METHODS
A total of 47 patients who receiving RT or chemoradiotherapy treatment for bladder cancer in elderly
patient (>70 years) were included in the study.
RESULTS
In total 47 patients, 4 patients (8.5%) had Stage I, 38 patients (80.8%) had Stage II, and 5 patients (10.6%)
had Stage III bladder cancer. About 76.9% of patients had invasive urothelial, 3.8% of patients had squamous
and micropapillary carcinoma, and 19.2% of had other (adenocarcinoma) histopathological type.
Gender, age, family cancer history, hematuria, smoking, bladder carcinoma type, Charlson CoMorbidity
Index, RT dose, concurrent chemoradiotherapy, metastasis side, acute and late toxicity, and follow-up
duration of patients showed insignificant differences according to stage (p>0.05). We found that overall
survival and disease-free survival (DFS) were statistically significant according to the stages (p<0.05).
DFS for Karnofsky Performance Status (KPS) >70 group (25.97±19.06) was higher than KPS <70 group
(2.37±1.53) with statistically significant difference (p<0.05).
CONCLUSION
Curative RT and chemoradiotherapy can be safe regimen for older (>70 year) patients with bladder cancer.
Nonetheless, KPS and geriatric assessments tools should be consideration before RT and chemoradiotherapy
administration.
Keywords: Aged; bladder neoplasms; radiotherapy; stage
In this study, we aimed to investigate outcome of elderly patients with MIBC and NMIBC who taken curative RT and CRT after TUR.
The general status of the patients was evaluated by
Karnofsky Performance Status (KPS) Scores range from
0 to 100 (<70 and ?70). The status of comorbidities was
determined using the Charlson Comorbidity Index.[
RT and Chemoradiotherapy Data
Chemotherapy protocol Cisplatin 35 mg/m2, weekly
to be administered by the Medical Oncology Clinic.
Treatment Toxicity and Follow-up
Statistical Analysis
All patients received maximal TUR. All patients received
external beam RT in 1.8-2.0 Gy daily fractions
with 18 MV photon beams, 5 days a week. Pelvic lymph
nodes were sometimes included and applied to the
bladder or tumor to 65 Gy after 40-45 Gy. Radiation
treatment was carried out using field-in field intensitymodulated
radiation treatment and 4-field box three-
-dimension conformal technique. The clinical target
volume (CTV) included gross tumor volume and covered
any direct extension of the tumor. The planning
treatment volume was the CTV with addition of a 1-1.5 cm margin. Almost all patients received a phase 2
boost to the tumor bed.
Treatment toxicity was evaluated with the Common
Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events version 4.0.[
Nominal and ordinal data were described with frequency
analysis, whereas scale parameters were described
with mean and standard deviations. Chi-square
with likelihood ratio was used for differences between
nominal and ordinal parameters. Kolmogorov-
Smirnov test was used for normality of scale parameters.
For normally distributed parameters, one-way
ANOVA Test was used, and Kruskal-Wallis Test was
used for non-normally distributed parameters. Kaplan-
Meier analysis was used for disease-free survival
(DFS) analysis for different patient groups. All analyses
were performed at 95% confidence level with 0.05 significance
level at SPSS 17.0 for windows program.
In terms of RT doses, all of Stage I patients received 60 Gy. About 92.1% of Stage II patients had 60 Gy, only one patient (2.7%) had 64 Gy. Half of the patients (21 patients) received RT alone while the other half received concomitant chemoradiotherapy with cisplatin (weekly). Six patients from Stage II (15.8%) and one patient from Stage III (20.0%) discontinued RT treatment.
Bone metastasis was dominant in Stage III patients. Follow-up duration mean was the highest in Stage I patients (33 month). All patients in the Stage III were died. Mortality rate was 25.0% in Stage I and 73.7% in Stage II patients.
RT and CRT treatment was well tolerated. It was seen in 4 (10.5%) patients with Grade 2 diarrhea Stage II. Urinary frequency was most common in Stage II patients. In terms of late toxicity, three patients (7.9%) had Grade 3 cystitis in Stage II and one patient (20.0%) had Grade 3 cystitis in Stage III. One patient in Stage III, two patients in Stage II required hospitalization due to late side effects. According to difference analysis results, all differences between stage groups were not statistically significant (p>0.05).
Some clinical parameters of patients according to
stage groups are given in Table
Kaplan-Meier results for stage and KPS groups are
given in Figures
Gross hematuria and painless bleeding are most important
sign in bladder cancer.[
Smoking is one of the important risk factors in bladder
cancer. Studies in the literature show that smoking
is one of the most important factors.[
KPS is an parameter used in bladder cancer and
other cancer. While making the treatment decision,
the general condition of the patient is evaluated with
this parameter. In the study conducted by Wujanto et
al.,[
Charlson Comorbidity Index is use geriatric oncology
patients. The patient is given points according
to the additional diseases. Our patients were generally
found to be 3 points or more.
In many studies on elderly bladder cancer, RT dose
was applied over 60 Gy. Median 58.6 Gy (range 54-62.8)
was used in the study of Lee et al.,[
Metastasis was most common in the liver after
treatment. Follow-up time was at least 11 months with
Stage III. In other stages, the follow-up period was approximately
30 months.
Stage of bladder cancer is an important factor that
affects both the course of the disease and survival rate.
Studies have been conducted in the literature regarding
the stage and course of the disease and different results
have been reported.[
In our study, clinical, treatment, toxicity, demographic
parameters did not differ significantly according
to the stages. OS and DFS are significantly difference
between stage groups (p=0.08 and p=0.02). DFS
and OS were observed at the lowest Stage III. The reason
for this is that patients are lost due to additional
diseases or they are receiving alone RT. DFS and OS
were found at the highest Stage II. Because, almost all
of these patients received CRT.
A limitation of our study was almost all patients
Stage II. According to the stages, the number of patients
was not homogeneously distributed. It was not
clear whether the cause of death was due to the additional
disease. Bladder cancer is mostly diagnosed in
older patients; a comprehensive assessment is required
when deciding on the options for curative treatment.
Peer-review: Externally peer-reviewed.
Conflict of Interest: The authors have no conflicts of interest to declare.
Ethics Committee Approval: The study was approved by the University of Health Science, Istanbul Training and Research Hospital Clinical Research Ethics Committee (No: 2019-1859, Date: 14/06/2019).
Financial Support: The authors declared that this study has received no financial support.
Authorship contributions: Concept - B.İ.; Design - B.İ., Ö.M.; Supervision - Ö.M.; Funding - B.İ.; Materials - B.İ., Ö.M.; Data collection and/or processing - B.İ.; Data analysis and/or interpretation - B.İ., Ö.M.; Literature search - Ö.M.; Writing - B.İ.; Critical review - B.İ.