A scoping review of racial, ethnic, socioeconomic, and geographic disparities in the outcomes of older adults with cancer.

INTRODUCTION: Cancer health disparities are widespread. Nevertheless, the disparities in outcomes among diverse survivors of cancer ages 65 years and older ("older") have not been systematically evaluated. METHODS: We conducted a scoping review of original research articles published between January 2016 and September 2023 and indexed in Medline (Ovid), Embase, Scopus, and CINAHL databases. We included studies evaluating racial, ethnic, socioeconomic disadvantaged, geographic, sexual and gender, and/or persons with disabilities disparities in treatment, survivorship, and mortality among older survivors of cancer. We excluded studies with no a priori aims related to a health disparity, review articles, conference proceedings, meeting abstracts, studies with unclear methodologies, and articles in which the disparity group was examined only as an analytic covariate. Two reviewers independently extracted data following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis reporting guidelines. RESULTS: After searching and removing duplicates, 2573 unique citations remained and after screening 59 articles met the inclusion criteria. Many investigated more than one health disparity, and most focused on racial and ethnic (n = 44) or socioeconomic (n = 25) disparities; only 10 studies described geographic disparities, and none evaluated disparities in persons with disabilities or due to sexual and gender identity. Research investigating disparities in outcomes among diverse older survivors of cancer is increasing gradually-68% of eligible articles were published between 2020 and 2023. Most studies focused on the treatment phase of care (n = 28) and mortality (n = 26), with 16 examined disparities in survivorship, symptoms, or quality of life. Most research was descriptive and lacked analyses of potential underlying mechanisms contributing to the reported disparities. CONCLUSION: Little research has evaluated the effect of strategies to reduce health disparities among older patients with cancer. This lack of evidence perpetuates cancer inequities and leaves the cancer care system ill equipped to address the unique needs of the rapidly growing and increasingly diverse older adult cancer population.

The disproportionate burden of Alzheimer's disease and related dementias (ADRD) in diverse older adults diagnosed with cancer.

INTRODUCTION: Older adults living with Alzheimer's disease and related dementias (ADRD) who are then diagnosed with cancer are an understudied population. While the role of cognitive impairment during and after cancer treatment have been well-studied, less is understood about patients who are living with ADRD and then develop cancer. The purpose of this study is to contribute evidence about our understanding of this vulnerable population. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This was a retrospective cohort study of a linked, representative family of databases of cancer registries and Medicare administrative claims that make up the SEER-Medicare database. Older adults ages 68 and older with a first primary cancer type: breast, cervical, colorectal, lung, oral, or prostate were eligible for inclusion (N = 337,932). Prevalence estimates of ADRD across cancer types and a 5% non-cancer comparison sample were compared by patient factors. RESULTS: The overall prevalence of patients who had an ADRD diagnosis anytime in the three years prior to their cancer diagnosis was 5.6%. Patients with ADRD were more likely to be female, older (over age 75), a racial/ethnic minority, single, with multiple chronic conditions, and a tumor diagnosed early (stage I) or were unstaged. Black patients with colorectal and oral cancer had the highest and second highest prevalence of ADRD compared to White patients (13.46% vs 7.95% and 12.64% vs 7.82% respectively, p < .0001). We observed the highest prevalence of ADRD among Black patients for breast (11.85%), cervical (11.98%), lung (8.41%), prostate (4.83), and the 5% sample (9.50%, p > .0001). DISCUSSION: The higher prevalence of ADRD among Black and Latine older adults with cancer not only aligns with the trend observed in our non-cancer comparison sample, but also, these findings demonstrate the compounded risk experienced by minoritized older adults over the life course. The greater than expected prevalence of patients with ADRD who go on to develop cancer demonstrates better assessment of cognition is urgently needed. Accurate identification of these vulnerable populations is critical to improve assessment, care coordination, and address inequities in screening and treatment planning.

Practical Assessment and Management of Vulnerabilities in Older Patients Receiving Systemic Cancer Therapy: ASCO Guideline Update.

PURPOSE: To update the ASCO guideline (2018) on the practical assessment and management of age-associated vulnerabilities in older patients undergoing systemic cancer therapy. METHODS: An Expert Panel conducted a systematic review to identify relevant randomized clinical trials (RCTs), systematic reviews, and meta-analyses from January 2016 to December 2022. RESULTS: A total of 26 publications met eligibility criteria and form the evidentiary basis for the update. RECOMMENDATIONS: The Expert Panel reiterates its overarching recommendation from the prior guideline that geriatric assessment (GA), including all essential domains, should be used to identify vulnerabilities or impairments that are not routinely captured in oncology assessments for all patients over 65 years old with cancer. Based on recently published RCTs demonstrating significantly improved clinical outcomes, all older adults with cancer (65+ years old) receiving systemic therapy with GA-identified deficits should have GA-guided management (GAM) included in their care plan. GAM includes using GA findings to inform cancer treatment decision-making as well as to address impairments through appropriate interventions, counseling, and/or referrals. A GA should include high priority aging-related domains known to be associated with outcomes in older adults with cancer: physical and cognitive function, emotional health, comorbid conditions, polypharmacy, nutrition, and social support. Clinical adaptation of the GA based on patient population, resources, and time is appropriate.The Panel recommends the Practical Geriatric Assessment as one option for this purpose (https://old-prod.asco.org/sites/new-www.asco.org/files/content-files/practice-patients/documents/2023-PGA-Final.pdf; https://youtu.be/jnaQIjOz2Dw; https://youtu.be/nZXtwaGh0Z0).Additional information is available at www.asco.org/supportive-care-guidelines.

Implementation and evaluation of a remote geriatric assessment and intervention program in Brazil.

BACKGROUND: This study sought to determine the feasibility and acceptability of a remote geriatric assessment (GA) and implementation (GAIN) program in Brazil. The authors also explored the effect of this program on health-related quality of life (HR-QOL) outcomes 3 months after initiating treatment. METHODS: This is a longitudinal study enrolling older adults (65+ years), diagnosed with any type of solid tumor, scheduled to initiate chemotherapy in a networked Brazilian cancer center. The GA was performed through telehealth. We assessed the feasibility of the remote GA, acceptability to patients, and changes in patient-centered outcomes (HR-QOL, mood, function) from baseline to month 3. Linear mixed model analysis was done, adjusting for age, gender, race, income, and disease stage. RESULTS: Fifty-six patients completed all intended assessments. Notably, the threshold of feasibility was 70% and there was 92% complete adherence. Average age was 76 years old (SD = 7.2). Most patients were female (57%), married (59%), and had a college degree (46%). The most common diagnoses were gastrointestinal (39%) and gynecological cancers (18%); most were diagnosed at an advance disease stage (77%). A total of 32 patients were referred to a remote appointment and 86% followed this recommendation(s). Significant improvement in Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy - General FACT-G (mean difference, 6.04; p < .001), Geriatric Depression Scale (mean difference, -0.86; p = .008), and instrumental activities of daily living ratio (mean difference, 0.17; p < .001) were found. CONCLUSION: Remote GAIN is feasible and acceptable to older adults with cancer receiving treatment in Brazil. The authors also found significant improvement in HR-QOL outcomes over time. Notably, this GAIN program could guide early detection of chemotherapy toxicity and improving patient-reported outcomes in low-resource environments.

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.

Evaluation of geriatric assessment and management on the toxic effects of cancer treatment (GAP70+): a cluster-randomised study.

BACKGROUND: Older adults with advanced cancer are at a high risk for treatment toxic effects. Geriatric assessment evaluates ageing-related domains and guides management. We examined whether a geriatric assessment intervention can reduce serious toxic effects in older patients with advanced cancer who are receiving high risk treatment (eg, chemotherapy). METHODS: In this cluster-randomised trial, we enrolled patients aged 70 years and older with incurable solid tumours or lymphoma and at least one impaired geriatric assessment domain who were starting a new treatment regimen. 40 community oncology practice clusters across the USA were randomly assigned (1:1) to the intervention (oncologists received a tailored geriatric assessment summary and management recommendations) or usual care (no geriatric assessment summary or management recommendations were provided to oncologists) by means of a computer-generated randomisation table. The primary outcome was the proportion of patients who had any grade 3-5 toxic effect (based on National Cancer Institute Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events version 4) over 3 months. Practice staff prospectively captured toxic effects. Masked oncology clinicians reviewed medical records to verify. The study was registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02054741. FINDINGS: Between July 29, 2014, and March 13, 2019, we enrolled 718 patients. Patients had a mean age of 77·2 years (SD 5·4) and 311 (43%) of 718 participants were female. The mean number of geriatric assessment domain impairments was 4·5 (SD 1·6) and was not significantly different between the study groups. More patients in intervention group compared with the usual care group were Black versus other races (40 [11%] of 349 patients vs 12 [3%] of 369 patients; p<0·0001) and had previous chemotherapy (104 [30%] of 349 patients vs 81 [22%] of 369 patients; p=0·016). A lower proportion of patients in the intervention group had grade 3-5 toxic effects (177 [51%] of 349 patients) compared with the usual care group (263 [71%] of 369 patients; relative risk [RR] 0·74 (95% CI 0·64-0·86; p=0·0001). Patients in the intervention group had fewer falls over 3 months (35 [12%] of 298 patients vs 68 [21%] of 329 patients; adjusted RR 0·58, 95% CI 0·40-0·84; p=0·0035) and had more medications discontinued (mean adjusted difference 0·14, 95% CI 0·03-0·25; p=0·015). INTERPRETATION: A geriatric assessment intervention for older patients with advanced cancer reduced serious toxic effects from cancer treatment. Geriatric assessment with management should be integrated into the clinical care of older patients with advanced cancer and ageing-related conditions. FUNDING: National Cancer Institute.

Geriatric Assessment-Driven Intervention (GAIN) on Chemotherapy-Related Toxic Effects in Older Adults With Cancer: A Randomized Clinical Trial.

IMPORTANCE: Although geriatric assessment-driven intervention improves patient-centered outcomes, its influence on chemotherapy-related toxic effects remains unknown. OBJECTIVE: To assess whether specific geriatric assessment-driven intervention (GAIN) can reduce chemotherapy-related toxic effects in older adults with cancer. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: A randomized clinical trial enrolled 613 participants from a National Cancer Institute-designated cancer center between 2015 and 2019. Patients were 65 years and older with a solid malignant neoplasm, were starting a new chemotherapy regimen, and completed a geriatric assessment. Patients were followed up until chemotherapy completion or 6 months after initiation, whichever occurred first. Data analysis was done by intention-to-treat principle. INTERVENTIONS: Patients were randomized (2:1) to either the GAIN (intervention) or standard of care (SOC) arm. In the GAIN arm, a geriatrics-trained multidisciplinary team composed of an oncologist, nurse practitioner, social worker, physical/occupation therapist, nutritionist, and pharmacist reviewed geriatric assessment results and implemented interventions based on prespecified thresholds built into the geriatric assessment's domains. In the SOC arm, geriatric assessment results were sent to treating oncologists for consideration. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: The primary outcome was incidence of grade 3 or higher chemotherapy-related toxic effects (graded using National Cancer Institute Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events, version 4.0). Secondary outcomes included advance directive completion, emergency department visits, unplanned hospitalizations, average length of stay, unplanned hospital readmissions, chemotherapy dose modifications, and early discontinuation. Overall survival analysis was performed up to 12 months after chemotherapy initiation. RESULTS: Among the 605 eligible participants for analysis, median (range) age was 71 (65-91) years, 357 (59.0%) were women, and 432 (71.4%) had stage IV disease. Cancer types included gastrointestinal (202 [33.4%]), breast (136 [22.5%]), lung (97 [16.0%]), genitourinary (91 [15.0%]), gynecologic (54 [8.9%]), and other (25 [4.1%]). Incidence of grade 3 or higher chemotherapy-related toxic effects was 50.5% (95% CI, 45.6% to 55.4%) in the GAIN arm and 60.6% (95% CI, 53.9% to 67.3%) in the SOC arm, resulting in a significant 10.1% reduction (95% CI, -1.5 to -18.2%; P = .02). A significant absolute increase in advance directive completion of 28.4% with GAIN vs 13.3% with SOC (P < .001) was observed. No significant differences were observed in emergency department visits, unplanned hospitalizations, average length of stay, unplanned readmissions, chemotherapy dose modifications or discontinuations, or overall survival. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: In this randomized clinical trial, integration of multidisciplinary GAIN significantly reduced grade 3 or higher chemotherapy-related toxic effects in older adults with cancer. Implementation of GAIN into oncology clinical practice should be considered among older adults receiving chemotherapy. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02517034.

Improving Care for Spanish-Speaking Older Adults with Breast Cancer: Feasibility, Reliability, and Validity of a Self-Administered Spanish Language Geriatric Assessment.

We evaluated the feasibility, reliability, and validity of a Spanish-language self-administered geriatric assessment (GA) in older (age ≥ 65) Spanish-speaking women with breast cancer in the United States. Eligible participants (n = 181) were recruited and randomized. Feasibility was defined as the participant's unassisted GA completion rate, completion time, and perception on ease of completion. Reliability and validity were assessed using Spearman's correlation coefficients. Two-sided p < 0.05 was considered significant. Ninety-eight percent of participants (n = 177) completed the GA at least once. Median age was 70 years (range: 65-95) and 55% had ≤8th grade education. Forty-one percent (n = 73) were unable to complete the GA unassisted, median completion time was 28 min (range 8-90), and 77% (n = 136) rated the GA as "easy"/"very easy". Patients with ≤8th grade education took longer to complete the GA (30 vs. 25 min, p = 0.0036) and needed more assistance (59% vs. 19%, p < 0.001) than those with ≥9th grade education. Test-retest reliability was high (≥0.82) for all domains except social activity (0.73). Validity among similar scales was found. The self-administered GA is a feasible, reliable, and valid tool for Spanish-speaking older women with breast cancer. Tailoring GA tools to the patients' educational level is important when implementing tools in multicultural environments.

Emotional problem-related distress screening and its prevalence by cancer type: Assessment by patients' characteristics and level of assistance requested.

OBJECTIVE: Emotional problem-related distress is a common issue faced by patients with cancer. However, patients suffering with this emotional burden do not typically seek assistance. This study sought to determine the prevalence of emotional problem-related distress by cancer type, and identify factors correlated with the level of assistance requested. METHODS: Using the SupportScreen®, patients were screened for emotional problem-related distress at their first or second visit to an NCI designated Comprehensive Cancer Center. General Linear Model was used to test the association between emotional problem-related distress and type of cancer, and the relationship between level of assistance requested and patients' characteristics. RESULTS: A total of 2,421 patients were included in this analysis. Patients were mostly female (62%), diagnosed with breast (24%), gynecological (16%) or gastrointestinal (15%) cancers. Highest levels of emotional problem-related distress were reported by patients diagnosed with lung, gynecological, breast and gastrointestinal cancers. Level of assistance requested were significantly associated with problem-related distress scores (p < 0.001), which were higher among patients with lower household incomes (p < 0.001) and Spanish as primary language (p = 0.001). CONCLUSION: Our study found an association between Level of assistance requested and emotional problem-related distress, which were heightened by lower income and Spanish-speaking. Intervention strategies should be considered to increase access to psychosocial support services.

Recommendations and outcomes from a geriatric assessment guided multidisciplinary clinic prior to autologous stem cell transplant in older patients.

BACKGROUND: Autologous hematopoietic stem cell transplant (autoHCT) is a mainstay of treatment for multiple myeloma and non-Hodgkin lymphoma but is underutilized in older adults. We investigated the association of vulnerabilities identified by a geriatric assessment (GA)-guided multidisciplinary clinic (MDC) on the receipt of autoHCT and evaluated its ability to predict outcomes in older autoHCT candidates. METHODS: Patients 50+ years received GA-informed optimization recommendations: 'decline' if unlikely to realize benefits of autoHCT, 'defer' if optimization necessary before autoHCT, and 'proceed' if autoHCT could proceed without delay. We compared characteristics and outcomes of autoHCT recipients (n = 62) to non-autoHCT patients (n = 29) and evaluated GA deficits on outcomes. RESULTS: 91 patients were evaluated; the MDC recommendation was 'decline' for 5 (6%), 'defer' for 25 (27%), and 'proceed' for 61 (67%). AutoHCT recipients had fewer GA-rated impairments relative to non-autoHCT patients, as did patients with a 'proceed' recommendation relative to 'defer'. Among autoHCT recipients, 1-year and 3-year non-relapse morality (NRM) was 0% and 5%, and there was no difference in length of hospitalization, readmission rate, or mortality after transplant by MDC recommendation. Frail grip strength and poor performance status were associated with inferior post-autoHCT progression-free survival and overall survival. CONCLUSIONS: Patients pursuing autoHCT after MDC-directed optimization achieved excellent outcomes, including patients deferred but ultimately receiving autoHCT. GA-identified functional deficits, especially frail grip strength, may improve risk stratification in older autoHCT candidates. Employing a GA earlier in the disease trajectory to inform early referral to an MDC may increase autoHCT safety and utilization in older patients.

How Is Geriatric Assessment Used in Clinical Practice for Older Adults With Cancer? A Survey of Cancer Providers by the American Society of Clinical Oncology.

PURPOSE: For patients with cancer who are older than 65 years, the 2018 ASCO Guideline recommends geriatric assessment (GA) be performed. However, there are limited data on providers' practices using GA. Therefore, ASCO's Geriatric Oncology Task Force conducted a survey of providers to assess practice patterns and barriers to GA. METHODS: Cancer providers treating adult patients including those ≥ 65 years completed an online survey. Questions included those asking about awareness of ASCO's Geriatric Oncology Guideline (2018), use of validated GA tools, and perceived barriers to using GA. Descriptive statistics and statistical comparisons between those aware of the Guideline and those who were not were conducted. Statistical significance was set at P < .05. RESULTS: Participants (N = 1,277) responded between April 5 and June 5, 2019. Approximately half (53%) reported awareness of the Guideline. The most frequently used GA tools, among those aware of the Guideline and those who were not, assessed functional status (69% v 50%; P < .001) and falls (62% v 45%; P < .001). Remaining tools were used < 50% of the time, including tools assessing weight loss, comorbidities, cognition, life expectancy, chemotherapy toxicity, mood, and noncancer mortality risk. GA use was two to four times higher among those who are aware of the Guideline. The most frequent barriers for those who reported being Guideline aware were lack of resources, specifically time (81.7%) and staff (77.0%). In comparison, those who were unaware of the Guideline most often reported the following barriers: lack of knowledge or training (78.4%), lack of awareness about tools (75.2%), and uncertainty about use of tools (75.0%). CONCLUSION: Among providers caring for older adults, 52% were aware of the ASCO Guideline. Some domains were assessed frequently (eg, function, falls), whereas other domains were assessed rarely (eg, mood, cognition). Guideline awareness was associated with two to four times increased use of GA and differing perceived barriers. Interventions facilitating Guideline-consistent implementation will require various strategies to change behavior.

Integration of an Objective Cognitive Assessment Into a Prognostic Index for 5-Year Mortality Prediction.

BACKGROUND/OBJECTIVES: Prognostic indices rarely include cognition. We determined if a comprehensive cognitive screen or brief individual items were associated with improved mortality predictions of a widely used prognostic index. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: The National Social Life Health and Aging Project Wave 2, a nationally representative, cross-sectional, in-home survey conducted in 2010 to 2011 on 3,199 community-dwelling adults aged 60 to 99 years. MEASUREMENTS: Cognition was measured using a Survey-Adapted Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA-SA) grouped into three screened categories: screen normal (≥24 points), screen positive for mild cognitive impairment (18-23 points), and screen positive for dementia (<18 points). Single-item cognitive measures included clock-draw and five-word delayed recall. We constructed a modified Lee Prognostic Index (range = 0-18 points) based on age, behavior, function, and comorbidities shown to predict long-term mortality. We used logistic regression and the fraction of new information provided to determine if each cognitive measure improved the Lee index's 5-year mortality prediction. RESULTS: The sample was 54% female and had a mean age of 72 years, MoCA-SA score of 22 (SD = 4.5), and Lee index of 7 (SD = 3). Regression analysis indicated the MoCA-SA modestly improved the Lee index's mortality prediction (P < .001; fraction of new information provided = 0.06); for low Lee index scores (<4 points), the absolute mortality rate difference was 7% by cognitive status; and for higher Lee index scores (4-7 points or 8-12 points), the absolute mortality rate difference was 15% by cognitive status. The clock-draw and delayed-recall items added similar value to mortality predictions as the longer MoCA-SA. Cognition had the third highest fraction of new information of all 13 Lee index items. CONCLUSION: Incorporating a brief measure of cognition into a modified Lee index, even with single items, resulted in more accurate 5-year mortality risk predictions. Cognition should be included in prognostic calculators in older adults given its independent association with mortality risk. J Am Geriatr Soc 68:1796-1802, 2020.

Communication With Older Patients With Cancer Using Geriatric Assessment: A Cluster-Randomized Clinical Trial From the National Cancer Institute Community Oncology Research Program.

Importance: Older patients with cancer and their caregivers worry about the effects of cancer treatment on aging-related domains (eg, function and cognition). Quality conversations with oncologists about aging-related concerns could improve patient-centered outcomes. A geriatric assessment (GA) can capture evidence-based aging-related conditions associated with poor clinical outcomes (eg, toxic effects) for older patients with cancer. Objective: To determine whether providing a GA summary and GA-guided recommendations to oncologists can improve communication about aging-related concerns. Design, Setting, and Participants: This cluster-randomized clinical trial enrolled 541 participants from 31 community oncology practices within the University of Rochester National Cancer Institute Community Oncology Research Program from October 29, 2014, to April 28, 2017. Patients were aged 70 years or older with an advanced solid malignant tumor or lymphoma who had at least 1 impaired GA domain; patients chose 1 caregiver to participate. The primary outcome was assessed on an intent-to-treat basis. Interventions: Oncology practices were randomized to receive either a tailored GA summary with recommendations for each enrolled patient (intervention) or alerts only for patients meeting criteria for depression or cognitive impairment (usual care). Main Outcomes and Measures: The predetermined primary outcome was patient satisfaction with communication about aging-related concerns (modified Health Care Climate Questionnaire [score range, 0-28; higher scores indicate greater satisfaction]), measured after the first oncology visit after the GA. Secondary outcomes included the number of aging-related concerns discussed during the visit (from content analysis of audiorecordings), quality of life (measured with the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy scale for patients and the 12-Item Short Form Health Survey for caregivers), and caregiver satisfaction with communication about aging-related patient concerns. Results: A total of 541 eligible patients (264 women, 276 men, and 1 patient did not provide data; mean [SD] age, 76.6 [5.2] years) and 414 caregivers (310 women, 101 men, and 3 caregivers did not provide data; mean age, 66.5 [12.5] years) were enrolled. Patients in the intervention group were more satisfied after the visit with communication about aging-related concerns (difference in mean score, 1.09 points; 95% CI, 0.05-2.13 points; P = .04); satisfaction with communication about aging-related concerns remained higher in the intervention group over 6 months (difference in mean score, 1.10; 95% CI, 0.04-2.16; P = .04). There were more aging-related conversations in the intervention group's visits (difference, 3.59; 95% CI, 2.22-4.95; P < .001). Caregivers in the intervention group were more satisfied with communication after the visit (difference, 1.05; 95% CI, 0.12-1.98; P = .03). Quality of life outcomes did not differ between groups. Conclusions and Relevance: Including GA in oncology clinical visits for older adults with advanced cancer improves patient-centered and caregiver-centered communication about aging-related concerns. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT02107443.

Arti Hurria and the progress in integrating the geriatric assessment into oncology: Young International Society of Geriatric Oncology review paper.

Until recently, the progress in the diagnosis and management of cancer has not been matched by similar progress in the assessment of the increasing numbers of older and more complex patients with cancer. Dr. Arti Hurria identified this gap at the outset of her career, which she dedicated toward studying the geriatric assessment (GA) as an improvement over traditional methods used in oncology to assess vulnerability in older patients with cancer. This review documents the progress of the GA and its integration into oncology. First, we detail the GA's origins in the field of geriatrics. Next, we chronicle the early rise of geriatric oncology, highlighting the calls of early thought-leaders to meet the demands of the rapidly aging cancer population. We describe Dr. Hurria's early efforts toward meeting these calls though the implementation of the GA in oncology research. We then summarize some of the seminal studies constituting the evidence base supporting GA's implementation. Finally, we lay out the evolution of cancer-focused guidelines recommending the GA, concluding with future needs to advance the next steps toward more widespread implementation in routine cancer care. Throughout, we describe Dr. Hurria's vision and its execution in driving progress of the GA in oncology, from her fellowship training to her co-authored guidelines recommending GA for all older adults with cancer-published in the year of her untimely death.

Results from a multidisciplinary clinic guided by geriatric assessment before stem cell transplantation in older adults.

Limitations found on geriatric assessment (GA) track with worse outcomes after hematopoietic cell transplantation (HCT). We report on a multidisciplinary team clinic (MDC), consisting of a cancer-specific GA and a multidisciplinary team of providers, to assess candidacy and create an individualized optimization plan for allogeneic HCT candidates aged ≥60 years and autologous HCT and adoptive T-cell therapy candidates aged ≥70 years. Among the 247 patients evaluated in the MDC, allogeneic HCT candidates comprised the majority (60%), followed by autologous HCT (37%) with occasional older cellular therapy candidates (3%). Almost all patients meeting program-required minimum ages for MDC optimization at our institution were assessed (98%). Relative to historical control subjects undergoing GA alone, allogeneic HCT patients aged ≥60 years who underwent MDC appraisal had similar frequencies of high-risk disease, reduced intensity regimens, and high comorbidity but fewer GA-graded functional impairments. The MDC cohort experienced fewer inpatient deaths, shorter length of stay, and fewer discharges to nursing facilities compared with control subjects. Improvements in early mortality were observed over time; 1-year overall survival improved from 43% in the pre-MDC era to 70% in the recent MDC era, and 1-year nonrelapse mortality decreased from 43% to 18%. The 31 autologous HCT recipients aged ≥70 years optimized by the MDC achieved 0% nonrelapse mortality and 97% overall survival at 1 year. A GA-guided MDC for older HCT candidates is feasible and seems to reduce transplant-associated morbidity and mortality. An MDC should encourage broader and safer utilization of transplantation in older patients.

Assessment of distress and quality of life in rare cancers.

OBJECTIVE: Rare cancers are a heterogeneous group of conditions that can be associated with emotional and physical impairments. In view of the dearth of research in this area, we investigated the quality of life and prevalence of distress in a cohort of patients diagnosed with a rare cancer, classified by the RARECARE definition. METHODS: A cohort of rare cancer patients, treated in a Brazilian public cancer center, was assessed for distress (Distress Thermometer), anxiety/depression (Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale), and quality of life (Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-General Version). Descriptive statistics were generated, and multivariate analyses were used to identify factors associated with distress, anxiety/depression, and quality of life. RESULTS: A total of 137 patients (52.6% male, mean age of 50 years; range 18-90) were identified. Nearly half (49.6%) of patients reported high levels of distress, with 19.7% endorsing anxiety and 15.3% depression. In multivariate analysis, demographic and clinical variables associated with worse psychosocial outcomes included younger age (P < 0.05), female gender (P < 0.01), advanced disease stage (P < 0.01), and engagement in active therapy (P < 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: Patients diagnosed with rare cancer reported poorer psychosocial outcomes and impaired quality of life when compared to the general population of cancer patients. Certain demographic groups (eg, women and younger patients) may benefit from targeted psychosocial interventions.