Advanced breast cancer at presentation (ABC-p) in octogenarian women (OW): Specific elderly-devoted risk tests(SEDRT) (CARG+CRASH) as new tools to prevent serious/irreversible adverse reactions (AR) in frail patients.

Abstract

e12510 Background: Due to current lengthening of average lifespan and progressive increase of malignant tumors in mankind, more new strategies must be constantly sought especially for thirdage neoplasms. Nevertheless because severe toxicity developed in the majority of frail patients, administration of therapy may cause high risk of life-threatening AIM: We have considered in this paper ABC in frail patients like OW. Purpose of the study is preliminary detection of the overall toxicity (OTox) through the possible use of specifics tests adopted specially in frail patients such as OW, to ensure greater control in drugs administration with good effectiveness. AIM: We have considered in this paper ABC in frail patients like OW. Methods: Sixty-two patients with advanced breast cancer at presentation ABC-p were enrolled between January 2018 and December 2019. Eligibility criteria: • women aging eighty or older; • acquired written consensus; • confirmed diagnosis of ABC; • one or two measurable lesions (bone or visceral or both); • no brain secondarisms; • Charlson’s Comorbidity Scale 1-3 score points; CGA Evaluation permissive for treatment. CARG-TS (Cancer and Aging Research Group-Test Score) and CRASH-TS (Chemotherapy Risk Assessment Scale for High-Age Patients Test S) are rated for predictive assessment of the risk of severe chemotox in all patients. Further Evaluations tools: Clinical Benefit according to ESMO CB scale v2a; Tox Profile CTCAE v3.0 Criteria; QoL by EORTC QLQ-C20 Results: CARG-TS predicts severe OTox; CRASH-TS predicts hematologic non-hematologic toxicity. Using a combination of CGA-ES+CARG-TS+CRASH-TS, we were able to divide patients into three categories: • LR -Low risk (score0-5); • MR-Medium risk (score 5-10); • HR High risk (score over 10). On this basis HR people was directed to receive endocrine therapy (if ER+PGR+) or RT alone. The MR group experienced a reduced schedule of eribulin (0.90mg/sqm d1,d28 until P-progression or INT-intolerable toxicity). Finally LR group received a schedule with eribulin alone(E 0.96-1.1 mg/sqm IV on d1, d21 dosage depending on creatinine clearance value according to the Kintzel-Dorr’s method and until P or INT-toxicity). Conclusions: With contemporary use of CGA-ES, CARG-TS, CRASH-TS we obtained two diagrams: the first “predicted risk” ; the second “observed risk” for each patient. The first curve was almost perfectly in line (p<0.001) with that of the “observed risk”. This allowed to have extremely personalized treatments, negligible OTox, and very good values for both CB and QoL.