Depending on the nature of the data, $R^2$ values in Cox regressions can be quite low. I'm presently working on some clinical survival data for which a model with very good predictive behavior only has an $R^2$ of 0.17. A high $R^2$ would require high precision in predicting the actual times of events, often an unrealistic goal.
The Concordance Index might tell you more about how useful your model is. It is the fraction of pairs of cases in which the actual order of events matches the order predicted by the model. The value of 0.664 shows that you predict the correct order in almost 2/3 of pairs of cases. That might be good enough for your purposes. You also should consider validation and calibration of your model to estimate how well it will generalize to new data, for example with tools provided by the rms
package in R.
It might be possible to improve your model, but help on that would require a lot more information about the nature of the data, the predictor variables, the events, and the number of cases. Also, it's somewhat strange that with 79 predictor variables your model only has 16 degrees of freedom. If you did some type of variable selection to reduce the number of variables (e.g., forward stepwise selection) then your results might be suspect and might not generalize well to new samples of data. This classic answer discusses the problems with such variable selection in the context of linear regression, but the issues are the same for Cox regressions.