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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

Patient and caregiver agreement on prognosis estimates for older adults with advanced cancer.

BACKGROUND: Disagreements between patients and caregivers about treatment benefits, care decisions, and patients' health are associated with increased patient depression as well as increased caregiver anxiety, distress, depression, and burden. Understanding the factors associated with disagreement may inform interventions to improve the aforementioned outcomes. METHODS: For this analysis, baseline data were obtained from a cluster-randomized geriatric assessment trial that recruited patients aged ≥70 years who had incurable cancer from community oncology practices (University of Rochester Cancer Center 13070; Supriya G. Mohile, principal investigator). Patient and caregiver dyads were asked to estimate the patient's prognosis. Response options were 0 to 6 months, 7 to 12 months, 1 to 2 years, 2 to 5 years, and >5 years. The dependent variable was categorized as exact agreement (reference), patient-reported longer estimate, or caregiver-reported longer estimate. The authors used generalized estimating equations with multinomial distribution to examine the factors associated with patient-caregiver prognostic estimates. Independent variables were selected using the purposeful selection method. RESULTS: Among 354 dyads (89% of screened patients were enrolled), 26% and 22% of patients and caregivers, respectively, reported a longer estimate. Compared with dyads that were in agreement, patients were more likely to report a longer estimate when they screened positive for polypharmacy (ß = 0.81; P = .001), and caregivers reported greater distress (ß = 0.12; P = .03). Compared with dyads that were in agreement, caregivers were more likely to report a longer estimate when patients screened positive for polypharmacy (ß = 0.82; P = .005) and had lower perceived self-efficacy in interacting with physicians (ß = -0.10; P = .008). CONCLUSIONS: Several patient and caregiver factors were associated with patient-caregiver disagreement about prognostic estimates. Future studies should examine the effects of prognostic disagreement on patient and caregiver outcomes.

Association Between Caregiver-Oncologist Discordance in Patient's Life Expectancy Estimates and Caregiver Perceived Autonomy Support by the Oncologist.

BACKGROUND: Caregiver perceived autonomy support by the oncologist is important for caregiver well-being and may be affected by the patient's survival. We determined the association of caregiver-oncologist discordance in patient's life expectancy estimates with perceived autonomy support over time and whether the association differed by patient survival status. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We used data from a geriatric assessment cluster-randomized trial (URCC 13070) that recruited patients aged at least 70 years with incurable cancer considering or receiving treatment, their caregivers, and their oncologists. At baseline, caregivers and oncologists were asked to estimate patient's life expectancy (0-6 months, 7-12 months, 1-2 years, 2-5 years, and >5 years; any difference in response was considered discordant). At 4-6 weeks, 3 months, and 6 months, caregivers completed the Health Care Climate Questionnaire (HCCQ), which measured perceived autonomy support by the oncologist. Generalized estimating equation modeling was conducted to assess the association of baseline caregiver-oncologist discordance with longitudinal HCCQ scores, stratified by patient 6-month survival status. RESULTS: Discordant life expectancy estimates were present in 72.0% of dyads. In multivariate analyses, caregiver-oncologist discordance in patient's life expectancy estimates was associated with higher caregiver HCCQ scores. In stratified analysis, caregiver-oncologist discordance was associated with lower caregiver HCCQ scores (ß = -3.46; 95% CI, -4.64 to -2.29) among patients who died within 6 months but with higher caregiver HCCQ scores (ß = 1.33; 95% CI, 0.63-2.04) among patients who survived beyond 6 months. CONCLUSION: Interventions aimed at mitigating discordance need to consider its association with caregiver perceived autonomy support and patient's survival in order to better inform caregiver expectations. IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE: Among patients who died within the first 6 months, caregivers who estimated a different length of life for the patient compared with oncologists were more likely to report lower support from the oncologist, whereas the opposite relationship was seen within patients who survived beyond the first 6 months. When designing interventions to improve caregiver understanding of the patient's prognosis, its relationship with caregiver-perceived support and patient's survival needs to be considered.

The Relationship Between Frailty and Emotional Health in Older Patients with Advanced Cancer.

BACKGROUND: Aging-related deficits that eventually manifest as frailty may be associated with poor emotional health in older patients with advanced cancer. This study aimed to examine the relationship between frailty and emotional health in this population. METHODS: This was a secondary analysis of baseline data from a nationwide cluster randomized trial. Patients were aged ≥70 years with incurable stage III/IV solid tumors or lymphomas, had ≥1 geriatric assessment (GA) domain impairment, and had completed the Geriatric Depression Scale, Generalized Anxiety Disorder-7, and Distress Thermometer. Frailty was assessed using a Deficit Accumulation Index (DAI; range 0-1) based on GA, which did not include emotional health variables (depression and anxiety), and participants were stratified into robust, prefrail, and frail categories. Multivariate logistic regression models examined the association of frailty with emotional health outcomes. Adjusted odds ratios (aORs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were reported. RESULTS: Five hundred forty-one patients were included (mean age: 77 years; 70-96). DAI ranged from 0.04 to 0.94; 27% of patients were classified as robust, 42% prefrail, and 31% frail. Compared with robust patients, frail patients had an increased risk of screening positive for depression (aOR = 12.8; 95% CI = 6.1-27.0), anxiety (aOR = 6.6; 95% CI = 2.2-19.7), and emotional distress (aOR = 4.62; 95% CI = 2.9-8.3). Prefrail compared with robust patients also had an increased risk of screening positive for depression (aOR = 2.22; 95% CI = 1.0-4.8) and distress (aOR = 1.71; 95% CI = 1.0-2.8). CONCLUSION: In older patients with advanced cancer, frailty is associated with poorer emotional health, which indicates a need for an integrated care approach to treating these patients. IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE: A relationship exists between frailty and poor emotional health in older adults with advanced cancer. Identifying areas of frailty can prompt screening for emotional health and guide delivery of appropriate interventions. Alternatively, attention to emotional health may also improve frailty.

Caregiver-Oncologist Prognostic Concordance, Caregiver Mastery, and Caregiver Psychological Health and Quality of Life.

BACKGROUND: Caregivers of adults with cancer often report a different understanding of the patient's prognosis than the oncologist. We examine the associations of caregiver-oncologist prognostic concordance with caregiver depressive symptoms, distress, and quality of life (QoL). We also explore whether these relationships differed by caregiver environment mastery, an individual's sense of control, and effectiveness in managing life situations. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We used data from a national geriatric assessment cluster-randomized trial (URCC 13070) that recruited patients aged 70 years and older with incurable cancer considering any line of cancer treatment at community oncology practices, their caregivers, and their oncologists. At enrollment, caregivers and oncologists estimated the patient's prognosis (0-6 months, 7-12 months, 1-2 years, 2-5 years, and >5 years; identical responses were concordant). Caregivers completed the Ryff's environmental mastery at enrollment. At 4-6 weeks, caregivers completed the Patient Health Questionnaire-2 (depressive symptoms), distress thermometer, and 12-Item Short-Form Health Survey (quality of life [QoL]). We used generalized estimating equations in models adjusted for covariates. We then assessed the moderation effect of caregiver mastery. RESULTS: Of 411 caregiver-oncologist dyads (mean age = 66.5 years), 369 provided responses and 28% were concordant. Prognostic concordance was associated with greater caregiver depressive symptoms (ß = 0.30; p = .04) but not distress or QoL. A significant moderation effect for caregiver depressive symptoms was found between concordance and mastery (p = .01). Specifically, among caregivers with low mastery (below median), concordance was associated with greater depressive symptoms (ß = 0.68; p = .003). CONCLUSIONS: Caregiver-oncologist prognostic concordance was associated with caregiver depressive symptoms. We found a novel moderating effect of caregiver mastery on the relationship between concordance and caregiver depressive symptoms. IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE: Caregiver-oncologist prognostic concordance is associated with greater caregiver depressive symptoms, particularly in those with low caregiver mastery. When discussing prognosis with caregivers, physicians should be aware that prognostic understanding may affect caregiver psychological health and should assess their depressive symptoms. In addition, while promoting accurate prognostic understanding, physicians should also identify strengths and build resilience among caregivers.

Willingness to bear adversity and beliefs about the curability of advanced cancer in older adults.

BACKGROUND: Older patients with advanced cancer who are 100% certain they will be cured pose unique challenges for clinical decision making, but to the authors' knowledge, the prevalence and correlates of absolute certainty about curability (ACC) are unknown. METHODS: Cross-sectional data were collected in a geriatric assessment trial. ACC was assessed by asking patients, "What do you believe are the chances that your cancer will go away and never come back with treatment?" Response options were 100% (coded as ACC), >50%, 50/50, <50%, 0%, and uncertain. The willingness to bear adversity in exchange for longevity was assessed by asking patients to consider trade-offs between survival and 2 clinical outcomes that varied in abstractness: 1) maintaining quality of life (QOL; an abstract outcome); and 2) specific treatment-related toxicities (eg, nausea/vomiting, worsening memory). Logistic regression was used to assess the independent associations between willingness to bear adversity and ACC. RESULTS: Of the 524 patients aged 70 to 96 years, approximately 5.3% reported that there was a 100% chance that their cancer would be cured (ACC). ACC was not found to be significantly associated with willingness to bear treatment-related toxicities, but was more common among patients who were willing to trade QOL for survival (adjusted odds ratio, 4.08; 95% CI, 1.17-14.26). CONCLUSIONS: Patients who were more willing to bear adversity in the form of an abstract state, namely decreased QOL, were more likely to demonstrate ACC. Although conversations regarding prognosis should be conducted with all patients, those who are willing to trade QOL for survival may especially benefit from conversations that focus on values and emotions.

Community Oncologists' Decision-Making for Treatment of Older Patients With Cancer.

Background: This study's objectives were to describe community oncologists' beliefs about and confidence with geriatric care and to determine whether geriatric-relevant information influences cancer treatment decisions. Methods: Community oncologists were recruited to participate in 2 multisite geriatric oncology trials. Participants shared their beliefs about and confidence in caring for older adults. They were also asked to make a first-line chemotherapy recommendation (combination vs single-agent vs no chemotherapy) for a hypothetical vignette of an older patient with advanced pancreatic cancer. Each oncologist received one randomly chosen vignette that varied on 3 variables: age (72/84 years), impaired function (yes/no), and cognitive impairment (yes/no). Other patient characteristics were held constant. Logistic regression models were used to identify associations between oncologist/vignette-patient characteristics and treatment decisions. Results: Oncologist response rate was 61% (n=305/498). Most oncologists agreed that "the care of older adults with cancer needs to be improved" (89%) and that "geriatrics training is essential" (72%). However, <25% were "very confident" in recognizing dementia or conducting a fall risk or functional assessment, and only 23% reported using the geriatric assessment in clinic. Each randomly varied patient characteristic was independently associated with the decision to treat: younger age (adjusted odds ratio [aOR], 5.01; 95% CI, 2.73-9.20), normal cognition (aOR, 5.42; 95% CI, 3.01-9.76), and being functionally intact (aOR, 3.85; 95% CI, 2.12-7.00). Accounting for all vignettes across all scenarios, 161 oncologists (52%) said they would offer chemotherapy. All variables were independently associated with prescribing single-agent over combination chemotherapy (older age: aOR, 3.22; 95% CI 1.43-7.25, impaired cognition: aOR, 3.13; 95% CI, 1.36-7.20, impaired function: aOR, 2.48; 95% CI, 1.12-5.72). Oncologists' characteristics were not associated with decisions about providing chemotherapy. Conclusion: Geriatric-relevant information, when available, strongly influences community oncologists' treatment decisions.

Using Information Technology in the Assessment and Monitoring of Geriatric Oncology Patients.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: Older adults with cancer have complex medical needs and often experience higher rates of treatment-related toxicities compared to their younger counterparts. The advent of health information technologies can address multiple gaps in the care of this population. We review the role of existing and emerging technologies in facilitating the use of comprehensive geriatric assessment (CGA) in routine clinics, promoting symptom reporting, and monitoring medication adherence. RECENT FINDINGS: Increasingly, studies demonstrate the feasibility of implementing electronic CGA in routine oncology practices. Evidence also suggests that electronic symptom reporting can improve outcomes in patients with cancer. In addition, technology devices can be used to promote adherence to cancer therapy. There are many opportunities for information technology to be integrated into the management and treatment of older adults with cancer. However, further evaluation of these technologies is needed to ensure that they meet the needs of the targeted end users.

Associations of sleep disturbance with physical function and cognition in older adults with cancer.

PURPOSE: Although sleep disturbances are common in older adults, studies evaluating the prevalence of sleep disturbance and its influence on functional outcomes in older adults with cancer are few. In this study, we examined the prevalence of sleep disturbance and its association with physical function and cognition in older adults with cancer. METHODS: This is a cross-sectional study of patients who were referred and evaluated in the Specialized Oncology Care & Research in the Elderly (SOCARE) clinics at the Universities of Rochester and Chicago from May 2011 to October 2015. All patients underwent a geriatric assessment (GA) as part of their routine evaluation. Our final study cohort included patients who completed a sleep assessment and consented to the study. We collected demographics (age, sex, race, marital status, and education level) and clinical characteristics (depression, comorbidity, cancer type, and stage) from the GA and medical chart reviews. Presence of sleep disturbance was self-reported (yes/no). Physical function was assessed using Instrumental Activities of Daily Living (IADLs), physical activity (PA) survey, falls in the preceding 6 months, and Short Physical Performance Battery (SPPB). Cognition was screened using the Blessed Orientation-Memory-Concentration Test (impairment >4) or Montreal Cognitive Assessment (impairment <26). Bivariate and multivariable analyses were used to examine the associations between sleep disturbance with functional outcomes and cognition. RESULTS: We included 389 older patients. The prevalence of sleep disturbance was 40%. Sixty-eight percent had ≥1 IADL impairment, 76% had PA limitation, 37% had ≥1 fall, 70% had impairment on SPPB, and 47% screened positive for cognitive impairment. On bivariate analyses, sleep disturbance was associated with IADL impairment (odds ratio [OR] 1.96, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.23-3.13, P = 0.005), and PA limitation (OR 2.43, 95% CI 1.38-4.28, P = 0.002). The associations remained significant on multivariable analyses. Sleep disturbance was not significantly associated with falls, impairment on SPPB, and performance on the cognitive screen. CONCLUSION: Sleep disturbance was associated with IADL impairment and PA limitation. It is important for oncologists to inquire about sleep problems, and these patients should also be screened for functional impairment if sleep disturbance was present.

Improving the quality of survivorship for older adults with cancer.

In May 2015, the Cancer and Aging Research Group, in collaboration with the National Cancer Institute and the National Institute on Aging through a U13 grant, convened a conference to identify research priorities to help design and implement intervention studies to improve the quality of life and survivorship of older, frailer adults with cancer. Conference attendees included researchers with multidisciplinary expertise and advocates. It was concluded that future intervention trials for older adults with cancer should: 1) rigorously test interventions to prevent the decline of or improve health status, especially interventions focused on optimizing physical performance, nutritional status, and cognition while undergoing cancer treatment; 2) use standardized care plans based on geriatric assessment findings to guide targeted interventions; and 3) incorporate the principles of geriatrics into survivorship care plans. Also highlighted was the need to integrate the expertise of interdisciplinary team members into geriatric oncology research, improve funding mechanisms to support geriatric oncology research, and disseminate high-impact results to the research and clinical community. In conjunction with the 2 prior U13 meetings, this conference provided the framework for future research to improve the evidence base for the clinical care of older adults with cancer. Cancer 2016;122:2459-68. © 2016 American Cancer Society.

Buspirone for management of dyspnea in cancer patients receiving chemotherapy: a randomized placebo-controlled URCC CCOP study.

PURPOSE: Cancer-related dyspnea is a common, distressing, and difficult-to-manage symptom in cancer patients, resulting in diminished quality of life and poor prognosis. Buspirone, a non-benzodiazepine anxiolytic which does not suppress respiration and has proven efficacy in the treatment of generalized anxiety disorder, has been suggested to relieve the sensation of dyspnea in patients with COPD. The main objective of our study was to evaluate whether buspirone alleviates dyspnea in cancer patients. METHODS: We report on a randomized, placebo-controlled trial of 432 patients (mean age 64, female 51%, lung cancer 62%) from 16 participating Community Clinical Oncology Program (CCOP) sites with grade 2 or higher dyspnea, as assessed by the Modified Medical Research Council Dyspnea Scale. Dyspnea was assessed by the Oxygen Cost Diagram (OCD; higher scores are better) and anxiety by the state subscale of the State-Trait Anxiety Inventory (STAI-S; lower scores are better) at baseline and after the 4-week intervention (post-intervention). RESULTS: Mean scores from baseline to post-intervention for buspirone were OCD 8.7 to 9.0 and STAI-S 40.5 to 40.1 and for placebo were OCD 8.4 to 9.3 and STAI-S 40.9 to 38.6 with raw improvements over time on both measures being greater in the placebo group. Analysis of covariance (ANCOVA) controlling for baseline scores showed no statistically significant difference between groups for OCD (P = 0.052) or STAI-S (P = 0.062). CONCLUSION: Buspirone did not result in significant improvement in dyspnea or anxiety in cancer patients. Thus, buspirone should not be recommended as a pharmacological option for dyspnea in cancer patients.

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 Analysis and Evaluation of Kumpfer's Resilience Framework.

Kumpfer's resilience framework (KRF) was initially developed from evidence on resilience and its predictors among at-risk youth. This framework has been expanded to guide resilience research in diverse populations facing a variety of stressors. However, KRF's strengths and weaknesses have not been evaluated since its publication. Guided by Walker and Avant's method, an analysis of KRF was conducted drawn from 41 publications. A revised KRF diagram was proposed on the basis of the analysis to improve clarity, consistency, logical structure, and parsimony in the diagram of KRF. Overall, KRF provides a useful, generalizable, and testable theoretical framework for future resilience research.