Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Oral Anticancer Drugs in the Elderly

An Overview

  • Review Article
  • Published:
Drugs & Aging Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The increasing number of elderly people in the world population has led to a parallel increase in the number of older cancer patients, with over 45% of all cancers in Europe occurring in patients >70 years of age.

The increasing tendency to use oral chemotherapy is thus of interest in the elderly, given that both elderly patients and their physicians prefer to use less complex and toxic regimens when such treatments have equivalent efficacy to more complex regimens. However, data from studies designed to evaluate these therapies in the elderly are currently limited. Factors that must be considered before prescribing oral agents to this subset of patients include age-related physiological changes affecting clinical pharmacology, adherence, the patient’s capability to self-administer medications, and safety issues concerning the older patient and his or her caregivers.

The idea that elderly patients may benefit from the introduction of oral chemotherapy is very fashionable, but to date there is no proof that this approach is as effective as intravenous therapy in this age group, particularly since randomised trials are lacking.

This review discusses these issues and reviews current information about the use of specific oral chemotherapeutic drugs for major neoplastic diseases in the elderly.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Subscribe and save

Springer+ Basic
$34.99 /Month
  • Get 10 units per month
  • Download Article/Chapter or eBook
  • 1 Unit = 1 Article or 1 Chapter
  • Cancel anytime
Subscribe now

Buy Now

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Table I
Table II
Table III
Table IV
Fig. 1

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Monfardini S, Lonardi S. Phase II single-agent studies in elderly cancer patients. Tumori 2002; 88 (1 Suppl. 1): S13–4

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. National Center for Health Statistics. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention [online]. Available from URL: http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/ [Accessed 2006 Oct]

  3. Newcomb PA, Carbone PP. Cancer treatment and age: patient perspectives. J Natl Cancer Inst 1993; 85: 1580–4

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  4. Fentiman IS, Tirelli U, Monfardini S, et al. Cancer in the elderly: why so badly treated? Lancet 1990; 355: 1020–2

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Hutchins LF, Unger JM, Crowley JJ, et al. Underrepresentation of patients 65 years of age or older in cancer-treatment trials. N Engl J Med 1999; 341: 2061–7

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  6. Sparreboom A, de Jonge MJA, Verweij J. The use of oral cytotoxic and cytostatic drugs in cancer treatment. Eur J Cancer 2002; 38: 18–22

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  7. Bow EJ, Kilpatrick MG, Clinch JJ. Totally implantable venous access ports systems for patients receiving chemotherapy for solid tissue malignancies: a randomized controlled clinical trial examining the safety, efficacy, costs, and impact on quality of life. J Clin Oncol 1999; 17: 1267–73

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  8. Verso M, Agnelli G. Venous thromboembolism associated with long-term use of central venous catheters in cancer patients. J Clin Oncol 2003; 21: 3665–75

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Lemmers NWM, Gels ME, Sleijfer DT, et al. Complications of venous access ports in 132 patients with disseminated testicu-lar cancer treated with polychemotherapy. J Clin Oncol 1996; 14: 2916–22

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  10. Liu G, Franssen E, Fitch MI, et al. Patient preferences for oral versus intravenous palliative chemotherapy. J Clin Oncol 1997; 15: 110–5

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  11. Borner MM, Schoffski P, de Wit R, et al. Patient preference and pharmacokinetics of oral modulated UFT versus intravenous fluorouracil and leucovorin: a randomized crossover trial in advanced colorectal cancer. Eur J Cancer 2002; 38: 349–58

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  12. Mcleod HL, Evans WE. Oral chemotherapy: the promise and the pitfalls. Clin Cancer Res 1999; 5(10): 2669–71

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  13. Gelderblom HA, de Jonge MJA, Sparreboom A, et al. Oral topoisomerase I inhibitors in adult patients: present and future. Invest New Drugs 1999; 17: 401–15

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  14. Balducci L, Mowry K. Pharmacology and organ toxicity of chemotherapy in older patients. Oncology (Williston Park) 1992; 6 (2 Suppl.): 62–8

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  15. DeMario MD, Ratain MJ. Oral chemotherapy: rationale and future directions. J Clin Oncol 1998; 16: 2557–67

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  16. Iber FL, Murphy PA, Connor ES. Age related changes in the gastrointestinal system. Drugs Aging 1994; 5: 34–48

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  17. Baker SD, Grochow LB. Pharmacology of cancer chemotherapy in the older person. Clin Geriatr Med 1997; 13: 169–83

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  18. Corcoran ME. Polypharmacy in the older patient with cancer. Cancer Control 1997; 4: 419–28

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Egorin MJ. Cancer pharmacology in the elderly. Semin Oncol 1993; 20: 43–9

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  20. Wallace S, Whiting B. Factors affecting drug binding in plasma of elderly patients. Br J Clin Pharmacol 1976; 3: 327–30

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  21. Balducci L, Corcoran MB. Antineoplastic chemotherapy of the older cancer patient. Hematol Oncol Clin North Am 2000; 14: 193–212

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  22. Skirvin A, Lichtman SM. Pharmacokinetic considerations of oral chemotherapy in elderly patients with cancer. Drugs Aging 2002; 19: 25–42

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  23. Sotaniemi EA, Arranto AJ, Pelkonen O, et al. Age and cyto-chrome P450-linked drug metabolism in humans: an analysis of 226 subjects with equal histopathologic conditions. Clin Pharmacol Ther 1997; 61: 331–9

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  24. Anderson S, Brenner BM. Effects of aging on the renal glomer-ulus. Am J Med 1986; 80: 435–42

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  25. Balducci L, Monwrey K, Parker M. Pharmacology of antineoplastic agents in older patients. In: Balducci L, Lyman GH, Ershler WB, editors. Geriatric oncology. Philadelphia (PA): Lippincott Co., 1992: 169–80

    Google Scholar 

  26. Smythe M, Hoffman J, Kizi K, et al. Estimating creatinine clearance in elderly patients with low serum creatinine concentrations. Am J Hosp Pharm 1994; 74: 23–39

    Google Scholar 

  27. Monfardini S. Evaluation of renal function in elderly cancer patients. Ann Oncol 2004; 15: 183–4

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  28. Marx GM, Blake GM, Galani E, et al. Evaluation of Cockroft-Gault, Jelliffe and Wright formulae in estimating renal function in elderly cancer patients. Ann Oncol 2004; 15: 291–5

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  29. Kovar M. Health of the elderly and use of health services. Public Health Rep 1977; 92: 9–19

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  30. Colt HG, Shapiro AP. Drug induced illness as a cause for admission to a community hospital. J Am Geriatr Soc 1989; 37: 323–6

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  31. Lazarou J, Pomeranz BH, Corey PN. Incidence of adverse drug reactions in hospitalized patients: a meta-analysis of prospective studies. JAMA 1998; 279: 1200–5

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  32. King RS. Drug interactions with cancer chemotherapy. Cancer Pract 1995; 3: 57–9

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  33. Reigner B, Blesch K, Weidekamm E. Clinical pharmacokinetics of capecitabine. Clin Pharmacokinet 2001; 40: 85–104

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  34. Corcoran ME. Polypharmacy in the older patient. In: Balducci L, Lyman GH, Ershler WB, editors. Comprehensive geriatric oncology. Amsterdam: Harwood Academic Publishers, 1998: 525–32

    Google Scholar 

  35. Colley CA, Lucas LM. Polypharmacy: the cure becomes the disease. J Gen Intern Med 1993; 8: 278–83

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  36. Lebovits AH, Strain JJ, Schleifer SJ. Patient non-compliance with self-administered chemotherapy. Cancer 1990; 65: 17–22

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  37. Col N, Fanale JE, Kronholm P. The role of medication non-compliance and adverse drug reaction in hospitalizations of the elderly. Arch Intern Med 1990; 150: 841–5

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  38. Gebhardt MW, Governali JF, Hart EJ. Drug related behaviour, knowledge and misconceptions among a selected group of senior citizens. J Drug Educ 1978; 8: 85–92

    Article  Google Scholar 

  39. Levine AM, Richardson JL, Marks G, et al. Compliance with oral drug in patient with haematological malignancy. J Clin Oncol 1987; 5: 1469–76

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  40. Lee CR, Nicholson PW, Souhami RL. Patient compliance with prolonged low-dose oral etoposide for small cell lung cancer. Br J Cancer 1993; 67: 630–4

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  41. Monfardini S, Ferrucci L, Fratino L, et al. Validation of a multidimensional evaluation scale for use in elderly cancer patients. Cancer 1996; 77: 395–501

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  42. Monfardini S, Balducci L. A comprehensive geriatric assessment (CGA) is necessary for the study and the management of cancer in the elderly. Eur J Cancer 1999; 35: 1771–2

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  43. Repetto L, Fratino L, Audisio RA, et al. Comprehensive geriatric assessment adds information to Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status in elderly cancer patients: an Italian Group for Geriatric Oncology Study. J Clin Oncol 2002; 20: 494–502

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  44. Raehl CL, Bond CA, Woods T, et al. Individualized drugassessment in the elderly. Pharmacotherapy 2002; 22: 1239–48

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  45. Birner A. Safe administration of oral chemotherapy. Clin J Oncol Nurs 2003; 7: 158–62

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  46. Cramer JA. Enhancing patient compliance in the elderly: role of packaging aids and monitoring. Drugs Aging 1998; 12: 7–15

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  47. Lee CR, Nicholson PW, Souhami RL. Patient compliance with oral chemotherapy as assessed by a novel electronic technique. J Clin Oncol 1992; 10: 1007–13

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  48. Hollywood E, Semple D. Nursing strategies for patients on oral chemotherapy. Oncology (Williston Park) 2001; 1Suppl. 2: 37–9; discussion 40

    Google Scholar 

  49. Kastrissios H, Blaschke TF. Medication compliance as a feature in drug development. Annu Rev Pharmacol Toxicol 1997; 37: 451–75

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  50. Sharma S. Patient selection for oral chemotherapy. Oncology (Williston Park) 2001; 1Suppl. 2: 33–5

    Google Scholar 

  51. Haller D. Questions and answers. In: Saltz L. Oral chemotherapy for colorectal cancer: some economic considerations. Oncology (Williston Park) 2001; 15 (1 Suppl. 2): 29–32

    Google Scholar 

  52. Stafford RS, Cyr PL. The impact of cancer on the physical function of the elderly and their utilization of health care. Cancer 1997; 80: 1973–80

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  53. Saltz L. Oral chemotherapy for colorectal cancer: some economic considerations. Oncology (Williston Park) 2001; 1Suppl. 2: 29–32

    Google Scholar 

  54. Cartei G, Cartei F, Interlandi G, et al. Oral 5-fluorouracil in squamous cell carcinoma of the skin in the aged. Am J Clin Oncol 2000; 23: 11–184

    Article  Google Scholar 

  55. Diaz-Rubio S, Sastre J, Abad A, et al. UFT plus or minus calcium folinate for metastatic colorectal cancer in older patients. Oncology (Williston Park) 1999; 13 (7 Suppl. 3): 35–40

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  56. Feliu J, Gonzales Baron M, Espinosa E, et al. Uracil and tegafur modulated with leucovorin: an effective regimen with low toxicity for the treatment of colorectal carcinoma in the elderly. Oncopaz Cooperative Group. Cancer 1997; 79: 1884–9

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  57. Ferrari VD, Barni S, Mandalà M, et al. Tegafur (T) plus folinic acid (FA) as first line treatment of advanced colorectal cancer (ACC) in patients (pts) aged over 70 years: GISCAD (Italian Group for the Study of Digestive Tract Cancer). 25th Congress of the European Society for Medical Oncology [abstract no. 235P]. Ann Oncol 2000; 11Suppl. 4: 54

    Google Scholar 

  58. Twelves C, Glynne-Jones R, Cassidy J, et al. Effect of hepatic dysfunction due to liver metastases on the pharmacokinetics of capecitabine and its metabolites. Clin Cancer Res 1999; 5: 1696–702

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  59. Poole C, Gardiner J, Twelves C, et al. Effect of renal impairment on the pharmacokinetics and tolerability of capecitabine (Xeloda) in cancer patients. Cancer Chemother Pharmacol 2002; 49: 225–34

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  60. Feliu J, Escudero P, Llosa F, et al. Capecitabine as first line treatment for patients older than 70 years with metastatic colorectal cancer: an Oncopaz Cooperative Group Study. J Clin Oncol 2005; 23: 3104–11

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  61. Bajetta E, Procopio G, Celio L, et al. Safety and efficacy of two different doses of capecitabine in the treatment of advanced breast cancer in older woman. J Clin Oncol 2005; 23: 2155–61

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  62. Jonker DJ, Vincent M, Kerr I, et al. Dose reduced first line capecitabine monotherapy in older and less fit patients with advanced colorectal cancer [abstract no. 212]. 2004 Gastrointestinal Cancer Symposium; 2004 Jan 22–24; San Francisco (CA)

  63. Patel B, Forman J, Fontana J. A single institution experience with concurrent capecitabine and radiation therapy in weak and/or elderly patients with urothelial cancer. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2005; 62: 1332–8

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  64. Twelves CJ, Butts CA, Cassidy J, et al. Capecitabine/oxalipla-tin, a safe and active first-line regimen for older patients with metastatic colorectal cancer: post hoc analysis of a large phase II study. Clin Colorectal Cancer 2005; 5: 101–7

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  65. Cornelia P, Natale D, Farris A, et al. Capecitabine plus oxalipla-tin for the first-line treatment of elderly patients with metastatic colorectal carcinoma. Cancer 2005; 104: 282–9

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  66. Hess D, Thurlimann B, Pagani O, et al. Capecitabine and vinorelbine in elderly patients (> 65 years) with metastatic breast cancer: a phase I trial (SAKK 25/99). Ann Oncol 2004; 15: 1760–5

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  67. Tong DK, Cheng CW, Ching Chan S, et al. Phase II study of an “all oral” regimen of capecitabine, idarubicin and cyclophosphamide for metastatic breast cancer: safety, efficacy and quality. Oncology 2005; 68: 520–5

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  68. Buyck HCE, Buckley N, Leslie MD, et al. Capecitabine-induced potentiation of warfarin [letter]. Clin Oncol (R Coll Radiol) 2003; 15: 297–8

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  69. Kennedy BJ. Aging and cancer. J Clin Oncol 1988; 6: 1903–11

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  70. Lopez M, Contegiacomo A, Vici P, et al. A prospective randomized trial of doxorubicin versus idarubicin in the treatment of advanced breast cancer. Cancer 1989; 64: 2431–6

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  71. Kurtz JE, Deplanque G, Borel C, et al. Dose-finding study of oral idarubicin and cyclophosphamide in first-line treatment of elderly patients with metastatic breast cancer. Ann Oncol 2000; 11: 229–30

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  72. Lasota WS, de Valeriola DL, Piccart MJ. Potential role of oral anthracyclines in older patient with breast cancer. Drugs Aging 1994; 4: 392–402

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  73. Chevallier B, Monnier A, Metz R, et al. Phase II study of oral idarubicin in elderly patients with advanced breast cancer. Am J Clin Oncol 1990; 13: 436–9

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  74. Freyer G, Lortholary A, Delcambre C, et al. Unexpected toxicity in elderly patients treated with oral idarubicin in metastatic breast cancer: the GINECO experience. Clin Oncol (R Coll Radiol) 2004; 16: 17–23

    Article  Google Scholar 

  75. Lowenthal RM, Chesterman CN, Griffiths JD, et al. Oral idarubicin as single agent treatment of acute nonlymphocytic leukaemia in poor-risk patients. Cancer Treat Rep 1987; 71: 1279–81

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  76. Harousseau JL, Rigal-Huguet F, Hurteloup P, et al. Treatment of acute myeloid leukaemia in elderly patients with oral idarubicin as single agent. Eur J Haematol 1989; 7: 723–7

    Google Scholar 

  77. Bouabdallah R, Lefrere F, Rose C, et al. A phase II trial of induction and consolidation therapy of acute myeloid leukaemia with weekly oral idarubicin alone in poor-risk elderly patients. Leukemia 1999; 13: 1491–6

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  78. Miller AA, Rosner GL, Ratain MJ, et al. Pharmacology of 21-day oral etoposide given in combination with i.V. cisplatin in patients with extensive-stage small cell lung cancer: a Cancer and Leukemia Group B (CALGB) study (CALGB 9062). Clin Cancer Res 1997; 3: 719–25

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  79. Ando M, Minami H, Ando Y. Pharmacological analysis of etoposide in elderly patients with lung cancer. Clin Cancer Res 1999; 5: 1690–5

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  80. Loadman PM, Bibby MC. Pharmacokinetic drug interactions with anticancer drugs. Clin Pharmacokinet 1994; 26: 486–500

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  81. Miller AA, Herndon JE II, Hollis DR, et al. Schedule dependency of 21-day oral versus 3-day intravenous etoposide in combination with intravenous cisplatin in extensive-stage small-cell lung cancer: a randomized phase III study of the Cancer and Leukemia Group B. J Clin Oncol 1995; 13: 1871–9

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  82. Girling DJ, et al. Comparison of oral etoposide and standard intravenous multidrug chemotherapy for small-cell lung cancer: a stopped multicentre randomized trial. Lancet 1996; 348: 536–66

    Article  Google Scholar 

  83. Souhami RL, Spiro SG, Rudd RM, et al. Five-day oral etoposide treatment for advanced small-cell lung cancer: randomized comparison with intravenous chemotherapy. J Natl Cancer Inst 1997; 89: 577–80

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  84. Tominaga T, Koyama H, Toge T, et al. Randomized controlled trial comparing oral doxifluridine plus oral cyclophosphamide with doxifluridine alone in women with node positive breast cancer after primary surgery. J Clin Oncol 2003; 15: 991–8

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  85. Zaniboni A, Bolognesi A, Arnoldi E, et al. Oral idarubicin and cyclophosphamide for metastatic breast cancer in elderly patients. Anticancer Drugs 1998; 9: 295–9

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  86. Fabbri A, Lenoci M, Gozzetti A, et al. Low-dose oral fludarabine plus cyclophosphamide in elderly patients with chronic lymphoproliferative disorders. Hematol J 2004; 5: 472–4

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  87. Colleoni M, Rocca A, Sandri MT, et al. Low-dose oral metho-trexate and cyclophosphamide in metastatic breast cancer: antitumor activity and correlation with vascular endothelial growth factor levels. Ann Oncol 2002 Jan; 13: 73–80

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  88. Gaya A, Rees J, Greenstein A, et al. The use of temozolomide in recurrent malignant gliomas. Cancer Treat Rev 2002; 28: 115–20

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  89. Brada M, Judson I, Beale P, et al. Phase I dose-escalation and pharmacokinetic study of temozolomide for refractory or relapsing malignancies. Br J Cancer 1999; 81: 1022–30

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  90. Brandes AA, Vastola F, Basso U, et al. A prospective study on glioblastoma in the elderly. Cancer 2003; 97: 657–62

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  91. Gridelli C, for the Elderly Lung Cancer Vinorelbine Italian Study Group. Effects of vinorelbine on quality of life and survival of elderly patients with advanced non small cell lung cancer. J Natl Cancer Inst 1999; 91: 66–72

    Article  Google Scholar 

  92. Jassem J, Ramlau R, Karnicka-Mlodkowska H, et al. A mul-ticenter randomized phase II study of oral vs intravenous vinorelbine in advanced non-small-cell lung cancer patients. Ann Oncol 2001; 12: 1375–81

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  93. Freyer G, Delozier T, Lichinister M, et al. Phase II study of oral vinorelbine in first-line advanced breast cancer chemotherapy. J Clin Oncol 2003; 21: 35–40

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  94. Marty M, Fumoleau P, Adenis A, et al. Oral vinorelbine pharmacokinetics and absolute bioavailability study in patients with solid tumors. Ann Oncol 2001; 12: 1643–9

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  95. Puozzo C, Gridelli C. Non-small cell lung cancer in elderly patients: influence of age on vinorelbine oral pharmacokinetic. Clin Lung Cancer 2004; 5: 237–42

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  96. Kanard A, Jatoi A, Castillo R, et al. Oral vinorelbine for the treatment of metastatic non-small cell lung cancer in elderly patients: a phase II trial of efficacy and toxicity. Lung Cancer 2004; 43: 345–53

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  97. Mali P, De Marinis F, Manegold C, et al. Single agent oral vinorelbine (NVB) in advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) in the elderly: patient benefit improvement by weekly schedule [abstract no. 7120]. ASCO Annual Meeting Proceedings (Post-Meeting Edition). J Clin Oncol 2004; 22(14S): 7120

    Google Scholar 

  98. O’Brien SG, Guilhot F, Larson RA, et al. Imatinib compared with interferon and low-dose cytarabine for newly diagnosed chronic-phase chronic myeloid leukaemia. N Engl J Med 2003; 348: 994–1004

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  99. Croom KF, Perry CM. Imatinib mesylate: in the treatment of gastrointestinal stromal tumors. Drugs 2003; 63: 513–22

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  100. Deininger MWN, O’Brien SG, Ford J, et al. Practical management of patients with chronic myeloid leukaemia receiving imatinib. J Clin Oncol 2003; 21: 1637–47

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  101. Alert for healthcare professionals: gefitinib (marketed as Iressa). FDA Alert [6/2005]: FDA [online]. Available from URL: http://www.fda.gov/cder/drug/InfoSheets/HCP/gefi-tinibHCP.htm [Accessed 2007 May 7]

  102. Hotta K, Ueoka H, Kiura K, et al. Safety and efficacy of gefitinib treatment in elderly patients with non-small-cell lung cancer: Okayama Lung Cancer Study Group experience. Acta Oncol 2005; 44(7): 717–22

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  103. Cappuzzo F, Bartolini S, Ceresoli GL, et al. Efficacy and tolerability of gefitinib in pretreated elderly patients with advanced non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). Br J Cancer 2004 Jan 12; 90(1): 82–6

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  104. Rossi A, Maione P, Del Gaizo F, et al. Safety profile of gefitinib in advanced non-small cell lung cancer elderly patients with chronic renal failure: two clinical cases. Lung Cancer 2005 Mar; 47(3): 421–3

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  105. Monfardini S, Sorio R, Kaye S. Should elderly cancer patients be entered in dose-escalation studies? Ann Oncol 1994; 5: 964–5

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  106. Van Cutsem E, Twelves C, Cassidy J, et al. Oral capecitabine compared with intravenous fluorouracil plus leucovorin in patients with metastatic colorectal cancer: results of a large phase III study. J Clin Oncol 2001; 19: 4097–106

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  107. Hoff PM, Ansari R, Batist G, et al. Comparison of oral capecitabine versus intravenous fluorouracil plus leucovorin as first-line treatment in 605 patients with metastatic colorectal cancer: results of a randomized phase III study. J Clin Oncol 2001; 19: 2282–92

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

No sources of funding were used to assist in the preparation of this review. The authors have no conflicts of interest that are directly relevant to the content of this review.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Medical Oncology Unit, Cancer Center of the Veneto Region - IRCCS, Padova, Italy

    Sara Lonardi, Alberto Bortolami, Micaela Stefani &  Silvio Monfardini

Authors
  1. Sara Lonardi
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Alberto Bortolami
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Micaela Stefani
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Silvio Monfardini
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Silvio Monfardini.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Lonardi, S., Bortolami, A., Stefani, M. et al. Oral Anticancer Drugs in the Elderly. Drugs Aging 24, 395–410 (2007). https://doi.org/10.2165/00002512-200724050-00004

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.2165/00002512-200724050-00004

Keywords

Search

Navigation