Consistent with our previous review , several domains of GA are associated with adverse outcomes .
BACKGROUND Our previous systematic review of geriatric assessment ( GA ) in oncology included a literature search up to November 2010 .
However , the quickly evolving field warranted an up date .
Aims of this review : ( i ) provide an overview of all GA instruments developed and /or in use in the oncology setting ; ( ii ) evaluate effectiveness of GA in predicting/modifying outcomes ( e.g. treatment decision impact , treatment toxicity , mortality , use of care ) .
Cyclophosphamide, doxorubicin, vincristine, prednisone and rituximab versus epirubicin, cyclophosphamide, vinblastine, prednisone and rituximab for the initial treatment of elderly “fit” patients with diffuse large B-cell lymphoma: results from the ANZINTER3 trial of the Intergruppo Italiano Linfomi
Abstract We conducted a prospect i ve study to compare epirubicin , cyclophosphamide , vinblastine , prednisone and rituximab ( R-miniCEOP ) with cyclophosphamide , doxorubicin , vincristine , prednisone and rituximab ( R-CHOP ) for the treatment of “ fit ” elderly patients with diffuse large B-cell lymphoma ( DLBCL ) . Patients over the age of 65 with stage II – IV DLBCL were screened with a comprehensive geriatric assessment . Patients were r and omized to receive six courses of R-miniCEOP ( n = 114 ) or R-CHOP ( n = 110 ) . Overall , the rate of complete remission was 70 % ( p = 0.466 ) . After a median follow-up of 42 months , 5-year event-free survival ( EFS ) rates were 46 % and 48 % for R-miniCEOP and R-CHOP , respectively ( p = 0.538 ) . Patients older than 72 years and with low-risk disease had a better outcome when treated with R-miniCEOP ( p = 0.011 ) . Overall R-CHOP and R-miniCEOP are similarly effective for elderly “ fit ” patients with DLBCL . The less intense R-miniCEOP may be an acceptable option for the treatment of relatively older patients with low-risk disease
Consistent with our previous review , several domains of GA are associated with adverse outcomes .
BACKGROUND Our previous systematic review of geriatric assessment ( GA ) in oncology included a literature search up to November 2010 .
However , the quickly evolving field warranted an up date .
Aims of this review : ( i ) provide an overview of all GA instruments developed and /or in use in the oncology setting ; ( ii ) evaluate effectiveness of GA in predicting/modifying outcomes ( e.g. treatment decision impact , treatment toxicity , mortality , use of care ) .