Presentation, Molecular Characteristics, Treatment, and Outcomes of Colorectal Cancer in Patients Older than 80 Years Old
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: An increasing proportion of the population of patients with cancer presents at an advanced age, increasing the challenges of successful and well-tolerated treatments. In the older spectrum of the geriatric cancer patients, those older than 80 years old, challenges are even higher because of increasing comorbidities and decreasing organ function reserves. Methods: Studies regarding colorectal cancer presentation, treatment, and prognosis in patients older than 80 years old available in the literature were evaluated and were compiled within a narrative review. Molecular attributes of colorectal cancer in the subset of patients older than 80 years old in published genomic cohorts were also reviewed and were compared with similar attributes in younger patients. Results: Characteristics of colorectal cancer in octogenarians are in many aspects similar to younger patients, but patients older than 80 years old present more often with right colon cancers. Surgical treatment of colorectal cancer in selected patients over 80 years old is feasible and should be pursued. Adjuvant chemotherapy is under-utilized in this population. Although combination chemotherapy is in most cases not advisable, monotherapy with fluoropyrimidine derivatives is feasible and efficacious. Conclusions: Outcomes of colorectal cancer patients over the age of 80 years old may be optimized with a combination of standard treatments adjusted to the individual patient’s functional status and organ reserves. Increased support for the older age group during their colorectal cancer treatment modalities would improve oncologic outcomes with decreasing adverse outcomes of therapies.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".