Despite the fact that elderly patients comprise over 50% of the non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) population, our knowledge regarding the efficacy and safety of chemotherapy in this group is suboptimal. The “elderly” (defined as individuals ≥70 years of age) experience physiologically normal aging of their bone marrow and kidneys, which inherently increases toxicity to therapy. Standard practice has often been to discourage the use of combination chemotherapy in these patients; however, general consensus guidelines emphasize that performance status should primarily guide the choice of treatment. Elderly patients with advanced NSCLC treated with platinum doublet therapy demonstrate similar efficacy (but increased toxicity) to their younger counterparts. Patients with metastatic disease in which a targeted and/or biological agent(s) was added to chemotherapy experienced benefits similar to those treated with standard platinum doublets, but with increased morbidity and mortality. In the future, effective testing of molecular targeted therapies will have to include elderly patients among research cohorts or risk excluding a large population of eligible patients. Overall, elderly patients with advanced NSCLC, while experiencing greater toxicity, demonstrate the same response rates and survival benefits as their younger peers.
It is estimated that lung cancer will be diagnosed in 222,520 patients in 2010 and that 80% of them will fall into the non-small cell category (NSCLC). Approximately 50% of these patients will be aged 65 years or older. The SEER database indicates that the median age of diagnosis for NSCLC is 69 years of age, with 14% of newly diagnosed patients 80 years old or older—this latter group receives fewer interventions and shows poor survival.[3,4] Furthermore, the age-adjusted incidence of developing lung cancer of any type increases from one in 41 patients from 60 to 69 years of age to 1 in 18 patients at over 70 years of age according to data acquired between 2003 and 2005. In the United States and Europe, 70 is accepted as “elderly”. Patients ≥70 years of age are grossly underrepresented in clinical trials. Historically, only 25% of NSCLC trials included patients 65 years or older. Extrapolating these data to elderly patients in clinical practice represents an obvious clinical dilemma.
However, age alone does not accurately predict patients’ ability to tolerate chemotherapy, and being elderly does not portend poor outcomes. Performance status (PS), rather than age, is a better predictor and should be used to tailor therapy decisions. Furthermore, multiple geriatric assessments have been constructed to better predict which elderly patients can tolerate chemotherapy. Questionnaires, such as ones developed by Hurria and Extermann et al, use a patient’s functional status, which combines nutritional status, mobility assessment, and concurrent health conditions to better predict for morbidity and mortality during treatment.[7,8]
In this article, we aim to demonstrate that elderly patients with advanced (stage III-IV) NSCLC will derive the same benefit from therapy as their younger age-matched controls. Topics to be addressed include toxicity, choice of single-agent or doublet chemotherapy, concurrent chemoradiotherapy, and finally choice of therapy in metastatic disease, with attention paid to toxicity of biological/targeted agents.
Pharmacology and Toxicity
Treatment of elderly cancer patients requires careful regard for potential toxicity. Normal aging results in a decrease in the glomerular filtration rate, which reduces the excretion of many common cytotoxic therapies used in NSCLC such as carboplatin and pemetrexed. The elderly must be careful to avoid dehydration, and nephrotoxic agents such as contrast dye, aspirin, or NSAIDs must be used with caution.[9, 10] Similarly, aging results in decreased hematopoietic progenitors and increased myelosuppression during chemotherapy.
From 2003 to 2005, advanced-stage NSCLC patients were enrolled in the Cancer Care Outcomes Research and Surveillance [CanCORS] Consortium observational study. Chrischilles et al prospectively evaluated a cohort of 1,371 of these NSCLC patients with age groups of <55, 55 to 64, 65 to 74, and ≥75 for the influence of age on toxicity and choice of therapy. They found that 78% of patients in the <55 group received chemotherapy, while only 60.5% of those in the 65 to 74 group and 42% in the ≥75 group received any therapy (P < .0001). Similarly, older patients were less likely to receive platinum agents. Among those receiving chemotherapy, pre-treatment clinically important acute medical events (as defined in the CanCORS survey) actually occurred in 18.5% of patients age <55 years, but 9.2% of elderly patients. This is in contrast to treatment-related adverse events, which occurred in 42% of patients age 65-74 years, compared to 30.6% of patients <55, which was statistically significant (odds ratio: 1.70, 95% confidence interval: 1.19 to 2.43). Both peripheral neuropathy and neutropenic fever/sepsis occurrences were also associated with increasing age. Some reduction in the incidence of neutropenia may have been achieved via growth factor administration, per the guidelines recommended by the American Society of Clinical Oncology (ASCO).
Doublet vs Single-Agent Therapy
The most recently published expert consensus data did not support the selection of a specific first-line chemotherapy regimen or combination therapy based on age alone, and in fact emphasized that elderly patients derive the same benefit as younger groups, but at the cost of increased toxicity with combination versus single agent first-line chemotherapy.[15, 16]
In the West Japan Thoracic Oncology Group (WJTOG) 9904 trial, in which docetaxel was compared with vinolrelbine in elderly patients with advanced-stage disease (including PS ≤2), docetaxel (5.5 vs 3.1 months, P < .001, and 22.7% vs 9.9%, P < .01, respectively) showed a higher progression-free survival (PFS) and response rate, but also showed higher myelosuppression.
Docetaxel has also been compared to a combination of gemcitabine-docetaxel in patients >65 years of age. In the combination arm, 39% of patients were >75 years. Time to progression was improved with the combination therapy (4.8 vs 2.9 months; P = .04), but overall survival (OS) results showed no statistical difference. Those with Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) PS of 2 did poorly, and the authors suggested that PS should influence the choice of singlet vs doublet therapy.
A pivotal trial conducted by Quoix et al was recently presented in abstract form (Table 1); this study intended to show that doublet therapy is superior to singlet therapy in the eldest of patients. The trial included only patients aged 70 to 89 years; in addition, patients with ECOG PS of 2 comprised ~27% of the total study population (n = 451). Patients were randomized to 15 weeks of either single-agent weekly gemcitabine or vinorelbine or to a combination of carboplatin, dosed monthly, with weekly paclitaxel for a total of 16 weeks. Doublet therapy demonstrated an improvement in PFS from 3.0 to 6.1 months for singlet therapy (P < 10-6). OS for doublet therapy was 10.3 months, vs 6.2 months in the single-agent arm (P < .00004). Grade 3 neutropenia occurred in 54% of patients who received doublet therapy and in 38% of those who received singlet therapy (P < 10-5), but no significant differences were shown regarding febrile neutropenia. Toxic deaths were increased with doublet therapy, but overall death rates were higher in the singlet therapy group.
Overall, this trial provides level I evidence for using PS criteria and not age as the most important factor in choosing doublet chemotherapy, since older patients with good PS achieve gains, similar to those seen in their younger counterparts, in PFS and OS with this therapy. This trial provides level I evidence to the ASCO consensus guidelines, which recommend consideration of doublet therapy in fit elderly individuals.
1. Jemal A, Siegel R, Ward E, et al. Cancer Statistics, 2009. CA Cancer J Clin. 2009;59:225-49.
2. Yancik R. Population aging and cancer: a cross-national concern. Cancer J. 2005;11:437-41.
3. Havlik RJ, Yancik R, Long S, et al. The National Institute on Aging and the National Cancer Institute SEER collaborative study on comorbidity and early diagnosis of cancer in the elderly. Cancer. 1994;74:2101-6.
4. Owonikoko TK, Ragin CC, Belani CP, et al. Lung cancer in elderly patients: an analysis of the surveillance, epidemiology, and end results database. J Clin Oncol. 2007;25:5570-7.
5. Balducci L. Geriatric oncology: challenges for the new century. Eur J Cancer. 2000;36:1741-54.
6. Hutchins LF, Unger JM, Crowley JJ, et al. Underrepresentation of patients 65 years of age or older in cancer-treatment trials. N Engl J Med. 1999;341:2061-7.
7. Extermann M, Hurria A. Comprehensive geriatric assessment for older patients with cancer. J Clin Oncol. 2007;25:1824-31.
8. Hurria A, Gupta S, Zauderer M, et al. Developing a cancer-specific geriatric assessment: a feasibility study. Cancer. 2005;104:1998-2005.
9. Himmelfarb J. Acute kidney injury in the elderly: problems and prospects. Semin Nephrol. 2009;29:658-64.
10. Rosner MH. The pathogenesis of susceptibility to acute kidney injury in the elderly. Curr Aging Sci. 2009;2:158-64.
11. Gazit R, Weissman IL, Rossi DJ. Hematopoietic stem cells and the aging hematopoietic system. Semin Hematol. 2008;45:218-24.
12. Chrischilles EA, Pendergast JF, Kahn KL, et al. Adverse events among the elderly receiving chemotherapy for advanced non-small-cell lung cancer. J Clin Oncol. 2010;28:620-7.
13. Smith TJ, Khatcheressian J, Lyman GH, et al. 2006 update of recommendations for the use of white blood cell growth factors: an evidence-based clinical practice guideline. J Clin Oncol. 2006;24:3187-205.
14. Smith TJ, Khatcheressian J, Lyman GH, et al. 2006 update of recommendations for the use of white blood cell growth factors: an evidence-based clinical practice guideline. J Clin Oncol. 2006;24:3187-205.
15. Azzoli CG, Baker S, Jr, Temin S, et al. American Society of Clinical Oncology Clinical Practice Guideline Update on Chemotherapy for Stage IV Non-Small-Cell Lung Cancer. J Clin Oncol. 2009;27:6251-66.
16. Pallis AG, Gridelli C, van Meerbeeck JP, et al. EORTC Elderly Task Force and Lung Cancer Group and International Society for Geriatric Oncology (SIOG) experts’ opinion for the treatment of non-small-cell lung cancer in an elderly population. Annals of Oncology. 2010;21:692-706.
17. Kudoh S, Takeda K, Nakagawa K, et al. Phase III study of docetaxel compared with vinorelbine in elderly patients with advanced non-small-cell lung cancer: results of the West Japan Thoracic Oncology Group Trial (WJTOG 9904). J Clin Oncol. 2006;24:3657-63.
18. Hainsworth JD, Spigel DR, Farley C, et al. Weekly docetaxel versus docetaxel/gemcitabine in the treatment of elderly or poor performance status patients with advanced nonsmall cell lung cancer: a randomized phase 3 trial of the Minnie Pearl Cancer Research Network. Cancer. 2007;110:2027-34.
19. Quoix EA, Oster J, Westeel V, et al. Weekly paclitaxel combined with monthly carboplatin versus single-agent therapy in patients age 70 to 89: IFCT-0501 randomized phase III study in advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). J Clin Oncol (Meeting Abstracts). 2010;28:2-.
20. Schiller JH, Harrington D, Belani CP, et al. Comparison of four chemotherapy regimens for advanced non-small-cell lung cancer. N Engl J Med. 2002;346:92-8.
21. Belani CP, Fossella F. Elderly subgroup analysis of a randomized phase III study of docetaxel plus platinum combinations versus vinorelbine plus cisplatin for first-line treatment of advanced nonsmall cell lung carcinoma (TAX 326). Cancer. 2005;104:2766-74.
22. Ramalingam S, Barstis J, Perry MC, et al. Treatment of elderly non-small cell lung cancer patients with three different schedules of weekly paclitaxel in combination with carboplatin: subanalysis of a randomized trial. J Thorac Oncol. 2006;1:240-4.
23. Ramalingam S, Perry MC, La Rocca RV, et al. Comparison of outcomes for elderly patients treated with weekly paclitaxel in combination with carboplatin versus the standard 3-weekly paclitaxel and carboplatin for advanced nonsmall cell lung cancer. Cancer. 2008;113:542-6.
24. Ansari R GR, Socinski M et al., editor. Elderly subgroup analysis of a randomized phase 3 trial of gmcitabine in combiantion with carboplatin or paclitaxel compared to paclitaxel plus carboplatin in advanced non-small cell lung cancer. Proc Am Soc Clin Oncol 2007.
25. Scagliotti GV, Parikh P, von Pawel J, et al. Phase III study comparing cisplatin plus gemcitabine with cisplatin plus pemetrexed in chemotherapy-naive patients with advanced-stage non-small-cell lung cancer. J Clin Oncol. 2008;26:3543-51.
26. Ciuleanu T, Brodowicz T, Zielinski C, et al. Maintenance pemetrexed plus best supportive care versus placebo plus best supportive care for non-small-cell lung cancer: a randomised, double-blind, phase 3 study. Lancet. 2009;374:1432-40.
27. Stinchcombe TE, Gore EM. Limited-stage small cell lung cancer: current chemoradiotherapy treatment paradigms. Oncologist. 2010;15:187-95.
28. Albain KS, Crowley JJ, Turrisi AT, 3rd, et al. Concurrent cisplatin, etoposide, and chest radiotherapy in pathologic stage IIIB non-small-cell lung cancer: a Southwest Oncology Group phase II study, SWOG 9019. J Clin Oncol. 2002;20:3454-60.
29. Gandara DR, Chansky K, Albain KS, et al. Consolidation docetaxel after concurrent chemoradiotherapy in stage IIIB non-small-cell lung cancer: phase II Southwest Oncology Group Study S9504. J Clin Oncol. 2003;21:2004-10.
30. Rocha Lima CM, Herndon JE, 2nd, Kosty M, et al. Therapy choices among older patients with lung carcinoma: an evaluation of two trials of the Cancer and Leukemia Group B. Cancer. 2002;94:181-7.
31. Schild SE, Stella PJ, Geyer SM, et al. The outcome of combined-modality therapy for stage III non-small-cell lung cancer in the elderly. J Clin Oncol. 2003;21:3201-6.
32. Sgroi MM, Neubauer M, Ansari R, et al. An analysis of elderly patients (pts) treated on a phase III trial of cisplatin (P) plus etoposide (E) with concurrent radiotherapy (CRT) followed by docetaxel (D) vs observation (O) in pts with stage III non small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). J Clin Oncol (Meeting Abstracts). 2007;25:9037-.
33. Sandler A, Gray R, Perry MC, et al. Paclitaxel-Carboplatin Alone or with Bevacizumab for Non-Small-Cell Lung Cancer. N Engl J Med. 2006;355:2542-50.
34. Ramalingam SS, Dahlberg SE, Langer CJ, et al. Outcomes for elderly, advanced-stage non small-cell lung cancer patients treated with bevacizumab in combination with carboplatin and paclitaxel: analysis of Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group Trial 4599. J Clin Oncol. 2008;26:60-5.
35. Wheatley-Price P, Ding K, Seymour L, et al. Erlotinib for advanced non-small-cell lung cancer in the elderly: an analysis of the National Cancer Institute of Canada Clinical Trials Group Study BR.21. J Clin Oncol. 2008;26:2350-7.
36. Belani CP, Choy CP, Choy H, et al. Combined chemoradiaotherapy regimens of paclitaxel and carboplatin for locally advanced non-small-cell lung cancer: a randomized phase II locally advanced multi-modality protocol. J Clin Oncol. 2005;23:5883-91.