Cargando…

Utility of the Age Discrepancy between Frailty-Based Biological Age and Expected Life Age in Patients with Urological Cancers

SIMPLE SUMMARY: The estimation of biological age is challenging in patients with cancers. We investigated the prognostic significance of biological-expected life age discrepancy using frailty-discriminant scores (FDS) in patients with urological cancers. The frailty-based biological age was 12 years...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Togashi, Kyo, Hatakeyama, Shingo, Soma, Osamu, Okita, Kazutaka, Fujita, Naoki, Tanaka, Toshikazu, Noro, Daisuke, Horiguchi, Hirotaka, Uemura, Nozomi, Iwane, Takuro, Okamoto, Teppei, Yamamoto, Hayato, Yoneyama, Takahiro, Hashimoto, Yasuhiro, Ohyama, Chikara
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: MDPI 2022
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9776733/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36551713
http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/cancers14246229
Descripción
Sumario:SIMPLE SUMMARY: The estimation of biological age is challenging in patients with cancers. We investigated the prognostic significance of biological-expected life age discrepancy using frailty-discriminant scores (FDS) in patients with urological cancers. The frailty-based biological age was 12 years older than the chronological age. The biological-expected life age discrepancy between the frailty-based biological and expected life ages of >5 years was also significantly associated with poor prognosis. A biological-expected life age discrepancy may be a useful tool in estimating frailty and prognosis in patients with urological cancers. ABSTRACT: Background: The estimation of biological age is challenging in patients with cancers. We aimed to investigate frailty-based biological ages using frailty-discriminant scores (FDS) and examined the effect of biological-expected life age discrepancy on the prognosis of patients with urological cancers. Methods: We retrospectively evaluated frailty in 1035 patients having urological cancers. Their frailty-based biological age was then defined by the FDS, which is a comprehensive frailty assessment tool, using 1790 noncancer individuals as controls. An expected life age (=chronological age + life expectancy) was subsequently calculated using the 2019 life expectancy table. The primary outcome was the estimation of the biological-expected life age discrepancy between the frailty-based biological age and expected life age in patients with urological cancers. Secondary outcomes were the evaluation of the effect of the biological-expected life age discrepancy on overall survival. Results: We included 405, 466, and 164 patients diagnosed with prostate cancer, urothelial carcinoma, and renal cell carcinoma, respectively. The median chronological age, life expectancy, and estimated frailty-based biological age were 71, 17, and 83 years, respectively. The biological-expected life age discrepancy in any urological cancers, localized diseases, and metastatic diseases was −4.8, −6.3, and +0.15 years, respectively. The biological-expected life age discrepancy of >5 years was significantly associated with poor overall survival. Conclusions: The biological-expected life age discrepancy between frailty-based biological age and expected life age may be helpful in understanding the role of frailty and patient/doctor conversation.