1 Department of Surgery, 2 Ottawa Health Research Institute, 3 Ottawa Regional Cancer Centre, 4 Clinical Epidemiology Unit, Ottawa Hospital; Ottawa, Canada
Received 11 February 2003; revised 19 June 2003; accepted 12 August 2003
![]() |
Abstract |
---|
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
---|
While adjuvant chemotherapy is known to improve survival in older women with breast cancer, there is little information about its effects on physical function and health-related quality of life.
Patients and methods:
Young (<65 years of age) and older (65 years of age) postmenopausal women completed the European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) Quality of Life Questionnaire Core Module (QLQ-C30) and BR23 questionnaires and other measures prior to, during and at the completion of anthracycline-based adjuvant chemotherapy, and then 6 and 12 months later.
Results:
Physical, role and social function decreased during chemotherapy and emotional function improved (all P <0.01). The decline in physical function was more marked in young (age range 3164 years; n = 45) than in older women (6580 years; n = 20) (P <0.05), despite similar baseline values and drug dose intensities. Physical and role function had recovered at 6 months post-chemotherapy. Older patients had consistently better emotional function (P <0.01).
Conclusions:
Physical function and other functional domains are impaired in postmenopausal women during adjuvant chemotherapy for breast cancer, but recover subsequently. Physical function appeared to be better maintained in the older women, who tolerated adjuvant chemotherapy well overall. A knowledge of these effects is important for clinical decision-making and when defining social support needs during adjuvant chemotherapy.
Key words: adjuvant therapy, breast cancer, elderly, health-related quality of life, physical function
![]() |
Introduction |
---|
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
---|
![]() |
Patients and methods |
---|
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
---|
Physical function and other HR-QoL domains were assessed using the European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) Quality of Life Questionnaire Core Module (QLQ-C30, version 2.0), which patients completed prior to chemotherapy (baseline), immediately before the third cycle, 3 weeks after the sixth cycle and 6 (follow-up) and 12 months later [9, 10]. In addition to the cancer-specific QLQ-C30, we employed a site-specific instrument (QLQ-BR23 breast cancer module [11]), a generic instrument (SF-36 Health Survey; English Canadian, Medical Outcomes Trust, Boston, MA, USA) and a domain-specific instrument [Karnofsky performance status (KPS)]. Maximal voluntary handgrip strength was evaluated at the same times, taken as the highest of three brief, maximal contractions in the dominant hand, 3060 s apart, using a handgrip dynamometer (Digital Pinch/Grip Analyser; MIE Medical Research, Leeds, UK) [12].
Age was treated as a dichotomous variable with a cut-off point of 65 years [13]. The effects of adjuvant chemotherapy were evaluated by comparing baseline values with those at completion of chemotherapy, when the magnitude of adverse effects was anticipated to be greatest. Subsequent recovery was evaluated by comparing baseline with post-chemotherapy values at 6 month, by which time recovery was expected. Other time points were of secondary interest, with less focused expectations, and formal repeated measures analysis was not carried out. Data were robustly analysed using Students t-test with additional multivariate and sensitivity analyses, and are reported as mean ± standard deviation.
![]() |
Results |
---|
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
---|
|
|
|
Young versus older women
Baseline QLQ-C30 physical, role, social and cognitive function, global health status, fatigue, and nausea and vomiting were similar in both age groups. Emotional function was better in older women at baseline and throughout the study (both P <0.02). The mean decline in physical function with chemotherapy was more marked in young (18 ± 19) than older women (4 ± 16; P = 0.02) (Figure 1 and Supplementary data Figure 1, which is available at Annals of Oncology on-line). The declines in role function, social function and global health status, the improvement in emotional function, and levels of fatigue with chemotherapy were similar in young and older women. Older women reported less nausea and vomiting during chemotherapy (P <0.05). The improvements in social and emotional function at follow-up relative to baseline did not appear to differ between young and older women.
|
Baseline SF-36 physical function, role functionphysical, role functionemotional, vitality, general health and bodily pain were similar in young and older women. Baseline social function (P <0.05) and mental health (P <0.001) were rated higher by older women. Physical function, role functionphysical and vitality declined and role functionemotional and mental health improved during chemotherapy to similar extents in young and older women. The improvements in role functionphysical (P <0.05) and role functionemotional (P = 0.05) at follow-up relative to baseline appeared greater in young women.
Baseline KPS and the decline during chemotherapy appeared similar in young and older women. Handgrip strength was lower in older than in young women at baseline (20 ± 4 versus 23 ± 4 kg; P <0.02), but did not change during chemotherapy or follow-up.
The study was observational out of necessity, and as a consequence, the groups to be compared were expected to differ in terms of baseline covariates. We sought to address the possible influence of these covariates on changes in physical function using multivariate techniques. Multiple linear regression analysis including a subset of measured covariates chosen as clinically relevant suggested that the age effect was still present. However, confidence in the robustness of this analysis is limited by the small group sizes. Since methods of imputation of missing values require large samples in order to be reliable, we employed sensitivity analysis with respect to change in physical function. Assuming extreme values (i.e. that physical function in young patients with missing values was optimal and in older patients was poor), the preservation of physical function in older relative to young patients was no longer apparent.
![]() |
Discussion |
---|
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
---|
Body composition tends to change in a predictable manner during adult life, the most substantial alteration being a decline in muscle mass of as much as 4050% by the eighth decade of life relative to young adulthood [24]. More or less parallel changes occur in strength, and age-related differences in muscle fibre types and numbers of functioning motor units and changes in muscle energetics have been identified [25, 26]. In previous work, we have observed that older patients were substantially weaker than young patients following major elective surgery and their recovery of strength was impaired [12]. Thus we postulated that older women with breast cancer would experience more marked declines in strength and physical function during the stress of adjuvant chemotherapy.
When data for all women were combined, physical function declined during adjuvant chemotherapy, as did role function, social function and global health status. The magnitude of the impairments was at a level that would be perceived by patients as moderate (for physical and role function] or a little (for social function and global health status) [14]. Importantly, by 6 months post-chemotherapy each had returned to or was better than baseline values. Moreover, emotional function improved throughout chemotherapy and the period of follow-up. A knowledge of the burden for patients represented by these changes, and that they resolve following therapy, is relevant for clinicians and patients in deciding about adjuvant chemotherapy. It may be also useful in planning treatment, for example, in defining social support needs.
The older women in this study reported a decline in physical function which was considerably less marked despite receiving chemotherapy at dose intensities similar to those in the young women. Furthermore, they rated their emotional function higher than did young women throughout therapy and follow-up, and declines in other functional domains were no worse than those in young postmenopausal women. Others have identified a negative correlation between age and psychological distress following breast cancer treatment and suggested that younger women have greater difficulty adjusting [27]. From the perspective of physical function and other functional domains, the older women tolerated adjuvant chemotherapy at least as well as younger women, supporting the concept that age should not be used in isolation in decision-making about adjuvant chemotherapy for breast cancer. Other possible predictors of adverse functional outcomes remain to be examined in larger patient groups; for example, comorbidity and baseline emotional function. Instruments that evaluate physical and/or instrumental activities of daily living, nutritional status and other elements of a comprehensive geriatric assessment may have predictive value.
Our observations are not generalizable to all older women with breast cancer. The number studied is small and it is likely that they were selected for medical oncology referral and offered adjuvant chemotherapy because they were particularly fit. The observation that baseline function in most domains was similar in both age groups is consistent with a selection bias, although we do not have information about women who were not referred for, or offered, adjuvant chemotherapy, or who were offered it but declined. Explanations for our observations other than selection bias may also be relevant. The difference in decline in physical function during chemotherapy may reflect a difference in the health expectations of young and older women and a discordance between their health expectations and current experience [28]. Specifically, individuals may experience a substantial impact on their QoL from a modest clinical condition if they have high expectations of their health, whereas those whose expectations of their health are lower (e.g. older patients) may experience less deterioration in the same circumstances. The elderly expect some deterioration in physical function as a consequence of their advancing age, yet may be quite satisfied despite limited functioning [29, 30]. Many elderly persons appear to view success in aging as a process of adaptation rather than as a state of being or function [31].
We conclude that anthracycline-based adjuvant chemotherapy for breast cancer in postmenopausal women is accompanied by impairments in physical function and other functional domains which are mild to moderate in degree and recover by 6 months post-therapy. Selected older women tolerate such therapy well. Age should not be used in isolation in decision-making about adjuvant chemotherapy for breast cancer.
![]() |
Acknowledgements |
---|
![]() |
Footnotes |
---|
Present address: Northwestern Ontario Regional Cancer Centre, 290 Munro Street, Thunder Bay, Ontario, Canada P7A 7T1.
¶ Present address: Centre for Statistics in Medicine, Institute of Health Sciences, Old Road, Headington, Oxford OX3 7LF, UK.
![]() |
References |
---|
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
---|
2. Early Breast Cancer Trialists Collaborative Group. Tamoxifen for early breast cancer: an overview of the randomised trials. Lancet 1998; 351: 14511467.[CrossRef][ISI][Medline]
3. Silliman RA, Balducci L, Goodwin JS et al. Breast cancer care in old age: what we know, dont know, and do. J Natl Cancer Inst 1993; 85: 190199.[Abstract]
4. Desch CE, Smith TJ. Defining treatment aims and end-points in older patients with cancer. Drugs Aging 1995; 6: 351357.[ISI][Medline]
5. Newcomb PA, Carbone PP. Cancer treatment and age: patient perspectives. J Natl Cancer Inst 1993; 85: 15801584.[Abstract]
6. Yellen SB, Cella DF, Leslie WT. Age and clinical decision making in oncology patients. J Natl Cancer Inst 1994; 86: 17661770.[Abstract]
7. Skelton DA, Grieg CA, Davies JM, Young A. Strength, power and related functional ability of healthy people aged 6589 years. Age Ageing 1994; 23: 371377.[Abstract]
8. Hürny C, Bernhard J, Coates AS et al. Impact of adjuvant therapy on quality of life in women with node-positive operable breast cancer. Lancet 1996; 347: 12791284.[CrossRef][ISI][Medline]
9. Aaronson NK, Ahmedzai S, Bergman B et al. The European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer QLQ-C30: a quality of life instrument for use in international clinical trials in oncology. J Natl Cancer Inst 1993; 85: 365376.[Abstract]
10. Osoba D, Zee B, Pater J et al. Psychometric properties and responsiveness of the EORTC Quality of Life Questionnaire (QLQ-C30) in patients with breast, ovarian, and lung cancer. Qual Life Res 1994; 3: 353364.[ISI][Medline]
11. Sprangers MAG, Groenvold M, Arraras JI et al. The European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer breast cancer-specific quality-of-life questionnaire module: first results from a three-country field study. J Clin Oncol 1996; 14: 27562768.[Abstract]
12. Watters JM, Clancey SM, Moulton SB et al. Impaired recovery of strength in older patients after major abdominal surgery. Ann Surg 1993; 218: 380393.[ISI][Medline]
13. Watters JM, ORourke K. Effects of age and gender. In Wilmore DW, Souba WW (eds): Surgical Research. San Diego, CA: Academic Press 2001; 167174.
14. Osoba D, Rodrigues G, Myles J et al. Interpreting the significance of changes in health-related quality-of-life scores. J Clin Oncol 1998; 16: 139144.[Abstract]
15. Yancik R, Wesley MN, Ries LAG et al. Effect of age and comorbidity in postmenopausal breast cancer patients aged 55 years and older. JAMA 2001; 285: 885892.
16. Mor V, Laliberte LL, Petrisek AC et al. Impact of breast cancer treatment guidelines on surgeon practice patterns: results of a hospital-based intervention. Surgery 2000; 128: 847861.[CrossRef][ISI][Medline]
17. Silliman RA, Guadagnoli E, Weitberg AB, Mor V. Age as a predictor of diagnostic and initial treatment intensity in newly diagnosed breast cancer patients. J Gerontol 1989; 44: M46M50.[ISI][Medline]
18. Siminoff LA, Zhang A, Colabianchi N et al. Factors that predict the referral of breast cancer patients onto clinical trials by their surgeons and medical oncologists. J Clin Oncol 2000; 18: 12031211.
19. Merchant TE, McCormick B, Yahalom J, Borgen P. The influence of older age on breast cancer treatment decisions and outcome. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 1996; 34: 565570.[ISI][Medline]
20. Fisher B, Redmond C, Legault-Poisson S et al. Postoperative chemotherapy and tamoxifen compared with tamoxifen alone in the treatment of positive-node breast cancer patients aged 50 years and older with tumors responsive to tamoxifen: results from the National Surgical Adjuvant Breast and Bowel Project B-16. J Clin Oncol 1990; 8: 10051018.[Abstract]
21. McKenna RJ Sr. Clinical aspects of cancer in the elderly. Cancer 1994; 74: 21072117.[ISI][Medline]
22. Dees EC, OReilly S, Goodman SN et al. A prospective pharmacologic evaluation of age-related toxicity of adjuvant chemotherapy in women with breast cancer. Cancer Invest 2000; 18: 521529.[ISI][Medline]
23. Du XL, Osborne C, Goodwin JS. Population-based assessment of hospitalizations for toxicity from chemotherapy in older women with breast cancer. J Clin Oncol 2002; 20: 46364642.
24. Cohn SH, Vartsky D, Yasumura S et al. Compartmental body composition based on total-body nitrogen, potassium, and calcium. Am J Physiol 1980; 239: E524E530.[ISI][Medline]
25. Kallman DA, Plato CC, Tobin JD. The role of muscle loss in the age-related decline of grip strength: cross-sectional and longitudinal perspectives. J Gerontol 1990; 45: M82M88.[ISI][Medline]
26. Lexell J, Taylor CC. Variability in muscle fibre areas in whole human quadriceps muscle: effects of increasing age. J Anat 1991; 174: 239249.[ISI][Medline]
27. Cohen L, Hack TF, de Moor C et al. The effects of type of surgery and time on psychological adjustment in women after breast cancer treatment. Ann Surg Oncol 2000; 7: 427434.
28. Carr AJ, Gibson B, Robinson PG. Measuring quality of life. Is quality of life determined by expectations or experience? BMJ 2001; 322: 12401243.
29. Ryff C. Possible selves in adulthood and old age: a tale of shifting horizons. Psychol Aging 1991; 6: 286295.[CrossRef][ISI][Medline]
30. Covinsky K, Wu A, Landefeld C et al. Health status versus quality of life in older patients: does the distinction matter? Am J Med 1999; 106: 435440.[CrossRef][ISI][Medline]
31. von Faber M, Bootsma van der Wiel A, van Exel E et al. Successful aging in the oldest old. Who can be characterized as successfully aged? Arch Intern Med 2001; 161: 26942700.