ABSTRACT
Older adults with cancer heterogeneously experience health care, treatment, and symptoms. Geriatric assessment (GA) offers a comprehensive evaluation of an older individual's health status and can predict cancer-related outcomes in individuals with solid tumors and those with hematologic malignancies. In the last decade, randomized controlled trials have demonstrated the benefits of GA and GA management (GAM), which uses GA information to provide tailored intervention strategies to address GA impairments (e.g., implementing physical therapy for impaired physical function). Multiple phase 3 clinical trials in older adults with solid tumors and hematologic malignancies have demonstrated that GAM improves treatment completion, quality of life, communication, and advance care planning while reducing treatment-related toxicity, falls, and polypharmacy. Nonetheless, implementation and uptake of GAM remain challenging. Various strategies have been proposed, including the use of GA screening tools, to identify patients most likely to benefit from GAM, the systematic engagement of the oncology workforce in the delivery of GAM, and the integration of technologies like telemedicine and mobile health to enhance the availability of GA and GAM interventions. Health inequities in minoritized groups persist, and systematic GA implementation has the potential to capture social determinants of health that are relevant to equitable care. Caregivers play an important role in cancer care and experience burden themselves. GA can guide dyadic supportive care interventions, ultimately helping both patients and caregivers achieve optimal health.
ABSTRACT
Cancer is a disease of aging and, as the world's population ages, the number of older persons with cancer is increasing and will make up a growing share of the oncology population in virtually every country. Despite this, older patients remain vastly underrepresented in research that sets the standards for cancer treatments. Consequently, most of what we know about cancer therapeutics is based on clinical trials conducted in younger, healthier patients, and effective strategies to improve clinical trial participation of older adults with cancer remain sparse. For this systematic review, the authors evaluated published studies regarding barriers to participation and interventions to improve participation of older adults in cancer trials. The quality of the available evidence was low and, despite a literature describing multifaceted barriers, only one intervention study aimed to increase enrollment of older adults in trials. The findings starkly amplify the paucity of evidence-based, effective strategies to improve participation of this underrepresented population in cancer trials. Within these limitations, the authors provide their opinion on how the current cancer research infrastructure must be modified to accommodate the needs of older patients. Several underused solutions are offered to expand clinical trials to include older adults with cancer. However, as currently constructed, these recommendations alone will not solve the evidence gap in geriatric oncology, and efforts are needed to meet older and frail adults where they are by expanding clinical trials designed specifically for this population and leveraging real-world data.
Subject(s)
Geriatrics/statistics & numerical data , Medical Oncology/statistics & numerical data , Neoplasms/therapy , Patient Participation/psychology , Patient Selection , Aged , Aged, 80 and over , Clinical Trials as Topic , Geriatrics/methods , Geriatrics/trends , Humans , Medical Oncology/methods , Medical Oncology/trends , Neoplasms/diagnosis , Patient Participation/statistics & numerical data , United StatesABSTRACT
Adults aged 85 years and older, the "oldest old," are the fastest-growing age group in the United States, yet relatively little is known about their cancer burden. Combining data from the National Cancer Institute, the North American Association of Central Cancer Registries, and the National Center for Health Statistics, the authors provide comprehensive information on cancer occurrence in adults aged 85 years and older. In 2019, there will be approximately 140,690 cancer cases diagnosed and 103,250 cancer deaths among the oldest old in the United States. The most common cancers in these individuals (lung, breast, prostate, and colorectum) are the same as those in the general population. Overall cancer incidence rates peaked in the oldest men and women around 1990 and have subsequently declined, with the pace accelerating during the past decade. These trends largely reflect declines in cancers of the prostate and colorectum and, more recently, cancers of the lung among men and the breast among women. We note differences in trends for some cancers in the oldest age group (eg, lung cancer and melanoma) compared with adults aged 65 to 84 years, which reflect elevated risks in the oldest generations. In addition, cancers in the oldest old are often more advanced at diagnosis. For example, breast and colorectal cancers diagnosed in patients aged 85 years and older are about 10% less likely to be diagnosed at a local stage compared with those diagnosed in patients aged 65 to 84 years. Patients with cancer who are aged 85 years and older have the lowest relative survival of any age group, with the largest disparities noted when cancer is diagnosed at advanced stages. They are also less likely to receive surgical treatment for their cancers; only 65% of breast cancer patients aged 85 years and older received surgery compared with 89% of those aged 65 to 84 years. This difference may reflect the complexities of treating older patients, including the presence of multiple comorbidities, functional declines, and cognitive impairment, as well as competing mortality risks and undertreatment. More research on cancer in the oldest Americans is needed to improve outcomes and anticipate the complex health care needs of this rapidly growing population.
Subject(s)
Neoplasms/epidemiology , Age Factors , Aged, 80 and over , Female , Humans , Incidence , Male , Neoplasms/diagnosis , Neoplasms/therapy , Risk Factors , SEER Program , United States/epidemiologyABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) inhibits prostate cancer growth. However, ADT causes loss of bone mineral density (BMD) and an increase in fracture risk; effective interventions for ADT-induced bone loss are limited. METHODS: A phase 2 randomized controlled trial investigated the feasibility, safety, and preliminary efficacy of high-dose weekly vitamin D (HDVD, 50,000 IU/week) versus placebo for 24 weeks in patients with prostate cancer receiving ADT, with all subjects receiving 600 IU/day vitamin D and 1000 mg/day calcium. Participants were ≥60 years (mean years, 67.7), had a serum 25-hydroxyvitamin D level <32 ng/mL, and initiated ADT within the previous 6 months. At baseline and after intervention, dual-energy x-ray absorptiometry was used to assess BMD, and levels of bone cell, bone formation, and resorption were measured. RESULTS: The HDVD group (N = 29) lost 1.5% BMD at the total hip vs. 4.1% for the low-dose group (N = 30; p = .03) and 1.7% BMD at the femoral neck vs. 4.4% in the low-dose group (p = .06). Stratified analyses showed that, for those with baseline 25-hydroxyvitamin D level <27 ng/mL, the HDVD group lost 2.3% BMD at the total hip vs 7.1% for the low-dose group (p < .01). Those in the HDVD arm showed significant changes in parathyroid hormone (p < .01), osteoprotegerin (p < 0.01), N-terminal telopeptide of type 1 collagen (p < 0.01) and C-terminal telopeptide of type 1 collagen (p < 0.01). No difference in adverse events or toxicity was noted between the groups. CONCLUSIONS: HDVD supplementation significantly reduced hip and femoral neck BMD loss, especially for patients with low baseline serum 25-hydroxyvitamin D levels, although demonstrating safety and feasibility in prostate cancer patients on ADT.
Subject(s)
Androgen Antagonists , Bone Density , Prostatic Neoplasms , Vitamin D , Humans , Male , Prostatic Neoplasms/drug therapy , Vitamin D/blood , Vitamin D/analogs & derivatives , Vitamin D/administration & dosage , Aged , Androgen Antagonists/adverse effects , Androgen Antagonists/administration & dosage , Androgen Antagonists/therapeutic use , Bone Density/drug effects , Middle Aged , Osteoporosis/chemically induced , Osteoporosis/prevention & controlABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Chemotherapy adversely affects physical well-being and inflammation may be related to changes in physical well-being. We evaluated the association of systemic inflammation with changes in physical well-being. METHODS: In a prospective study of 580 patients with stages I-III breast cancer we assessed immune cell counts, neutrophil:lymphocyte ratio (NLR), lymphocyte:monocyte ratio (LMR), and platelet:lymphocyte ratio (PLR) within 7 days before chemotherapy (pre-chemotherapy). Physical well-being was assessed using the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy: General-Physical Well-being subscale (FACT-PWB) pre-chemotherapy and 1 month and 6 months post-chemotherapy. Clinically meaningful decline in physical well-being was determined as decreasing FACT-PWB by more than one point from pre-chemotherapy level, and non-resilience defined as having decline post-chemotherapy and not returning to within one-point of pre-chemotherapy FACT-PWB by 6 months post-chemotherapy. Multivariable logistic regressions examined the association between inflammation and changes in physical well-being, adjusting for sociodemographic and clinical characteristics. RESULTS: Fifty-nine percent (310/529) and 36% (178/501) of participants had physical well-being decline post-chemotherapy and 6 months post-chemotherapy, respectively. Fifty percent (147/294) were non-resilient. Low NLR and PLR were associated with 1.78 (Pâ =â .01) and 1.66 (Pâ =â .02) fold greater odds of having a decline in physical well-being 6 months post-chemotherapy compared to those with high NLR and PLR, respectively. Low NLR and PLR were associated with 1.92 (Pâ =â .02) and 2.09 (Pâ =â 0.01) fold greater odds of being non-resilient 6 months post-chemotherapy compared to those with high NLR and PLR, respectively. CONCLUSION: Low NLR and PLR were associated with chemotherapy-induced changes in physical well-being independent of sociodemographic and clinical risk factors.
ABSTRACT
Understanding the experiences of community oncology practices in recruiting informal (unpaid/family) caregivers into research studies can inform strategies to improve caregiver enrollment. We used data from the 2022 National Cancer Institute Community Oncology Research Program (NCORP) Landscape Assessment to describe the experience of recruiting informal caregivers for research studies in community oncology practices. Among 258 practice groups, only one-third (30%, 78/258) reported prior experience recruiting informal caregivers for research studies. In multivariable logistic analyses, having a greater number of oncology providers (increase per 10 providers, adjusted odds ratio [AOR] 1.16, 95% CI 1.03-1.31) and having advanced practice providers (APPs) involved in research (AOR 2.17, 95% CI 1.05-4.48) were significantly associated with prior experience recruiting caregivers. In conclusion, many community oncology practices lack caregiver recruitment experience and may benefit from education, integration of APPs/caregiver stakeholders in research infrastructure, and/or other strategies to improve caregiver recruitment.
ABSTRACT
OBJECTIVES: Over half of new cancer diagnoses occur in patients aged 65 or older, with up to 40% experiencing anxiety. The American Society of Clinical Oncology recommends using the Generalized Anxiety Disorder Scale (GAD-7) for anxiety screening, but the GAD-7 psychometric properties in this population are unknown. This study examined the GAD-7's reliability, validity, and item parameters, comparing its utility with the GAD-2 in older adults with cancer. METHODS: This cross-sectional secondary analysis of a nationwide multi-site two-arm cluster randomized trial in older adults (≥ 70) with advanced cancer. The GAD-7 was administered at baseline. Properties were evaluated with Cronbach's α, Pearson correlation coefficients, and a 2-parameter logistic model. Logistic regression models compared the GAD-2 and GAD-7. RESULTS: The sample included 718 participants (Mean age = 77, SD = 5) with mild anxiety (M = 3.74, SD = 4.74). Internal consistency was strong (Cronbach's alpha = 0.89) and item-total correlations ranged 0.53 to 0.78. Item 2 (Not being able to stop or control worrying) was the most discriminating and item 5 (Being so restless that it is hard to sit still) was least discriminating. Area Under the Curve (AUC) analyses demonstrated the GAD-2 had a 0.93-0.96 AUC. CONCLUSIONS: Establishing the psychometric properties of anxiety screening measures is crucial in the older adults with cancer to maximize referral efficiency and accuracy. This study indicates that the GAD-7 is reliable and valid for older adults with cancer. Analyses suggest the GAD-2 may be as sufficient as the GAD-7 in identifying anxiety in older adults with cancer, thereby reducing assessment burden.
Subject(s)
Anxiety Disorders , Neoplasms , Psychometrics , Humans , Male , Female , Aged , Neoplasms/psychology , Anxiety Disorders/diagnosis , Anxiety Disorders/psychology , Cross-Sectional Studies , Reproducibility of Results , Aged, 80 and over , Psychiatric Status Rating Scales , Anxiety/psychology , Anxiety/diagnosisABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Polypharmacy and potentially inappropriate medications (PIM) are common among older adults with advanced cancer, but their association with physical functional outcomes is understudied. This study aimed to estimate the risk of physical functional decline associated with medication measures in older adults with advanced cancer starting a new line of systemic treatment. METHODS: This secondary analysis of GAP 70+ Trial (PI: Mohile) enrolled patients aged 70+ with advanced cancer, had ≥ 1 geriatric assessment domain impairment and planned to start a new antineoplastic regimen with a high risk of toxicity. Polypharmacy (concurrent use of ≥ 8 medications (meds)) was assessed before initiation of treatment. PIM were categorized using Screening Tool of Older Person's Prescriptions (STOPP) criteria and 2019 Beers criteria. Physical functional outcomes were assessed within 3 months of treatment initiation: (1) Activity of Daily Living (ADL) decline: 1-point decrease in ADL score between baseline and 3 months; (2) Instrumental ADL (IADL) decline: 1-point decrease in IADL score between baseline and 3 months; (3) Short physical performance battery (SPPB) decline, defined as 1-point decrease on SPPB; (4) ≥ 1 falls within 3 months of treatment. Separate multivariable, cluster-weighted Generalized Estimating Equations models adjusted for relevant covariates (e.g., age, baseline function/comorbidities). RESULTS: Among 616 participants, mean number of meds was 6 (range 0-24); 28% received ≥ 8 meds. Polypharmacy was associated with increased risk of ADL decline (adjusted risk ratio [aRR], 1.31; 95% CI, 1.00-1.71). Taking ≥ 1 PIM per STOPP was associated with increased risk of IADL decline (aRR, 1.21; 95% CI, 1.04-1.40) and falls (aRR, 1.93; 95% CI, 1.49-2.51). CONCLUSIONS: In a large cohort of vulnerable older adults with advanced cancer receiving systemic treatment, polypharmacy and PIM were independently associated with an increased risk of physical functional decline. This emphasizes the need to develop interventions to optimize medication use, intending to improve outcomes in these patients. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02054741. Registered 01-31-2014.
Subject(s)
Activities of Daily Living , Geriatric Assessment , Neoplasms , Polypharmacy , Potentially Inappropriate Medication List , Aged , Aged, 80 and over , Female , Humans , Male , Antineoplastic Agents/adverse effects , Antineoplastic Agents/administration & dosage , Antineoplastic Agents/therapeutic use , Geriatric Assessment/methods , Neoplasms/drug therapyABSTRACT
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.
Subject(s)
Inappropriate Prescribing , Neoplasms , Aged , Aged, 80 and over , Humans , Drug Interactions , Neoplasms/drug therapy , Neoplasms/etiology , Polypharmacy , Potentially Inappropriate Medication List , Treatment OutcomeABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Although research has advanced the field of oncologic geriatrics with survivors to assess their cancer-related needs and devise patient-centered interventions, most of that research has excluded rural populations. This study aimed to understand the survivorship challenges and recommendations in the perspective of rural older adults. METHODS: This was a qualitative study that explored the survivorship challenges and recommendations of rural older adults who have completed curative intent chemotherapy for a solid tumor malignancy in the 12 months prior to enrollment in the present study. RESULTS: Twenty-seven older adult survivors from rural areas completed open-ended semi-structured interviews. The mean age was 73.4 (SD = 5.0). Most participants were non-Hispanic White (96.3%), female (59.3%), married (63.0%), and had up to a high school education (51.9%). Rural older survivors reported a general lack of awareness of survivorship care plans, communication challenges with healthcare team, transportation challenges, financial toxicity, psychological challenges, and diet and physical challenges. Rural older survivors recommend the provision of nutritional advice referral to exercise programs, and social support groups and for their healthcare providers to discuss their survivorship plan with them. CONCLUSIONS: Although study participants reported similar survivorship challenges as urban older adult survivors, additional challenges reported regarding transportation and consideration of farm animals have not been previously reported. Heightened awareness of the survivorship needs of rural older adults may result in better survivorship care for this population.
Subject(s)
Cancer Survivors , Neoplasms , Humans , Female , Aged , Cancer Survivors/psychology , Survivors , Survivorship , Neoplasms/epidemiology , Neoplasms/therapy , Neoplasms/psychology , Medical OncologyABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Older adults (age ≥65 years) receiving chemotherapy are at risk for hospitalization. Predictors of unplanned hospitalization among older adults receiving chemotherapy for cancer were recently published using data from a study conducted by the Cancer and Aging Research Group (CARG). Our study aimed to externally validate these predictors in an independent cohort including older adults with advanced cancer receiving chemotherapy. METHODS: This validation cohort included patients (n=369) from the GAP70+ trial usual care arm. Enrolled patients were aged ≥70 years with incurable cancer and were starting a new line of chemotherapy. Previously identified risk factors proposed by the CARG study were ≥3 comorbidities, albumin level <3.5 g/dL, creatinine clearance <60 mL/min, gastrointestinal cancer, ≥5 medications, requiring assistance with activities of daily activities (ADLs), and having someone available to take them to the doctor (ie, presence of social support). The primary outcome was unplanned hospitalization within 3 months of treatment initiation. Multivariable logistic regression was applied including the 7 identified risk factors. Discriminative ability of the fitted model was performed by calculating the area under the receiver operating characteristic (AUC) curve. RESULTS: Mean age of the cohort was 77 years, 45% of patients were women, and 29% experienced unplanned hospitalization within the first 3 months of treatment. The proportions of hospitalized patients with 0-3, 4-5, and 6-7 identified risk factors were 24%, 28%, and 47%, respectively (P=.04). Impaired ADLs (odds ratio, 1.76; 95% CI, 1.04-2.99) and albumin level <3.5 g/dL (odds ratio, 2.23; 95% CI, 1.37-3.62) were significantly associated with increased odds of unplanned hospitalization. The AUC of the model, including the 7 identified risk factors, was 0.65 (95% CI, 0.59-0.71). CONCLUSIONS: The presence of a higher number of risk factors was associated with increased odds of unplanned hospitalization. This association was largely driven by impairment in ADLs and low albumin level. Validated predictors of unplanned hospitalization can help with counseling and shared decision-making with patients and their caregivers. CLINICALTRIALS: gov identifier: NCT02054741.
Subject(s)
Neoplasms , Humans , Female , Aged , Male , Neoplasms/drug therapy , Risk Factors , Hospitalization , Activities of Daily LivingABSTRACT
PURPOSE: To describe emotional barriers and facilitators to deprescribing (the planned reduction or discontinuation of medications) in older adults with cancer and polypharmacy. METHODS: Virtual focus groups were conducted over Zoom with 5 key informant groups: oncologists, oncology nurses, primary care physicians, pharmacists, and patients. All groups were video- and audio-recorded and transcribed verbatim. Focus group transcripts were analyzed using inductive content analysis, and open coding was performed by two coders. A codebook was generated based on the initial round of open coding and updated throughout the analytic process. Codes and themes were discussed for each transcript until consensus was reached. Emotion coding (identifying text segments expressing emotion, naming the emotion, and assigning a label of positive or negative) was performed by both coders to validate the open coding findings. RESULTS: All groups agreed that polypharmacy is a significant problem. For clinicians, emotional barriers to deprescribing include fear of moral judgment from patients and colleagues, frustration toward patients, and feelings of incompetence. Oncologists and patients expressed ambivalence about deprescribing due to role expectations that physicians "heal with med[ication]s." Emotional facilitators of deprescribing included the involvement of pharmacists, who were perceived to be neutral, discerning experts. Pharmacists described emotionally aware communication strategies when discussing deprescribing with other clinicians and expressed increased awareness of patient context. CONCLUSION: Deprescribing can elicit strong and predominantly negative emotions among clinicians and patients which could inhibit deprescribing interventions. The involvement of pharmacists in deprescribing interventions could mitigate these emotional barriers. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT05046171 . Date of registration: September 16, 2021.
Subject(s)
Deprescriptions , Neoplasms , Humans , Aged , Polypharmacy , Attitude of Health Personnel , Emotions , Neoplasms/drug therapyABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: The patient portal is a widely available secure digital platform offered by care delivery organizations that enables patients to communicate electronically with clinicians and manage their care. Many organizations allow patients to authorize family members or friends-"care partners"-to share access to patient portal accounts, thus enabling care partners to receive their own identity credentials. Shared access facilitates trilateral information exchange among patients, clinicians, and care partners; however, uptake and awareness of this functionality are limited. OBJECTIVE: We partnered with 3 health care organizations to co-design an initiative that aimed to increase shared access registration and use and that can be implemented using existing patient portals. METHODS: In 2020, we undertook a rigorous selection process to identify 3 geographically diverse health care organizations that had engaged medical informatics teams and clinical champions within service delivery lines caring for older adults. We prioritized selecting organizations that serve racially and socioeconomically diverse populations and possess sophisticated reporting capabilities, a stable patient portal platform, a sufficient volume of older adult patients, and active patient and family advisory councils. Along with patients and care partners, clinicians, staff, and other stakeholders, the study team co-designed an initiative to increase the uptake of shared access guided by either an iterative, human-centered design process or rapid assessment procedures of stakeholders' inputs. RESULTS: Between February 2020 and April 2022, 73 stakeholder engagements were conducted with patients and care partners, clinicians and clinic staff, medical informatics teams, marketing and communications staff, and administrators, as well as with funders and thought leaders. We collected insights regarding (1) barriers to awareness, registration, and use of shared access; (2) features of consumer-facing educational materials to address identified barriers; (3) features of clinician- and staff-facing materials to address identified barriers; and (4) approaches to fit the initiative into current workflows. Using these inputs iteratively via a human-centered design process, we produced brochures and posters, co-designed organization-specific web pages detailing shared access registration processes, and developed clinician and staff talking points about shared access and staff tip sheets that outline shared access registration steps. Educational materials emphasized the slogan "People remember less than half of what their doctors say," which was selected from 9 candidate alternatives as resonating best with the full range of the initiative's stakeholders. The materials were accompanied by implementation toolkits specifying and reinforcing workflows involving both in-person and telehealth visits. CONCLUSIONS: Meaningful and authentic stakeholder engagement allowed our deliberate, iterative, and human-centered co-design aimed at increasing the use of shared access. Our initiative has been launched as a part of a 12-month demonstration that will include quantitative and qualitative analysis of registration and use of shared access. Educational materials are publicly available at Coalition for Care Partners.
Subject(s)
Patient Portals , Humans , Aged , Stakeholder Participation , Delivery of Health Care , Patients , CommunicationABSTRACT
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.
Subject(s)
Frailty , Neoplasms , Oncologists , Aged , Aging , Communication , Geriatric Assessment , HumansABSTRACT
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.
Subject(s)
Antineoplastic Agents/adverse effects , Geriatric Assessment , Neoplasms/drug therapy , Accidental Falls/statistics & numerical data , Aged , Aged, 80 and over , Aging , Drug-Related Side Effects and Adverse Reactions/prevention & control , Female , Humans , Male , OncologistsABSTRACT
PURPOSE: Polypharmacy is prevalent in older adults starting cancer treatment and associated with potentially inappropriate medications (PIM), potential drug-drug interactions (DDI), and drug-cancer treatment interactions (DCI). For a large cohort of vulnerable older adults with advanced cancer starting treatment, we describe patterns of prescription and nonprescription medication usage, the prevalence of PIM, and the prevalence, severity, and type of DDI/DCI. METHODS: This secondary analysis used baseline data from a randomized study enrolling patients aged ≥70 years with advanced cancer starting a new systemic cancer treatment (University of Rochester Cancer Center [URCC] 13059; PI: Mohile). PIM were categorized using 2019 Beers criteria and Screening Tool of Older Persons' Prescriptions. Potential DDI/DCI were evaluated using Lexi-Interact Online. Medication classification followed the World Health Organization Anatomical Therapeutic Chemical system. Bivariate associations were evaluated between sociodemographic and geriatric assessment (GA) measures and medication measures. Chord diagrams and network analysis were used to understand and describe DDI/DCI. RESULTS: Among 718 patients (mean age 77.6 years), polypharmacy (≥5 medications), excessive polypharmacy (≥10 medications), and ≥1 PIM were identified in 61.3%,14.5%, and 67.1%, respectively. Cardiovascular medications were the most prevalent (47%), and nonprescription medications accounted for 26% of total medications and 40% of PIM. One-quarter of patients had ≥1 potential major DDI not involving cancer treatment, and 5.4% had ≥1 potential major DCI. Each additional medication increased the odds of a potential major DDI and DCI by 39% and 12%, respectively. Polypharmacy and PIM are associated with multiple GA domains. CONCLUSION: In a cohort of vulnerable older adults with advanced cancer starting treatment, polypharmacy, PIM, and potential DDI/DCI are very common. Nonprescription medications are frequently PIMs and/or involved in potential DDI/DCI.
Subject(s)
Neoplasms , Potentially Inappropriate Medication List , Aged , Aged, 80 and over , Drug Interactions , Humans , Neoplasms/drug therapy , Polypharmacy , Risk FactorsABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Older adults (≥65 years) with gastrointestinal (GI) cancers who receive chemotherapy are at increased risk of hospitalization caused by treatment-related toxicity. Geriatric assessment (GA) has been previously shown to predict risk of toxicity in older adults undergoing chemotherapy. However, studies incorporating the GA specifically in older adults with GI cancers have been limited. This study sought to identify GA-based risk factors for chemotherapy toxicity-related hospitalization among older adults with GI cancers. PATIENTS AND METHODS: We performed a secondary post hoc subgroup analysis of two prospective studies used to develop and validate a GA-based chemotherapy toxicity score. The incidence of unplanned hospitalizations during the course of chemotherapy treatment was determined. RESULTS: This analysis included 199 patients aged ≥65 years with a diagnosis of GI cancer (85 colorectal, 51 gastric/esophageal, and 63 pancreatic/hepatobiliary). Sixty-five (32.7%) patients had ≥1 hospitalization. Univariate analysis identified sex (female), cardiac comorbidity, stage IV disease, low serum albumin, cancer type (gastric/esophageal), hearing deficits, and polypharmacy as risk factors for hospitalization. Multivariable analyses found that patients who had cardiac comorbidity (OR 2.48, 95% CI 1.13-5.42) were significantly more likely to be hospitalized. CONCLUSION: Cardiac comorbidity may be a risk factor for hospitalization in older adults with GI cancers receiving chemotherapy. Further studies with larger sample sizes are warranted to examine the relationship between GA measures and hospitalization in this vulnerable population.
Subject(s)
Gastrointestinal Neoplasms , Hospitalization , Aged , Female , Gastrointestinal Neoplasms/drug therapy , Gastrointestinal Neoplasms/epidemiology , Geriatric Assessment , Humans , Prospective Studies , Risk FactorsABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Informed treatment decision-making necessitates accurate prognostication, including predictions about quality of life. AIMS: We examined whether oncologists, patients with advanced cancer, and caregivers accurately predict patients' future quality of life and whether these predictions are prospectively associated with end-of-life care and bereavement. MATERIALS & METHODS: We conducted secondary analyses of clinical trial data. Patients with advanced cancer (n = 156), caregivers (n = 156), and oncologists (n = 38) predicted patient quality of life 3 months into the future. Patients subsequently rated their quality of life 3 months later. Medical record data documented chemotherapy and emergency department (ED)/inpatient visits in the 30 days before death (n = 79 decedents). Caregivers self-reported on depression, anxiety, grief, purpose, and regret 7-months post-mortem. In mixed-effects models, patient, caregiver, and oncologist quality-of-life predictions at study entry were used to predict end-of-life care and caregiver outcomes, controlling for patients' quality of life at 3-month follow-up, demographic and clinical characteristics, and nesting within oncologists. RESULTS: Caregivers (P < 0.0001) and oncologists (P = 0.001) predicted lower quality of life than what patients actually experienced. Among decedents, 24.0% received chemotherapy and 54.5% had an ED/inpatient visit. When caregivers' predictions were more negative, patients were less likely to receive chemotherapy (P = 0.028) or have an ED/inpatient visit (P = 0.033), and caregivers reported worse depression (P = 0.002), anxiety (P = 0.019), and grief (P = 0.028) and less purpose in life (P < 0.001) 7-months post-mortem. CONCLUSION: When caregivers have more negative expectations about patients' quality of life, patients receive less intensive end-of-life care, and caregivers report worse bereavement outcomes.
Subject(s)
Bereavement , Neoplasms , Oncologists , Terminal Care , Caregivers , Grief , Humans , Neoplasms/therapy , Quality of LifeABSTRACT
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.
Subject(s)
Caregivers , Neoplasms , Aged , Caregivers/psychology , Geriatric Assessment , Humans , Neoplasms/psychology , Neoplasms/therapy , Quality of Life/psychology , UncertaintyABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Frailty is associated with an increased risk of chemotherapy toxicity. Cellular markers of inflammation can help identify patients with frailty characteristics. However, the role of cellular markers of inflammation in identifying patients at risk of developing chemotherapy-induced frailty and their clinical utility are not fully understood. METHODS: This study was a secondary analysis of a large nationwide cohort study of women with stage I-IIIC breast cancer (n = 581, mean age 53.4; range 22-81). Measures were completed pre-chemotherapy (T1), post-chemotherapy (T2), and 6 months post-chemotherapy (T3). Frailty was assessed at all three time points using a modified Fried score consisting of four self-reported measures (weakness, exhaustion, physical activity, and walking speed; 0-4, 1 point for each). Immune cell counts as well as neutrophil to lymphocyte ratio (NLR) and lymphocyte to monocyte ratio (LMR) were obtained at T1 and T2 time points. Separate linear regressions were used to evaluate the associations of (1) cell counts at T1 with frailty at T1, T2, and T3 and (2) change in cell counts (T2-T1) with frailty at T2 and T3. We controlled for relevant covariates and frailty at the T1 time point. RESULTS: From T1 to T2, the mean frailty score increased (1.3 vs 2.0; p < 0.01) and returned to T1 levels by the T3 time point (1.3 vs 1.3; p = 0.85). At the T1 time point, there was a positive association between cellular markers of inflammation and frailty: WBC (ß = 0.04; p < 0.05), neutrophils (ß = 0.04; p < 0.05), and NLR (ß = 0.04; p < 0.01). From T1 to T2, a greater increase in cellular markers of inflammation was associated with frailty at T2 (WBC: ß = 0.02, p < 0.05; neutrophils: ß = 0.03, p < 0.05; NLR: ß = 0.03; p < 0.01). These associations remained significant after controlling for the receipt of growth factors with chemotherapy and the time between when laboratory data was provided and the start or end of chemotherapy. CONCLUSIONS: In patients with breast cancer undergoing chemotherapy, cellular markers of inflammation are associated with frailty. Immune cell counts may help clinicians identify patients at risk of frailty during chemotherapy. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov , NCT01382082.