4.7 Article

Prognostic factors in elderly patients with malignant pleural mesothelioma: results of a multicenter survey

期刊

BRITISH JOURNAL OF CANCER
卷 111, 期 2, 页码 220-226

出版社

NATURE PUBLISHING GROUP
DOI: 10.1038/bjc.2014.312

关键词

pleural mesothelioma; comorbidity; Charlson Index; elderly; pemetrexed

类别

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Background: The incidence of malignant pleural mesothelioma (MPM) in elderly patients is increasing. There are no specific guidelines for their management. Methods: The clinical records of elderly patients (>= 70 years old) with MPM referred from January 2005 to November 2011 to six Italian Centres were reviewed. Age, gender, histology, International Mesothelioma Interest Group (IMIG) stage, Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group Performance Status (ECOG-PS), Charlson Comorbidity Index (CCI) and treatment modalities were analysed and correlated to overall survival (OS). Results: In total, 241 patients were identified. Charlson Comorbidity Index was >= 1 in 92 patients (38%). Treatment was multimodality therapy including surgery in 18, chemotherapy alone in 180 (75%) and best supportive care in 43 cases (18%). Chemotherapy was mainly pemetrexed based. Median OS was 11.4 months. Non-epithelioid histology (HR 2.32; 95% CI 1.66-3.23, P<0.001), age >= 75 years (HR 1.44; 95% CI 1.08-1.93, P = 0.014), advanced (III-IV) stage (HR 1.47; 95% CI 1.09-1.98, P = 0.011) and CCI >= 1 (HR 1.38; 95% CI 1.02-1.85, P = 0.034) were associated to a shorter OS. Treatment with pemetrexed was associated with improved OS (HR 0.40; 95% CI 0.28-0.56, P<0.001). Conclusions: Non-epithelioid histology, age >= 75 years, advanced IMIG stage and presence of comorbidities according to CCI were significant prognostic factors in elderly patients with MPM. Treatment with pemetrexed-based chemotherapy was feasible in this setting. Prospective dedicated trials in MPM elderly patients selected according to prognostic factors including comorbidity scales are warranted.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据