Abstract We performed a multicenter study to validate the concept that a simple comprehensive geriatric assessment (CGA) can identify elderly, non-fit patients with diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL) in whom curative treatment is not better then palliation, and to analyze potential benefits of treatment modulation after further subdividing the non-fit category by CGA criteria. One hundred and seventy-three patients aged > 69 treated with curative or palliative intent by clinical judgement only were grouped according to CGA into fit (46%), unfit (16%) and frail (38%) categories. Two-year overall survival (OS) was significantly better in fit than in non-fit patients (84% vs. 47%; p < 0.0001). Survival in unfit and frail patients was not significantly different. Curative treatment slightly improved 2-year OS in unfit (75% vs. 45%) but not in frail patients (44% vs. 39%). CGA was confirmed as very efficient in identifying elderly patients with DLBCL who can benefit from a curative approach. Further efforts are needed to better tailor therapies in non-fit patients.

Tucci, A., Martelli, M., Rigacci, L., Riccomagno, P., Cabras, M. G., Salvi, F., Stelitano, C., Fabbri, A., Storti, S., Fogazzi, S., Mancuso, S., Brugiatelli, M., Fama, A., Paesano, P., Puccini, B., Bottelli, C., Dalceggio, D., Bertagna, F., Rossi, G., Spina, M., Comprehensive geriatric assessment is an essential tool to support treatment decisions in elderly patients with diffuse large B-cell lymphoma: A prospective multicenter evaluation in 173 patients by the Lymphoma Italian Foundation (FIL), <<LEUKEMIA & LYMPHOMA>>, 2015; 56 (4): 921-926. [doi:10.3109/10428194.2014.953142] [http://hdl.handle.net/10807/172552]

Comprehensive geriatric assessment is an essential tool to support treatment decisions in elderly patients with diffuse large B-cell lymphoma: A prospective multicenter evaluation in 173 patients by the Lymphoma Italian Foundation (FIL)

Storti, Sergio;
2015

Abstract

Abstract We performed a multicenter study to validate the concept that a simple comprehensive geriatric assessment (CGA) can identify elderly, non-fit patients with diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL) in whom curative treatment is not better then palliation, and to analyze potential benefits of treatment modulation after further subdividing the non-fit category by CGA criteria. One hundred and seventy-three patients aged > 69 treated with curative or palliative intent by clinical judgement only were grouped according to CGA into fit (46%), unfit (16%) and frail (38%) categories. Two-year overall survival (OS) was significantly better in fit than in non-fit patients (84% vs. 47%; p < 0.0001). Survival in unfit and frail patients was not significantly different. Curative treatment slightly improved 2-year OS in unfit (75% vs. 45%) but not in frail patients (44% vs. 39%). CGA was confirmed as very efficient in identifying elderly patients with DLBCL who can benefit from a curative approach. Further efforts are needed to better tailor therapies in non-fit patients.
2015
Inglese
Tucci, A., Martelli, M., Rigacci, L., Riccomagno, P., Cabras, M. G., Salvi, F., Stelitano, C., Fabbri, A., Storti, S., Fogazzi, S., Mancuso, S., Brugiatelli, M., Fama, A., Paesano, P., Puccini, B., Bottelli, C., Dalceggio, D., Bertagna, F., Rossi, G., Spina, M., Comprehensive geriatric assessment is an essential tool to support treatment decisions in elderly patients with diffuse large B-cell lymphoma: A prospective multicenter evaluation in 173 patients by the Lymphoma Italian Foundation (FIL), <<LEUKEMIA & LYMPHOMA>>, 2015; 56 (4): 921-926. [doi:10.3109/10428194.2014.953142] [http://hdl.handle.net/10807/172552]
File in questo prodotto:
File Dimensione Formato  
172552.pdf

non disponibili

Tipologia file ?: Versione Editoriale (PDF)
Licenza: Non specificato
Dimensione 3.4 MB
Formato Unknown
3.4 MB Unknown   Visualizza/Apri

I documenti in IRIS sono protetti da copyright e tutti i diritti sono riservati, salvo diversa indicazione.

Utilizza questo identificativo per citare o creare un link a questo documento: https://hdl.handle.net/10807/172552
Citazioni
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.pmc??? 31
  • Scopus 126
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.isi??? 121
social impact