Value of a multidisciplinary geriatric oncology committee on patient care in a community-based, academic cancer center.

INTRODUCTION: The heterogeneity in health and functional ability among older patients makes the management of cancer a unique challenge. The Geriatric Oncology Program at the University of Maryland Baltimore Washington Medical Center (BWMC) was created to optimize cancer management for older patients. This study aimed to assess the benefits of the implementation of such a program at a community-based academic cancer center. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We analyzed patients aged ≥80 years presenting to the Geriatric Oncology Program between 2017 and 2022. A multidisciplinary team of specialists collectively reviewed each patient using geriatric-specific domains and stratified each patient into one of three management groups- Group 1: those deemed fit to receive standard oncologic care (SOC); Group 2: those recommended to receive optimization services prior to reassessment for SOC; and Group 3: those deemed to be best suited for supportive care and/or hospice care. RESULTS: The study cohort consisted of 233 patients, of which 76 (32.6%) received SOC, 43 (18.5%) were optimized, and 114 (49.0%) received supportive care or hospice referral. Among the optimized patients, 69.8% were deemed fit for SOC upon re-evaluation following their respective optimization services. The Canadian Study of Health and Aging-Clinical Frailty Scale (CSHA-CFS) score was implemented in 2019 (n = 90). Patients receiving supportive/hospice care only had an average score of 5.8, while the averages for those in the optimization and SOC groups were 4.6 and 4.1, respectively (p ≤0.001). Patients receiving SOC had the longest average survival of 2.71 years compared to the optimization (2.30 years) and supportive care groups (0.93 years) (p ≤0.001). For all patients that underwent surgical interventions post-operatively, 23 patients (85%) were discharged home and four (15%) were discharged to a rehabilitation facility. DISCUSSION: The present study demonstrates the profound impact that the complexities in health status and frailty among older individuals can have during cancer management. The Geriatric Oncology Program at BWMC maximized treatment outcomes for older adults through the provision of SOC therapies and optimization services, while also minimizing unnecessary interventions on an individual patient-centric level.

Analysis of 10 years of open, laparoscopic, and robotic rectal surgeries in the community setting.

Background: Colorectal cancer is the fourth most common cancer in the US. Many of these patients will require operations. Although there is significant data in the literature that supports minimally invasive colorectal operations in the academic setting, few studies have examined their performance in community hospitals. Methods: Data was collected from a high-volume, university-affiliated, community center. Our Cancer Registry Database was queried to include any patients that had rectal surgery at our institution from 2010 to 2020. One hundred-twenty-two patients were identified and reviewed retrospectively. Main outcome measures include estimated blood loss (EBL), blood transfusion, time to first bowel movement, oncologic resection, length of stay (LOS), survival, and cost analysis. Results: Both robotic and laparoscopic operations resulted in lower average EBL, less blood transfusions, and less time to first bowel movement (p = 0.003, 0.006, 0.003, respectively). There was no significant difference in ability to achieve R0 resection, adequate lymph node retrieval, and adequate total mesorectal excision (TME, p = 0.856, 0.489, 0.500, respectively). LOS was significantly shorter for minimally invasive operations, 4.35 vs 8.48 days, and average survival was longest for laparoscopic operations at 7.19 years as compared to 5.55 years for open operations (p < 0.001, 0.026, respectively). Cost was lowest for robotic operations (0.003). Conclusions: Minimally invasive rectal operations, especially robotic, lead to better short- and long-term outcomes, equivalent oncologic resection, and are more cost-effective as compared to open operations even in the community setting, supporting continued performance and growth of robotic colorectal operations in the community setting. Key message: Although there is significant data in the literature that supports minimally invasive colorectal operations in the academic setting, few studies have examined their performance in community hospitals as this study does. This study found that minimally invasive rectal operations, especially robotic, lead to better short- and long-term outcomes, equivalent oncologic resection, and are more cost-effective as compared to open operations even in the community setting, supporting continued performance and growth of robotic colorectal operations in the community setting.