Cited by 403Frailty in Older AdultsLung Cancer Diagnosis and TreatmentLung Cancer Research Studies

Use of a Comprehensive Geriatric Assessment for the Management of Elderly Patients With Advanced Non–Small-Cell Lung Cancer: The Phase III Randomized ESOGIA-GFPC-GECP 08-02 Study

Corre, Romain, Greillier, Laurent, Le Caër, Hervé, Audigier-Valette, Clarisse, Baize, Nathalie, Bérard, Henri, Falchero, Lionel, Monnet, Isabelle +15 more·2016·Journal of Clinical Oncology

Abstract

Purpose: Comprehensive geriatric assessment (CGA) is recommended to assess the vulnerability of elderly patients, but its integration in cancer treatment decision making has never been prospectively evaluated. Here, in elderly patients with advanced non–small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC), we compared a standard strategy of chemotherapy allocation on the basis of performance status (PS) and age with an experimental strategy on the basis of CGA. Patients and Methods: In a multicenter, open-label, phase III trial, elderly patients ≥ 70 years old with a PS of 0 to 2 and stage IV NSCLC were randomly assigned between chemotherapy allocation on the basis of PS and age (standard arm: carboplatin-based doublet if PS ≤ 1 and age ≤ 75 years; docetaxel if PS = 2 or age > 75 years) and treatment allocation on the basis of CGA (CGA arm: carboplatin-based doublet for fit patients, docetaxel for vulnerable patients, and best supportive care for frail patients). The primary end point was treatment failure free survival (TFFS). Secondary end points were overall survival (OS), progression-free survival, tolerability, and quality of life. Results: Four hundred ninety-four patients were randomly assigned (standard arm, n = 251; CGA arm, n = 243). Median age was 77 years. In the standard and CGA arms, 35.1% and 45.7% of patients received a carboplatin-based doublet, 64.9% and 31.3% received docetaxel, and 0% and 23.0% received best supportive care, respectively. In the standard and CGA arms, median TFFS times were 3.2 and 3.1 months, respectively (hazard ratio, 0.91; 95% CI, 0.76 to 1.1), and median OS times were 6.4 and 6.1 months, respectively (hazard ratio, 0.92; 95% CI, 0.79 to 1.1). Patients in the CGA arm, compared with standard arm patients, experienced significantly less all grade toxicity (85.6% v 93.4%, respectively P = .015) and fewer treatment failures as a result of toxicity (4.8% v 11.8%, respectively; P = .007). Conclusion: In elderly patients with advanced NSCLC, treatment allocation on the basis of CGA failed to improve the TFFS or OS but slightly reduced treatment toxicity.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1200/jco.2015.63.5839

Cites

33 of 33 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Corre, R., Greillier, L., Le Caër, H., Audigier-Valette, C., Baize, N., Bérard, H., Falchero, L., Monnet, I., Dansin, E., Vergnenègre, A., Marcq, M., Decroisette, C., Auliac, J.-B., Bota, S., Lamy, R., Massuti, B., Dujon, C., Pérol, M., Daurès, J.-P., Descourt, R., Léna, H., Plassot, C., & Chouaïd, C.
Affiliations
  • Centre Hospitalier Universitaire d'Angers (FR)
  • Romain Corre and Hervé Léna, Centre Hospitalier Universitaire de Rennes, Rennes; Laurent Greillier, Université de Médecine, Marseille; Hervé Le Caër, Centre Hospitalier de Draguignan, Draguignan; Clarisse Audigier-Valette, Centre Hospitalier Intercommunal de Toulon; Henri Bérard, Hôpital Inter Armées Sainte-Anne, Toulon; Nathalie Baize, Centre Hospitalier Universitaire d’Angers, Angers; Lionel Falchero, Centre Hospitalier de Villefranche sur Saône, Villefranche sur Saône; Isabelle Monnet and Christos...
Venue
Journal of Clinical Oncology
Published
2016-05-01
Volume
34
Issue
13
Pages
1476-1483
ISSN
  • 0732-183X (ISSN-L)
  • 1527-7755
OpenAlex
W2281930375
Cited by
403
References
32
Citations by year
2026: 18 · 2025: 11 · 2024: 37 · 2023: 35 · 2022: 47 · 2021: 40 · 2020: 50 · 2019: 40 · 2018: 56 · 2017: 43 · 2016: 23 · 2015: 1
FWCI
31.02
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Journal of Clinical Oncology (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • HAL (submittedVersion)
Funders
  • American Society of Clinical Oncology
  • Centre Hospitalier Universitaire de Rennes
  • National Cancer Institute
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Geriatrics and Gerontology › Frailty in Older Adults
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Pulmonary and Respiratory Medicine › Lung Cancer Diagnosis and Treatment
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Oncology › Lung Cancer Research Studies
Keywords
comprehensive geriatric assessment, advanced non-small cell lung cancer, elderly patients, frailty, performance status, docetaxel, treatment toxicity, overall survival, best supportive care, geriatric oncology, treatment decision-making, quality of life, treatment tolerability
MeSH terms
Pemetrexed, Docetaxel, Gemcitabine, Aged, Aged, 80 and over, Antineoplastic Combined Chemotherapy Protocols, Carcinoma, Non-Small-Cell Lung, Carcinoma, Squamous Cell, Deoxycytidine, Female, Follow-Up Studies, Humans, Lung Neoplasms, Male, Neoplasm Staging, Prognosis, Quality of Life, Geriatric Assessment, Survival Rate, Carboplatin, Paclitaxel, Taxoids

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review