Resection of colorectal cancer (CRC) metastases provides good survival but is probably underused in real-world practice. A prospective Finnish nationwide study enrolled treatable metastatic CRC patients. The intervention was the assessment of resectability upfront and twice during first-line therapy by the multidisciplinary team (MDT) at Helsinki tertiary referral centre. The primary outcome was resection rates and survival. In 2012–2018, 1086 patients were included. Median follow-up was 58 months. Multiple metastatic sites were present in 500 (46%) patients at baseline and in 820 (76%) during disease trajectory. In MDT assessments, 447 (41%) were classified as resectable, 310 (29%) upfront and 137 (18%) after conversion therapy. Six-hundred and ninety curative intent resections or local ablative therapies (LAT) were performed in 399 patients (89% of 447 resectable). Multiple metastasectomies for multisite or later developing metastases were performed in 148 (37%) patients. Overall, 414 liver, 112 lung, 57 peritoneal, and 107 other metastasectomies were performed. Median OS was 80·4 months in R0/1-resected (HR 0·15; CI_95% 0·12–0·19), 39·1 months in R2-resected/LAT (0·39; 0·29–0·53) patients, and 20·8 months in patients treated with “systemic therapy alone” (reference), with 5-year OS rates of 66%, 40%, and 6%, respectively. Repeated centralized MDT assessment in real-world metastatic CRC patients generates high resectability (41%) and resection rates (37%) with impressive survival, even when multisite metastases are present or develop later. The funders had no role in the study design, analysis, and interpretation of the data or writing of this report.

Metastasectomy and/or local ablative therapy in metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) patients often provide long-term survival. Health-related quality of life (HRQoL) data in curatively treated mCRC are limited. In the RAXO-study that evaluated repeated resectability, a multi-cross-sectional HRQoL substudy with 15D, EQ-5D-3L, QLQ-C30, and QLQ-CR29 questionnaires was conducted. Mean values of patients in different treatment groups were compared with age- and gender-standardized general Finnish populations. The questionnaire completion rate was 444/477 patients (93%, 1751 questionnaires). Mean HRQoL was 0.89–0.91 with the 15D, 0.85–0.87 with the EQ-5D, 68–80 with the EQ-5D-VAS, and 68–79 for global health status during curative treatment phases, with improvements in the remission phase (disease-free >18 months). In the remission phase, mean EQ-5D and 15D scores were similar to the general population. HRQoL remained stable during first- to later-line treatments, when the aim was no longer cure, and declined notably when tumour-controlling therapy was no longer meaningful. The symptom burden affecting mCRC survivors’ well-being included insomnia, impotence, urinary frequency, and fatigue. Symptom burden was lower after treatment and slightly higher, though stable, through all phases of systemic therapy. HRQoL was high in curative treatment phases, further emphasizing the strategy of metastasectomy in mCRC when clinically meaningful.

Older adults are underrepresented in metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) studies and thus may not receive optimal treatment, especially not metastasectomies. The prospective Finnish real-life RAXO-study included 1086 any organ mCRC patients. We assessed repeated centralized resectability, overall survival (OS), and quality of life (QoL) using 15D and EORTC QLQ-C30/CR29. Older adults (>75 years; n = 181, 17%) had worse ECOG performance status than adults (<75 years, n = 905, 83%), and their metastases were less likely upfront resectable. The local hospitals underestimated resectability in 48% of older adults and in 34% of adults compared with the centralized multidisciplinary team (MDT) evaluation (p < 0.001). The older adults compared with adults were less likely to undergo curative-intent R0/1-resection (19% vs. 32%), but when resection was achieved, OS was not significantly different (HR 1.54 [CI 95% 0.9–2.6]; 5-year OS-rate 58% vs. 67%). ‘Systemic therapy only’ patients had no age-related survival differences. QoL was similar in older adults and adults during curative treatment phase (15D 0.882–0.959/0.872–0.907 [scale 0–1]; GHS 62–94/68–79 [scale 0–100], respectively). Complete curative-intent resection of mCRC leads to excellent survival and QoL even in older adults. Older adults with mCRC should be actively evaluated by a specialized MDT and offered surgical or local ablative treatment whenever possible.

Background: Incidence of glioblastoma (GBM) increases with age and the prognosis is worse among the elderly. This was shown in a Finnish population-based register study evaluating GBM patients diagnosed between 2000 and 2013. The median overall survival (OS) was poor among the elderly (4.5 months), despite the OS increase during that period. We conducted a study to see if the OS has increased in our hospital area with current therapies. Methods: One hundred and ninety-eight patients over 65 years at the time of diagnosis, with malignant glioma diagnosed January 1, 2014 to December 31, 2018 at the Helsinki Comprehensive Cancer Center were included. In addition to grade IV gliomas, grade III gliomas with nonmutated R132HIDH1 and only radiographically diagnosed gliomas were included. The demographics and treatment data were collected with performance status evaluated retrospectively. The Kaplan–Meier method and the multivariate Cox proportional hazard model were used for the statistical analysis. Results: One hundred and seventy-seven patients with grade IV glioma, 6 with grade III glioma with nonmutated IDH1 and 15 radiologically diagnosed patients were included. One hundred and sixteen patients received chemoradiation, 59 only radiotherapy, 3 only temozolomide, and 27 patients did not receive oncological treatments. In the age group 65–70 years the OS was 9.95 months, 70–75 years 10.12 months, and >75 years 5.54 months. Lower WHO status correlated with longer survival independently of the age of the patient. Also methylated O(6)-methylguanine-DNA-methyltransferase and tumor resection correlated with better survival. Conclusions: The performance status of elderly patients is the most important prognostic factor. When choosing treatment protocols for patients in this age group, the performance status not calendar age should be considered.