Predicting the risk of chemotherapy toxicity in older patients: The Chemotherapy Risk Assessment Scale for High‐Age Patients (CRASH) score

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Tools are lacking to assess the individual risk of severe toxicity from chemotherapy. Such tools would be especially useful for older patients, who vary considerably in terms of health status and functional reserve. METHODS: The authors conducted a prospective, multicentric study of patients aged !70 years who were starting chemotherapy. Grade 4 hematologic (H) or grade 3/4 nonhematologic (NH) toxicity according to version 3.0 of the Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events was defined as severe. Twenty-four parameters were assessed. Toxicity of the regimen (Chemotox) was adjusted using an index to estimate the average per-patient risk of chemotherapy toxicity (the MAX2 index). In total, 562 patients were accrued, and 518 patients were evaluable and were split randomly (2:1 ratio) into a derivation cohort and a validation cohort. RESULTS: Severe toxicity was observed in 64% of patients. The Chemotherapy Risk Assessment Scale for High-Age Patients (CRASH) score was constructed along 2 subscores: H toxicity and NH toxicity. Predictors of H toxicity were lymphocytes, aspartate aminotransferase level, Instrumental Activities of Daily Living score, lactate dehydrogenase level, diastolic blood pressure, and Chemotox. The best model included the 4 latter predictors (risk categories: low, 7%; medium-low, 23%; medium-high, 54%; and high, 100%, respectively; P trend < .001). Predictors of NH toxicity were hemoglobin, creatinine clearance, albumin, selfrated health, Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance, Mini-Mental Status score, Mini-Nutritional Assessment score, and Chemotox. The 4 latter predictors provided the best model (risk categories: 33%, 46%, 67%, and 93%, respectively; P trend < .001). The combined risk categories were 50%, 58%, 77%, and 79%, respectively; P trend < .001). Bootstrap internal validation and independent sample validation demonstrated stable risk categorization and P trend < .001. CONCLUSIONS: The CRASH score distinguished several risk levels of severe toxicity. The split score discriminated better than the combined score. To the authors' knowledge, this is the first score systematically integrating both chemotherapy and patient risk for older patients and has a potential for future clinical application. Cancer 2012;118:3377-

Clinical features, presentation, and tolerance of platinum‐based chemotherapy in germ cell tumor patients 50 years of age and older

“…22 Such studies have mostly focused on the geriatric population in other malignancies. [23][24][25] Although the median age of our chemotherapy cohort was only 54 years, the increased complication rate observed compared to reports of younger men is not entirely surprising. Even among patients without significant comorbidities, age-related decline in organ function can impact chemotherapy pharmacokinetics, increasing drug exposure and toxicity.…”

Controversial issues in the management of older adults with early breast cancer

“…One instrument [81,82], including assessment of functional status, level of social activity, neurosensory deficits and assistance in medication-taking, showed that the risk of grade 3-4 toxicity increased significantly with increasing risk scores: 37% in low-risk, 62% in medium-risk and 70% in high-risk patients (p<0.001). Another instrument differentiated between hematological and non-hematological toxicity and found several geriatric domains to be associated with each [83].…”

Monoclonal Gammopathy of Undetermined Significance and Multiple Myeloma in Older Adults

“…42 Clearly GA tools have great promise in MM, but an important caveat is that these GA instruments have generally been tested in patients with solid tumors and their relevance to MM has not been fully elucidated. Recently, a single larger study of older adults with MM used a combination of age, the Charlson Comorbidity Index, and ability to perform IADLs to classify patients as frail, intermediate fitness, and fit.…”