Digital Health Psychosocial Intervention in Adult Patients With Cancer and Their Families: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

BACKGROUND: Patients with cancer and their families often experience significant distress and deterioration in their quality of life. Psychosocial interventions were used to address patients' and families' psychosocial needs. Digital technology is increasingly being used to deliver psychosocial interventions to patients with cancer and their families. OBJECTIVE: A systematic review and meta-analysis were conducted to review the characteristics and effectiveness of digital health interventions on psychosocial outcomes in adult patients with cancer and their family members. METHODS: Databases (PubMed, Cochrane Library, Web of Science, Embase, CINAHL, PsycINFO, ProQuest Dissertations and Theses Global, and ClinicalTrials.gov) were searched for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) or quasi-experimental studies that tested the effects of a digital intervention on psychosocial outcomes. The Joanna Briggs Institute's critical appraisal checklists for RCTs and quasi-experimental studies were used to assess quality. Standardized mean differences (ie, Hedges g) were calculated to compare intervention effectiveness. Subgroup analysis was planned to examine the effect of delivery mode, duration of the intervention, type of control, and dosage on outcomes using a random-effects modeling approach. RESULTS: A total of 65 studies involving 10,361 patients (mean 159, SD 166; range 9-803 patients per study) and 1045 caregivers or partners (mean 16, SD 54; range 9-244 caregivers or partners per study) were included in the systematic review. Of these, 32 studies were included in a meta-analysis of the effects of digital health interventions on quality of life, anxiety, depression, distress, and self-efficacy. Overall, the RCT studies' general quality was mixed (applicable scores: mean 0.61, SD 0.12; range 0.38-0.91). Quasi-experimental studies were generally of moderate to high quality (applicable scores: mean 0.75, SD 0.08; range 0.63-0.89). Psychoeducation and cognitive-behavioral strategies were commonly used. More than half (n=38, 59%) did not identify a conceptual or theoretical framework. Most interventions were delivered through the internet (n=40, 62%). The median number of intervention sessions was 6 (range 1-56). The frequency of the intervention was highly variable, with self-paced (n=26, 40%) being the most common. The median duration was 8 weeks. The meta-analysis results showed that digital psychosocial interventions were effective in improving patients' quality of life with a small effect size (Hedges g=0.05, 95% CI -0.01 to 0.10; I2=42.7%; P=.01). The interventions effectively reduced anxiety and depression symptoms in patients, as shown by moderate effect sizes on Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale total scores (Hedges g=-0.72, 95% CI -1.89 to 0.46; I2=97.6%; P<.001). CONCLUSIONS: This study demonstrated the effectiveness of digital health interventions on quality of life, anxiety, and depression in patients. Future research with a clear description of the methodology to enhance the ability to perform meta-analysis is needed. Moreover, this study provides preliminary evidence to support the integration of existing digital health psychosocial interventions in clinical practice. TRIAL REGISTRATION: PROSPERO CRD42020189698; https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/display_record.php?RecordID=189698.

Primary Treatment Modification and Treatment Tolerability Among Older Chemotherapy Recipients With Advanced Cancer.

Importance: Older adults with advanced cancer are less likely to tolerate treatment with cytotoxic chemotherapy compared with younger patients due to their aging-related conditions. Hence, oncologists sometimes opt to employ primary treatment modifications (deviation from standard of care) during the first cycle of chemotherapy. Objective: To examine the association between primary treatment modification and treatment tolerability in older adults with advanced cancer who were starting new palliative chemotherapy regimens. Design, Setting, and Participants: This cohort study was a secondary analysis of the GAP70+ (Geriatric Assessment Intervention for Reducing Toxicity in Older Patients with Advanced Cancer) trial, which was conducted between July 2014 and March 2019. The GAP70+ trial included patients aged 70 years or older who had advanced (ie, incurable) cancer, had 1 or more geriatric assessment domain impairments, and planned to start a new palliative chemotherapy regimen. Data analysis was conducted in November 2022. Exposures: Receipt of standard-of-care chemotherapy regimens vs primary treatment modification defined as any change from National Comprehensive Cancer Network guidelines or published clinical trials (eg, primary dose reduction, schedule change). Main Outcomes and Measures: Tolerability outcomes were assessed within 3 months of treatment. These outcomes included the following: (1) any grade 3 to 5 toxic effect, according to the National Cancer Institute Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events; (2) patient-reported functional decline, defined as the development of worse dependency in activities of daily living using scale scores; and (3) a composite adverse outcome (an end point that combined toxic effects, functional decline, and 6-month overall survival). Multivariable cluster-weighted generalized estimating equation models examined the association between primary treatment modification and outcomes adjusting for covariates. Results: This study included 609 patients with a mean (SD) age of 77.2 (5.2) years; more than half (333 [54.7%]) were men. Race and ethnicity was available for 607 patients: 39 (6.4%) were Black, 539 (88.5%) were non-Hispanic White, and 29 (4.8%) were of other race or ethnicity. Nearly half (281 [46.1%]) received a primary modified treatment regimen. The most common cancer types were gastrointestinal cancer (228 [37.4%]) and lung cancer (174 [28.6%]). In multivariable analysis, primary treatment modification was associated with a reduced risk of grade 3 to 5 toxic effects (relative risk [RR], 0.85 [95% CI, 0.77-0.94]) and functional decline (RR, 0.80 [95% CI, 0.67-0.95]). Patients who received primary treatment modification had 32.0% lower odds of having a worse composite adverse outcome (odds ratio, 0.68 [95% CI, 0.48-0.97]). Conclusions and Relevance: In this cohort study, primary treatment modification was associated with improved tolerability of chemotherapeutic regimens among older adults with advanced cancer and aging-related conditions. These findings may help optimize cancer treatment dosing in older adults with advanced cancer and aging-related conditions.

Defining the Role of the Advanced Practice Provider Within the National Cancer Institute Community Oncology Research Program.

PURPOSE: Oncology advanced practice providers (APPs), including nurse practitioners, clinical nurse specialists, physician assistants, and clinical pharmacists, contribute significantly to quality cancer care. Understanding the research-related roles of APPs in the National Cancer Institute's (NCI) Community Oncology Research Program (NCORP) could lead to enhanced protocol development, trial conduct, and accrual. METHODS: The 2022 NCORP Landscape Assessment Survey asked two questions about the utilization and roles of APPs in the NCORP. RESULTS: A total of 271 practice groups completed the 2022 survey, with a response rate of 90%. Of the 259 nonpediatric exclusive practice groups analyzed in this study, 92% used APPs for clinical care activities and 73% used APPs for research activities. APPs most often provided clinical care for patients enrolled in trials (97%), followed by assistance with coordination (65%), presenting/explaining clinical trials (59%), screening patients (49%), ordering investigational drugs (37%), and consenting participants (24%). Some groups reported APPs as an enrolling investigator (18%) and/or participating in institutional oversight/selection of trials (15%). Only 5% of NCORP sites reported APPs as a site primary investigator for trials, and very few (3%) reported APPs participating in protocol development. CONCLUSION: Practice groups report involving APPs in clinical research within the NCORP network; however, opportunities for growth exists. As team-based care has enhanced clinical practice in oncology, this same approach can be used to enhance successful research. Suggested strategies include supporting APP research-related time, recognition, and education. The findings of this survey and subsequent recommendations may be applied to all adult oncology practices that participate in clinical research.

An Unsupervised Machine Learning Approach to Evaluating the Association of Symptom Clusters With Adverse Outcomes Among Older Adults With Advanced Cancer: A Secondary Analysis of a Randomized Clinical Trial.

Importance: Older adults with advanced cancer who have high pretreatment symptom severity often experience adverse events during cancer treatments. Unsupervised machine learning may help stratify patients into different risk groups. Objective: To evaluate whether clusters identified from baseline patient-reported symptom severity were associated with adverse outcomes. Design, Setting, and Participants: This secondary analysis of the Geriatric Assessment Intervention for Reducing Toxicity in Older Patients With Advanced Cancer (GAP70+) Trial (2014-2019) included patients who completed the National Cancer Institute Patient-Reported Outcomes version of the Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (PRO-CTCAE) before starting a new cancer treatment regimen and received care at community oncology sites across the United States. An unsupervised machine learning algorithm (k-means with Euclidean distance) clustered patients based on similarities of baseline symptom severities. Clustering variables included severity items of 24 PRO-CTCAE symptoms (range, 0-4; corresponding to none, mild, moderate, severe, and very severe). Total severity score was calculated as the sum of 24 items (range, 0-96). Whether the clusters were associated with unplanned hospitalization, death, and toxic effects was then examined. Analyses were conducted in January and February 2022. Exposures: Symptom severity. Main Outcomes and Measures: Unplanned hospitalization over 3 months (primary), all-cause mortality over 1 year, and any clinician-rated grade 3 to 5 toxic effect over 3 months. Results: Of 718 enrolled patients, 706 completed baseline PRO-CTCAE and were included (mean [SD] age, 77.2 [5.5] years, 401 [56.8%] male patients; 51 [7.2%] Black and 619 [87.8%] non-Hispanic White patients; 245 [34.7%] with gastrointestinal cancer; 175 [24.8%] with lung cancer; mean [SD] impaired Geriatric Assessment domains, 4.5 [1.6]). The algorithm classified 310 (43.9%), 295 (41.8%), and 101 (14.3%) into low-, medium-, and high-severity clusters (within-cluster mean [SD] severity scores: low, 6.3 [3.4]; moderate, 16.6 [4.3]; high, 29.8 [7.8]; P < .001). Controlling for sociodemographic variables, clinical factors, study group, and practice site, compared with patients in the low-severity cluster, those in the moderate-severity cluster were more likely to experience hospitalization (risk ratio, 1.36; 95% CI, 1.01-1.84; P = .046). Moderate- and high-severity clusters were associated with a higher risk of death (moderate: hazard ratio, 1.31; 95% CI, 1.01-1.69; P = .04; high: hazard ratio, 2.00; 95% CI, 1.43-2.78; P < .001), but not toxic effects. Conclusions and Relevance: In this study, unsupervised machine learning partitioned patients into distinct symptom severity clusters; patients with higher pretreatment severity were more likely to experience hospitalization and death. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02054741.

Association of polypharmacy and potential drug-drug interactions with adverse treatment outcomes in older adults with advanced cancer.

BACKGROUND: Polypharmacy is common in older adults who are starting cancer treatment and is associated with an increased risk of potentially inappropriate medications (PIMs) and potential drug-drug interactions (PDIs). The authors evaluated the association of medication measures with adverse outcomes in older adults with advanced cancer who were receiving systemic therapy. METHODS: This secondary analysis from GAP 70+ Trial (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier NCT02054741; principal investigator, Supriya G. Mohile) enrolled patients aged 70 years and older with advanced cancer who planned to start a new treatment regimen (n = 718). Polypharmacy was assessed before the initiation of treatment and was defined as the concurrent use of eight or more medications. PIMs were categorized using 2019 Beers Criteria and the Screening Tool of Older Persons' Prescriptions. PDIs were evaluated using Lexi-Interact Online. Study outcomes were assessed within 3 months of treatment and included: (1) the number of grade ≥2 and ≥3 toxicities according to the National Cancer Institute Common Toxicity Criteria, (2) treatment-related unplanned hospitalization, and (3) early treatment discontinuation. Multivariable regression models examined the association of medication measures with outcomes. RESULTS: The mean patient age was 77 years, and 57% had lung or gastrointestinal cancers. The median number of medications was five (range, 0-24 medications), 28% of patients received eight or more medications, 67% received one or more PIM, and 25% had one or more major PDI. The mean number of grade ≥2 toxicities in patients with polypharmacy was 9.8 versus 7.7 in those without polypharmacy (adjusted ß = 1.87; standard error, 0.71; p <.01). The mean number of grade ≥3 toxicities in patients with polypharmacy was 2.9 versus 2.2 in patients without polypharmacy (adjusted ß = 0.59; standard error, 0.29; p = .04). Patients with who had one or more major PDI had 59% higher odds of early treatment discontinuation (odds ratio, 1.59; 95% confidence interval, 1.03-2.46; p = .03). CONCLUSIONS: In a cohort of older adults with advanced cancer, polypharmacy and PDIs were associated with an increased risk of adverse treatment outcomes. Providing meaningful screening and interventional tools to optimize medication use may improve treatment-related outcomes in these patients.

Adaptation of Serious Illness Care Program to be delivered via telehealth for older patients with hematologic malignancy.

Older patients with acute myeloid leukemia (AML) and myelodysplastic syndromes (MDS) experience intense inpatient health care at the end-of-life stage. Early advance care planning may improve care at the end of life for patients with AML or MDS. The Serious Illness Care Program (SICP) is a multicomponent, communication intervention developed to improve conversations about values for patients with serious illnesses. The SICP has been shown to improve the quality and frequency of advance care planning discussions. We adapted the SICP for delivery via telehealth to older patients with AML or MDS. We conducted a single-center qualitative study of 45 participants (25 clinicians, 15 older patients with AML or MDS, and 5 caregivers). Participants, whether clinicians, patients, or caregivers, agreed that the SICP would help older patients with AML or MDS to share their personal values with their care team. Four qualitative themes emerged from our data: (1) serious illness conversations can be conducted via telehealth, (2) older patients have limited experience using technology but are willing and able to learn, (3) patients feel that serious illness conversations will help them understand their AML or MDS diagnosis and prognosis better, and (4) serious illness conversations should be common and routine, not extraordinary. The adapted SICP may provide older patients with AML or MDS an opportunity to share what matters most to them with their care team and may assist oncologists in aligning patient care with patient values. The adapted SICP is the subject of an ongoing single-arm pilot study at the Wilmot Cancer Institute (clinicaltrials.gov identifier: NCT04745676).

Advance care planning in older patients with acute myeloid leukemia and myelodysplastic syndromes.

INTRODUCTION: Older patients with acute myeloid leukemia (AML) and myelodysplastic syndromes (MDS) have worse survival rates compared to younger patients, and experience more intense inpatient healthcare at the end of life (EOL) compared to patients with solid tumors. Advance care planning (ACP) has been shown to limit aggressive and burdensome care at EOL for patients with AML and MDS. The purpose of this study was to better understand ACP from the perspective of clinicians, older patients with AML and MDS, and their caregivers. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We conducted semi-structured interviews with 45 study participants. Interviews were audio-recorded and transcribed. Open coding and focused content analysis were used to organize data and develop and contextualize categories and subcategories. RESULTS: Guided by our specific aims, we developed four themes: (1) The language of ACP and medical order for life-sustaining treatment (MOLST) does not resonate with patients, (2) There is no uniform consensus on when ACP is currently happening, (3) Oncology clinician-perceived barriers to ACP (e.g., patient discomfort, patient lack of knowledge, and lack of time), and (4) Patients felt that they are balancing fear and hope when navigating their AML or MDS diagnosis. DISCUSSION: The results of this study can be used to develop interventions to promote serious illness conversations for patients with AML and MDS and their caregivers to ensure that patient care aligns with patient values.

Effects of a Geriatric Assessment Intervention on Patient-Reported Symptomatic Toxicity in Older Adults With Advanced Cancer.

PURPOSE: Providing a geriatric assessment (GA) summary with management recommendations to oncologists reduces clinician-rated toxicity in older patients with advanced cancer receiving treatment. This secondary analysis of a national cluster randomized clinical trial (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT02054741) aims to assess the effects of a GA intervention on symptomatic toxicity measured by Patient-Reported Outcomes Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (PRO-CTCAE). METHODS: From 2014 to 2019, the study enrolled patients age ≥ 70 years, with advanced solid tumors or lymphoma and ≥ 1 GA domain impairment, who were initiating a regimen with high prevalence of toxicity. Patients completed PRO-CTCAEs, including the severity of 24 symptoms (11 classified as core symptoms) at enrollment, 4-6 weeks, 3 months, and 6 months. Symptoms were scored as grade ≥ 2 (at least moderate) and grade ≥ 3 (severe/very severe). Symptomatic toxicity was determined by an increase in severity during treatment. A generalized estimating equation model was used to assess the effects of the GA intervention on symptomatic toxicity. RESULTS: Mean age was 77 years (range, 70-96 years), 43% were female, and 88% were White, 59% had GI or lung cancers, and 27% received prior chemotherapy. In 706 patients who provided PRO-CTCAEs at baseline, 86.1% reported at least one moderate symptom and 49.7% reported severe/very severe symptoms at regimen initiation. In 623 patients with follow-up PRO-CTCAE data, compared with usual care, fewer patients in the GA intervention arm reported grade ≥ 2 symptomatic toxicity (overall: 88.9% v 94.8%, P = .035; core symptoms: 83.4% v 91.7%, P = .001). The results for grade ≥ 3 toxicity were comparable but not significant (P > .05). CONCLUSION: In the presence of a high baseline symptom burden, a GA intervention for older patients with advanced cancer reduces patient-reported symptomatic toxicity.

Health behaviors in adolescent survivors of cancer: An integrative review.

PROBLEM: Adolescent survivors of cancer face an increased risk of chronic health conditions that can be improved by healthy behaviors. The purpose of this review is to synthesize the extent/prevalence of health behaviors (physical activity [PA], diet, human papillomavirus [HPV] vaccination, alcohol use, smoking, marijuana use, and unprotected sex) compared to age-matched peers and factors associated with those behaviors. ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA: Four databases (PubMed, EMBASE, PsycINFO, and CINAHL) were searched for peer-reviewed primary studies published since 2000 including adolescents aged 11-20 years-old, who had completed cancer treatments. Studies reporting at least one behavior were included. SAMPLE: Of 1979 articles reviewed, 27 studies reporting any of the following health behaviors were included: PA, diet, HPV vaccination, alcohol use, smoking, marijuana use, or unprotected sex. RESULTS: Adolescent survivors of cancer engaged less in health risk behaviors (alcohol use, smoking, marijuana use, and unprotected sex) or health-promoting behaviors (PA, healthy diet, and HPV vaccination) compared to age-matched peers. Their health behaviors were associated with psychosocial factors including emotional discomfort (e.g., feeling depressed or nervous) and influence of others (family, friends, and healthcare providers). CONCLUSIONS: Although health risk behaviors in adolescent survivors of cancer are not as prevalent as in their peers, the survivors' low engagement in health-promoting behaviors including PA, diet, and HPV vaccination is concerning. IMPLICATIONS: More research is needed to develop and evaluate interventions to improve health-promoting behaviors in adolescent survivors of cancer by strengthening or facilitating psychosocial resources.

A Geriatric Assessment Intervention to Reduce Treatment Toxicity Among Older Adults With Advanced Lung Cancer: A Subgroup Analysis From a Cluster Randomized Controlled Trial.

Introduction: More older adults die from lung cancer worldwide than breast, prostate, and colorectal cancers combined. Current lung cancer treatments may prolong life, but can also cause considerable treatment-related toxicity. Objective: This study is a secondary analysis of a cluster-randomized clinical trial which evaluated whether providing a geriatric assessment (GA) summary and GA-guided management recommendations can improve grade 3-5 toxicity among older adults with advanced lung cancer. Methods: We analyzed participants aged ≥70 years(y) with stage III & IV (advanced) lung cancer and ≥1 GA domain impairment starting a new cancer treatment with high-risk of toxicity within the National Cancer Institute's Community Oncology Research Program. Community practices were randomized to the intervention arm (oncologists received GA summary & recommendations) versus usual care (UC: no summary or recommendations given). The primary outcome was grade 3-5 toxicity through 3 months post-treatment initiation. Secondary outcomes included 6-month (mo) and 1-year overall survival (OS), treatment modifications, and unplanned hospitalizations. Outcomes were analyzed using generalized linear mixed and Cox proportional hazards models with practice site as a random effect. Trial Registration: NCT02054741. Results & Conclusion: Among 180 participants with advanced lung cancer, the mean age was 76.3y (SD 5.1), 39.4% were female and 82.2% had stage IV disease. The proportion of patients who experienced grade 3-5 toxicity was significantly lower in the intervention arm vs UC (53.1% vs 71.6%, P=0.01). More participants in the intervention arm received lower intensity treatment at cycle 1 (56.3% vs 35.3%; P<0.01). Even with a cycle 1 dose reduction, OS at 6mo and 1 year was not significantly different (adjusted hazard ratio [HR] intervention vs. UC: 6mo HR=0.90, 95% CI: 0.52-1.57, P=0.72; 1 year HR=0.89, 95% CI: 0.58-1.36, P=0.57). Frequent toxicity checks, providing education and counseling materials, and initiating direct communication with the patient's primary care physician were among the most common GA-guided management recommendations. Providing a GA summary and management recommendations can significantly improve tolerability of cancer treatment among older adults with advanced lung cancer.

Caregiver-oncologist prognostic concordance, caregiving esteem, and caregiver outcomes.

INTRODUCTION: Caregiver-oncologist concordance regarding the patient's prognosis is associated with worse caregiver outcomes (e.g., depressive symptoms), but mechanisms underpinning these associations are unclear. We explored whether caregiving esteem mediates these associations. METHODS: At enrollment, caregivers and oncologists used a 5-point ordinal scale to estimate patient survival; identical responses were considered concordant. At 4-6 weeks, caregivers completed an assessment of the extent to which caregiving imparts self-esteem (Caregiver Reaction Assessment self-esteem subscale; range 0-5; higher score indicates greater esteem). They also completed Patient Health Questionnaire-2 (PHQ-2) for depressive symptoms, Distress Thermometer, and 12-Item Short Form Survey for quality of life (QoL). Mediation analysis with bootstrapping (PROCESS macro by Hayes) was used to estimate the extent to which caregiving mediated the effects of prognostic concordance on caregiver outcomes through caregiving esteem. RESULTS: Prognostic concordance occurred in 28% the caregiver-oncologist dyads; 85% of the discordance were due to caregivers estimating a longer patient's survival. At 4-6 weeks, mean caregiving esteem score was 4.4 (range 1.5-5.0). Lower caregiving esteem mediated the associations of concordance with higher PHQ-2 [indirect effect = 0.12; 95% Confidence Interval (CI) 0.03, 0.27], greater distress (indirect effect =0.25; 95% CI 0.08, 0.48), and poorer QoL (indirect effect = -1.50; 95% CI -3.06, -0.41). Caregiving esteem partially mediated 39%, 64%, and 48% of the associations between caregiver-oncologist concordance and PHQ-2, distress, and SF-12, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Caregiver-oncologist concordance was associated with lower caregiving esteem. Lower caregiving esteem mediated the negative relationship between caregiver-oncologist concordance and caregiver outcomes.

The shared uncertainty experience of older adults with advanced cancer and their caregivers.

OBJECTIVE: One primary source of psychological distress in patients with cancer and their caregivers is uncertainty. However, the uncertainty trajectory and its relationship between older adults with advanced cancer and their caregivers have rarely been examined. This study describes the uncertainty trajectory in patient-caregiver dyads, explores the effect of geriatric assessment (GA) intervention on trajectory, and examines the interdependent relationship of uncertainty. METHODS: This secondary analysis used longitudinal data from a national cluster-randomized controlled trial examining a GA intervention compared to usual care. Participants completed the modified 9-item Mishel Uncertainty in Illness Scale at enrollment, 4-6 weeks, 3 months, and 6 months. The dyadic growth model and cross-lagged actor-partner interdependence model were used. RESULTS: A total of 397 dyads (patient age M = 76.81 ± SD5.43; caregiver age M = 66.69 ± SD12.52) were included. Both had a trend of decreased uncertainty over time (b = -0.16, p < 0.01). There was a greater decrease in uncertainty among caregivers in the GA group than those in the usual care group (b = -0.46, p = 0.02). For both patients and caregivers, their past uncertainty was a significant predictor of their own current uncertainty (i.e., actor effect, p < 0.01). The individual's past uncertainty was a significant predictor of the other dyad member's current uncertainty (i.e., partner effect, p < 0.05), indicating an interdependent relationship between patient and caregiver uncertainty over time. CONCLUSIONS: Findings suggest patient and caregiver function as a unit with uncertainty levels affecting each other. Future interventions could build on GA to address uncertainty for older patients with advanced cancer and caregivers.

Association of Prognostic Understanding With Health Care Use Among Older Adults With Advanced Cancer: A Secondary Analysis of a Cluster Randomized Clinical Trial.

Importance: A poor prognostic understanding regarding curability is associated with lower odds of hospice use among patients with cancer. However, the association between poor prognostic understanding or prognostic discordance and health care use among older adults with advanced incurable cancers is not well characterized. Objective: To evaluate the association of poor prognostic understanding and patient-oncologist prognostic discordance with hospitalization and hospice use among older adults with advanced cancers. Design, Setting, and Participants: This was a post hoc secondary analysis of a cluster randomized clinical trial that recruited patients from October 29, 2014, to April 28, 2017. Data were collected from community oncology practices affiliated with the University of Rochester Cancer Center National Cancer Institute Community Oncology Research Program. The parent trial enrolled 541 patients who were aged 70 years or older and were receiving or considering any line of cancer treatment for incurable solid tumors or lymphomas; the patients' oncologists and caregivers (if available) were also enrolled. Patients were followed up for at least 1 year. Data were analyzed from January 3 to 16, 2021. Main Outcomes and Measures: At enrollment, patients and oncologists were asked about their beliefs regarding cancer curability (100%, >50%, 50%, <50%, and 0%; answers other than 0% reflected poor prognostic understanding) and life expectancy (≤6 months, 7-12 months, 1-2 years, 2-5 years, and >5 years; answers of >5 years reflected poor prognostic understanding). Any difference between oncologist and patient in response options was considered discordant. Outcomes were any hospitalization and hospice use at 6 months captured by the clinical research associates. Results: Among the 541 patients, the mean (SD) age was 76.6 (5.2) years, 264 of 540 (49%) were female, and 486 of 540 (90%) were White. Poor prognostic understanding regarding curability was reported for 59% (206 of 348) of patients, and poor prognostic understanding regarding life expectancy estimates was reported for 41% (205 of 496) of patients. Approximately 60% (202 of 336) of patient-oncologist dyads were discordant regarding curability, and 72% (356 of 492) of patient-oncologist dyads were discordant regarding life expectancy estimates. Poor prognostic understanding regarding life expectancy estimates was associated with lower odds of hospice use (adjusted odds ratio, 0.30; 95% CI, 0.16-0.59). Discordance regarding life expectancy estimates was associated with greater odds of hospitalization (adjusted odds ratio, 1.64; 95% CI, 1.01-2.66). Conclusions and Relevance: This study highlights different constructs of prognostic understanding and the need to better understand the association between prognostic understanding and health care use among older adult patients with advanced cancer. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02107443.

Overview of Sankey flow diagrams: Focusing on symptom trajectories in older adults with advanced cancer.

This perspectives paper provides an overview of how to read and interpret a Sankey, examples using symptom data from older adults with advanced cancer, a synopsis of medical literature, and comments on creating and using the diagram for presentation of data. From prior reports and our own, we conclude Sankeys are an excellent tool for visualizing the changing status of older patients with cancer. Older adult symptom data is used as an example with data dispalyed in a range of Sankey flow diagrams. Because there is large heterogeneity in aging, different subgroups can be examined. In a single diagram, Sankey can show both the likelihood and variability of patients' future status from their current status.

Completion of Patient-Reported Outcome Questionnaires Among Older Adults with Advanced Cancer.

CONTEXT: Systematic collection of patient-reported outcomes (PROs) reduces symptom burden and improves quality of life. The ability of older adults to complete PROs, however, has not been thoroughly studied. OBJECTIVES: To determine whether older adults with advanced cancer received assistance completing PROs, the nature of the assistance, the factors associated with receiving assistance, and how the prevalence of assistance changed over time. METHODS: Data were obtained from a multisite cluster randomized controlled study of geriatric assessment (Clinicaltrials.gov: NCT02107443). Adults ≥70 years with advanced cancer completed multiple PROs at 4 time points (enrollment, 6 weeks, 3 months, 6 months). Factors associated with receipt of assistance were assessed with bivariate and multivariate analyses. RESULTS: The study included 541 adults (range 70-96 years, 49% female, mixed incurable cancer diagnoses). Twenty-eight percent (153/541) received assistance completing PROs. Of these, 42% received assistance from caregivers, 37% from research staff, and 15% from both. Factors associated with receiving assistance included older age [Adjusted Odds Ratio (AOR) 3.71, 95% Confidence Interval (CI) 1.03-13.38], lower education level (3.92, 2.11-7.29), impaired cognition (1.90, 1.23-2.93), impaired functional status (2.16, 1.33-3.52), and impaired hearing (1.38, 1.05-1.80). Eighty percent of individuals who received assistance were identified at study initiation. Receiving assistance decreased over time from 28% to 18%, partially due to drop-outs. CONCLUSION: Over a quarter of older adults with advanced cancer in this study received assistance completing PROs. Completing PROs is a key aspect of many clinical programs and cancer trials; assistance in completing PROs should be offered and provided.

Evaluating the association of frailty with communication about aging-related concerns between older patients with advanced cancer and their oncologists.

BACKGROUND: A geriatric assessment (GA) intervention improves communication about aging-related concerns, but its effect on communication in patients with various levels of frailty is unknown. METHODS: This was a secondary analysis of a nationwide trial of patients aged ≥70 years with incurable cancer and impairment on 1 or more GA domains (ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier NCT02107443; principal investigator Supriya G. Mohile). Practice sites were randomized to either the GA-intervention or usual care. Frailty was assessed with a deficit accumulation index (range, 0-1), and patients were stratified as robust (0 to <0.2), prefrail (0.2 to <0.35), or frail (≥0.35). The clinic visit after the GA-intervention was audio-recorded, transcribed, and coded to evaluate the number and quality of conversations about aging-related concerns. Linear mixed models examined differences in the number and quality of conversations within and between arms. All P values were 2-sided. RESULTS: Patients (n = 541) were classified as robust (27%), prefrail (42%), or frail (31%). In the usual care arm, frail patients (vs robust ones) engaged in more aging-related conversations (adjusted mean difference, 1.73; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.59-2.87), conversations of higher quality (difference, 1.12; 95% CI, 0.24-2.0), and more discussions about evidence-based recommendations (difference, 0.71; 95% CI, 0.04-1.38; all P values ≤ .01). Similarly, in the GA intervention arm, frail patients (vs robust ones) engaged in more aging-related conversations (difference, 2.49; 95% CI, 1.51-3.47), conversations of higher quality (difference, 1.31; 95% CI, 0.56-2.06), and more discussions about evidence-based recommendations (difference, 0.87; 95% CI, 0.32-1.42; all P values ≤ .01). Furthermore, the GA-intervention significantly improved the number and quality of conversations in all patients: robust, prefrail, and frail (all P values ≤ .01). CONCLUSIONS: Patients with higher degrees of frailty and those exposed to the GA-intervention had more and higher quality conversations about aging-related concerns with oncologists. LAY SUMMARY: A geriatric assessment (GA) intervention improves communication about aging-related concerns, but its effect on communication in patients with various levels of frailty is unknown. This study conducted a secondary analysis of a nationwide trial of patients aged ≥70 years with incurable cancer and 1 or more GA domain impairments. Patients were stratified as robust, prefrail, or frail. The number and quality of conversations about aging-related concerns that occurred during the clinic visit after the GA-intervention were determined. Patients with higher degrees of frailty and those in the GA intervention arm had more and higher quality conversations about aging-related concerns with oncologists.