Real-World Treatment and Outcomes of Metastatic Colorectal Cancer Patients With a Poor or Very Poor Performance Status

Avraham Travers,Azim Jalali,Stephen Begbie,Christine Semira,Suzanne Kosmider,Sumitra Ananda,Rachel Wong,Margaret Lee,Jeremy Shapiro,Matthew Burge,Desmond Yip,Javier Torres,Brigette Ma,Louise Nott,Andrew Dean,Jeanne Tie,Adnan Khattak,Stephanie Lim,Hui-Li Wong,Peter Gibbs,Hui-li Wong
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.clcc.2020.08.002
IF: 4.035
2021-03-01
Clinical Colorectal Cancer
Abstract:<h3 class="u-h4 u-margin-m-top u-margin-xs-bottom">Introduction</h3><p>/Background: The management of metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) patients with a poor performance status (PS) continues to be a clinical dilemma, with the potential activity and safety of treating this population remaining poorly understood. Few of these patients are enrolled in clinical trials and poor PS is often multifactorial.</p><h3 class="u-h4 u-margin-m-top u-margin-xs-bottom">Materials and Methods</h3><p>We analysed the Treatment of Recurrent and Advanced Colorectal Cancer registry to describe treatment practices and outcomes in poor (ECOG 2) and very poor PS (ECOG &gt; 2) patients, to explore the relationship between age, tumour burden, comorbidities and PS, and to evaluate the benefit of systemic therapy. Standard descriptive statistical methods, Kaplan-Meier analysis and a multivariate Cox regression model were utilised.</p><h3 class="u-h4 u-margin-m-top u-margin-xs-bottom">Results</h3><p>Of 2769 registry patients (diagnosed January 2009 – June 2018), 329 (12%) and 182 (7%) patients had a poor and very poor PS respectively. Good PS patients were more likely to receive systemic therapy than poor and very poor PS patients (85%, 55% and 21.5%, p&lt;0.0001), but clinician assessed response was observed in all subsets (53%, 41% and 29%, p 0.0003). Treatment with chemotherapy was associated with longer median OS across PS groups. Exploratory analysis based on comorbidity score and tumour burden subgroups demonstrated a consistently positive OS association with treatment. Benefit was observed where poor OS was attributable to medical comorbidities and to tumour burden.</p><h3 class="u-h4 u-margin-m-top u-margin-xs-bottom">Conclusion</h3><p>In routine clinical care, a substantial proportion of poor and very poor PS patients receive active treatment, which is often associated with meaningful clinical benefit.</p>
oncology
What problem does this paper attempt to address?