatistics, Fox Chase Cancer Center, Philadelphia, PA, United States of America. 4. Department of Radiation Oncology, Fox Chase Cancer Center, Philadelphia, PA, United States of America.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Neoadjuvant chemoradiation (nCRT) followed by esophagectomy is the standard treatment for locally advanced esophageal cancer. Older patients are often felt to be poor candidates for nCRT. Limited data is available to guide the use of nCRT in this population. METHODS: A retrospective review of patients treated at a tertiary cancer center between 2002 and 2014 was conducted grouping patients by age (≥ 65 or < 65) for evaluation of differences in toxicity and outcomes. Evaluation of pre-treatment platelet-to-lymphocyte ratio (PLR) and neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio (NLR) was also performed. Univariate (UVA) and multivariate analyses (MVA) determined associations between age, toxicities and outcomes. The Kaplan-Meier method (KM) assessed overall survival (OS) and relapse free survival (RFS). RESULTS: 125 patients were identified for this study (67 aging <65, and 58 ≥ 65). In the UVA, advanced age was only associated with increased hematologic toxicity (p = .04). After adjusting for covariates in the MVA, there were no significant differences in toxicity between older and younger patients. There were also no differences between overall survival and relapse free survival between age groups. Increased pre-treatment NLR was strongly correlated with advanced age (p = .01), increased hospitalizations (p = .04), and decreased RFS (p = .002). CONCLUSIONS: Older patients who underwent nCRT followed by esophagectomy had similar toxicities and outcomes as younger patients suggesting that nCRT before esophagectomy is safe in select older adults with esophageal cancer. PLR and NLR may serve as prognostic markers of aging, toxicity, and outcomes. Further research is warranted to optimize the therapy of older patients with this disease.
BACKGROUND: Neoadjuvant chemoradiation (nCRT) followed by esophagectomy is the standard treatment for locally advanced esophageal cancer. Older patients are often felt to be poor candidates for nCRT. Limited data is available to guide the use of nCRT in this population. METHODS: A retrospective review of patients treated at a tertiary cancer center between 2002 and 2014 was conducted grouping patients by age (≥ 65 or < 65) for evaluation of differences in toxicity and outcomes. Evaluation of pre-treatment platelet-to-lymphocyte ratio (PLR) and neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio (NLR) was also performed. Univariate (UVA) and multivariate analyses (MVA) determined associations between age, toxicities and outcomes. The Kaplan-Meier method (KM) assessed overall survival (OS) and relapse free survival (RFS). RESULTS: 125 patients were identified for this study (67 aging <65, and 58 ≥ 65). In the UVA, advanced age was only associated with increased hematologic toxicity (p = .04). After adjusting for covariates in the MVA, there were no significant differences in toxicity between older and younger patients. There were also no differences between overall survival and relapse free survival between age groups. Increased pre-treatment NLR was strongly correlated with advanced age (p = .01), increased hospitalizations (p = .04), and decreased RFS (p = .002). CONCLUSIONS: Older patients who underwent nCRT followed by esophagectomy had similar toxicities and outcomes as younger patients suggesting that nCRT before esophagectomy is safe in select older adults with esophageal cancer. PLR and NLR may serve as prognostic markers of aging, toxicity, and outcomes. Further research is warranted to optimize the therapy of older patients with this disease.
Authors: Tanja M Cijs; Cees Verhoef; Ewout W Steyerberg; Linetta B Koppert; T C Khe Tran; Bas P L Wijnhoven; Hugo W Tilanus; Jeroen de Jonge Journal: Ann Thorac Surg Date: 2010-09 Impact factor: 4.330
Authors: Dilan A Patel; Jing Xi; Jingqin Luo; Bilal Hassan; Shana Thomas; Cynthia X Ma; Jian L Campian Journal: Breast Cancer Res Treat Date: 2019-01-02 Impact factor: 4.872
Authors: R L G M Blom; M van Heijl; J H G Klinkenbijl; J J G H M Bergman; J W Wilmink; D J Richel; M C C M Hulshof; J B Reitsma; O R C Busch; M I van Berge Henegouwen Journal: Dis Esophagus Date: 2012-08-23 Impact factor: 3.429
Authors: Arnoud J Templeton; Mairéad G McNamara; Boštjan Šeruga; Francisco E Vera-Badillo; Priya Aneja; Alberto Ocaña; Raya Leibowitz-Amit; Guru Sonpavde; Jennifer J Knox; Ben Tran; Ian F Tannock; Eitan Amir Journal: J Natl Cancer Inst Date: 2014-05-29 Impact factor: 13.506