Systematic nutritional screening and assessment in older patients: Rationale for its integration into oncology practice.

As the global population ages, so does the number of older people being diagnosed, treated and surviving cancer. Challenges to providing appropriate healthcare management stem from the heterogeneity common in this population. Although malnutrition is highly prevalent in older people with cancer, ranging between 30 % and 80 % according to some analyses, is associated with frailty, and has been shown to be a major risk factor for poor treatment response and worse overall survival, addressing nutrition status is not always a priority among oncology healthcare providers. Evaluation of nutritional status is a two-step process: screening identifies risk factors for reduced nutritional intake and deficits that require more in-depth assessment. Screening activities can be as simple as taking weight and BMI measurements or using short nutritional questionnaires and asking the patient about unintentional weight loss to identify potential nutritional risk. Using geriatric assessment, deficits in the nutritional domain as well as in others reveal potentially reversible geriatric and medical problems to guide specific therapeutic interventions. The authors of this paper are experts in the fields of geriatric medicine, oncology, and nutrition science and believe that there is not only substantial evidence to support regularly performing screening and assessment of nutritional status in older patients with cancer, but that these measures lead to the planning and implementation of patient-centered approaches to nutrition management and thus enhanced geriatric-oncology care. This paper presents rationale for systematic nutrition screening and assessment in older adults with cancer.

Targeting Senescence for Next-Generation Cancer Treatments.

SUMMARY: Cellular senescence has paradoxical effects on cancer emergence, progression, and therapeutic response. We herein identify four lessons that emerged from studying senescence interaction with cancer and emphasize four bottlenecks in the therapeutic manipulation of cellular senescence to prevent or cure cancer.

Study protocol for two stepped-wedge interventional trials evaluating the effects of holistic information technology-based patient-oriented management in older multimorbid patients with cancer: The GERONTE trials.

INTRODUCTION: Current hospital-based care pathways are generally single-disease centred. As a result, coexisting morbidities are often suboptimally evaluated and managed, a deficiency becoming increasingly apparent among older patients who exhibit heterogeneity in health status, functional abilities, frailty, and other geriatric impairments. To address this issue, our study aims to assess a newly developed patient-centred care pathway for older patients with multimorbidity and cancer. The new care pathway was based on currently available evidence and co-designed by end-users including health care professionals, patients, and informal caregivers. Within this care pathway, all healthcare professionals involved in the care of older patients with multimorbidity and cancer will form a Health Professional Consortium (HPC). The role of the HPC will be to centralise oncologic and non-oncologic treatment recommendations in accordance with the patient's priorities. Moreover, an Advanced Practice Nurse will act as case-manager by being the primary point of contact for the patient, thus improving coordination between specialists, and by organising and leading the consortium. Patient monitoring and the HPC collaboration will be facilitated by digital communication tools designed specifically for this purpose, with the added benefit of being customisable for each patient. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The GERONTE study is a prospective international, multicentric study consisting of two stepped-wedge trials performed at 16 clinical sites across three European countries. Each trial will include 720 patients aged 70 years and over with a new or progressive cancer (breast, lung, colorectal, prostate) and at least one moderate or severe multimorbidity. The patients in the intervention group will receive the new care pathway whereas patients in the control group will receive usual oncologic care. DISCUSSION: GERONTE will evaluate whether this kind of holistic, patient-oriented healthcare management can improve quality of life (primary outcome) and other valuable endpoints in older patients with multimorbidity and cancer. An ancillary study will assess in depth the socio-economic impact of the intervention and deliver concrete implementation guidelines for the GERONTE intervention care pathway. TRIAL REGISTRATION: FRONE: NCT05720910 TWOBE: NCT05423808.

How to incorporate chronic health conditions in oncologic decision-making and care for older patients with cancer? A survey among healthcare professionals.

PURPOSE: A substantial proportion of patients with cancer are older and experience multimorbidity. As the population is ageing, the management of older patients with multimorbidity including cancer will represent a significant challenge to current clinical practice. METHODS: This study aimed to (1) identify which chronic health conditions may cause change in oncologic decision-making and care in older patients and (2) provide guidance on how to incorporate these in decision-making and care provision of older patients with cancer. Based on a scoping literature review, an initial list of prevalent morbidities was developed. A subsequent survey among healthcare providers involved in the care for older patients with cancer assessed which chronic health conditions were relevant and why. RESULTS: A list of 53 chronic health conditions was developed, of which 34 were considered likely or very likely to influence decision-making or care according to the 39 healthcare professionals who responded. These conditions were further categorized into five patient profiles. From these conditions, five patient profiles were developed, namely, (1) a somatic profile consisting of cardiovascular, metabolic, and pulmonary disease, (2) a functional profile, including conditions that cause disability, dependency or a high caregiver burden, (3) a psychosocial profile, including cognitive impairment, (4) a nutritional profile also including digestive system diseases, and finally, (5) a concurrent cancer profile. All profiles were considered likely to impact decision-making with differences between treatment modalities. The impact on the care trajectory was generally considered less significant, except for patients with care dependency and psychosocial health problems. CONCLUSIONS: Chronic health conditions have various ways of influencing oncologic decision-making and the care trajectory in older adults with cancer. Understanding why specific chronic health conditions may impact the oncologic care trajectory can aid clinicians in the management of older patients with multimorbidity, including cancer.

Hospital-based palliative care referrals: determinants in older adults with cancer.

OBJECTIVES: Early palliative care improves the quality of life of older patients with cancer. This work aimed to analyse the effect of sociodemographic, geriatric, and tumour-related determinants on hospital-based palliative care (HPC) referral in older patients with cancer, taking into account competing risk of death. METHODS: Older adults with diagnosed cancer from 2014 to 2018 according to the general cancer registry of Gironde (French department) were identified in three population-based cohorts on ageing (PAQUID, 3C - Three City, AMI). Cause-specific Cox models focused on 10 usual determinants in geriatric oncology and palliative care: age, gender, living alone, place of residency, tumour prognosis, activities of daily living (ADL) and instrumental-ADL (IADL) limitations, cognitive impairment, depressive disorders, and polypharmacy. RESULTS: 131 patients with incident cancer (mean age: 86.2 years, men: 62.6%, poor cancer prognosis: 32.8%) were included, HPC occurring for 26 of them. Unfavourable cancer prognosis was a key determinant for HPC referral (HR 7.02, 95% CI 2.86 to 17.23). An altered IADL score was associated with precocious (first year) referral (HR 3.21, 95% CI 1.20 to 8.64, respectively). Women had a higher rate immediately (first week) after diagnosis (HR 8.64, 95% CI 1.27 to 87.27). CONCLUSIONS: Cancer prognosis, functional decline and gender are independent factors of HPC referral in older patients with cancer. These findings may help for a better anticipation of the healthcare pathway.

Assessing patient-reported outcomes (PROs) and patient-related outcomes in randomized cancer clinical trials for older adults: Results of DATECAN-ELDERLY initiative.

As older adults with cancer are underrepresented in randomized clinical trials (RCT), there is limited evidence on which to rely for treatment decisions for this population. Commonly used RCT endpoints for the assessment of treatment efficacy are more often tumor-centered (e.g., progression-free survival). These endpoints may not be as relevant for the older patients who present more often with comorbidities, non-cancer-related deaths, and treatment toxicity. Moreover, their expectation and preferences are likely to differ from younger adults. The DATECAN-ELDERLY initiative combines a broad expertise, in geriatric oncology and clinical research, with interest in cancer RCT that include older patients with cancer. In order to guide researchers and clinicians coordinating cancer RCT involving older patients with cancer, the experts reviewed the literature on relevant domains to assess using patient-reported outcomes (PRO) and patient-related outcomes, as well as available tools related to these domains. Domains considered relevant by the panel of experts when assessing treatment efficacy in RCT for older patients with cancer included functional autonomy, cognition, depression and nutrition. These were based on published guidelines from international societies and from regulatory authorities as well as minimum datasets recommended to collect in RCT including older adults with cancer. In addition, health-related quality of life, patients' symptoms, and satisfaction were also considered by the panel. With regards to tools for the assessment of these domains, we highlighted that each tool has its own strengths and limitations, and very few had been validated in older adults with cancer. Further studies are thus needed to validate these tools in this specific population and define the minimum clinically important difference to use when developing RCTs in this population. The selection of the most relevant tool should thus be guided by the RCT research question, together with the specific properties of the tool.

Self-reported electronic symptom monitoring in older patients with multimorbidity treated for cancer: Development of a core dataset based on expert consensus, literature review, and quality of life questionnaires.

INTRODUCTION: In cancer care, symptom monitoring during treatment results in improved clinical outcomes such as improved quality of life, longer survival, and fewer hospital admissions. However, as the majority of patients with cancer are older and have multimorbidity, they may benefit from monitoring of additional symptoms. The aim of this study was to identify a core set of symptoms to monitor in older patients with multimorbidity treated for cancer, including symptoms caused by treatment side effects, destabilization of comorbidities, and functional decline. MATERIALS AND METHODS: During a scoping literature search, 17 quality of life questionnaires were used to select 53 possible symptoms to monitor. An expert panel of cancer and geriatrics specialists was asked to participate in multiple online surveys to indicate whether these symptoms were not relevant to monitor, only relevant to monitor in a specific patient group, or relevant to monitor in all patients. In a subsequent round the list was reduced and the panel indicated how frequently these symptoms should be monitored during cancer treatment and after cancer treatment completion. Finally, a digital consensus meeting was organised to decide when symptoms had to trigger a recommendation to the patient to get in touch with their medical team. RESULTS: In total, 30 healthcare professionals participated in the online surveys. After two rounds, a dataset of 19 symptoms related to cancer, cancer treatment, functional decline, and destabilization of comorbidities was agreed upon for monitoring. Five symptoms were selected for daily monitoring during treatment, seven for weekly, and seven for monthly. After treatment completion, the panel agreed upon less frequent reporting. Additionally, nine symptoms to be monitored only in patients with specific cancer types or treatment types were chosen, such as "cough up blood" in lung cancer. DISCUSSION: This study is the first to identify a core set of symptoms to monitor in older patients with multimorbidity treated for cancer. Future research is needed to investigate whether the monitoring of these symptoms is feasible and improves clinical outcomes in older patients with multimorbidity treated for cancer.

Geriatric assessment for older people with cancer: policy recommendations.

Most cancers occur in older people and the burden in this age group is increasing. Over the past two decades the evidence on how best to treat this population has increased rapidly. However, implementation of new best practices has been slow and needs involvement of policymakers. This perspective paper explains why older people with cancer have different needs than the wider population. An overview is given of the recommended approach for older people with cancer and its benefits on clinical outcomes and cost-effectiveness. In older patients, the geriatric assessment (GA) is the gold standard to measure level of fitness and to determine treatment tolerability. The GA, with multiple domains of physical health, functional status, psychological health and socio-environmental factors, prevents initiation of inappropriate oncologic treatment and recommends geriatric interventions to optimize the patient's general health and thus resilience for receiving treatments. Multiple studies have proven its benefits such as reduced toxicity, better quality of life, better patient-centred communication and lower healthcare use. Although GA might require investment of time and resources, this is relatively small compared to the improved outcomes, possible cost-savings and compared to the large cost of oncologic treatments as a whole.

Challenges of caring for older patients with multimorbidity including cancer.

INTRODUCTION: As the population is ageing, the number of older patients with multimorbidity including cancer continues to increase. To improve care for these patients, the European Union-funded project "Streamlined Geriatric and Oncological evaluation based on IC Technology" (GERONTE) was initiated to develop a new, patient-centred, holistic care pathway. The aim of this paper is to analyse what challenges are encountered in everyday clinical practice according to patients, their informal caregivers, and healthcare professionals as a starting point for the development of the care pathway. MATERIALS AND METHODS: An expert panel of cancer and geriatrics specialists participated in an online survey to answer what challenges they experience in caring for older patients with multimorbidity including cancer and what treatment outcomes could be improved. Furthermore, in-depth interviews with older patients and their informal caregivers were organised to assess what challenges they experience. RESULTS: Healthcare professionals (n = 36) most frequently mentioned the challenge of choosing the best treatment in light of the lack of evidence in this population and how to handle interactions between the (cancer) treatment and multimorbidities. Twelve patients and caregivers participated, and they most frequently mentioned challenges related to treatment outcomes, such as how to deal with symptoms of disease or treatment and how to maintain quality of life. From the challenges, five main themes emerged that should be taken into account when developing a new care pathway for older patients with multimorbidity including cancer. Two themes focus on decision making aspects such as personalized treatment recommendations and inclusion of non-oncologic information, two focus on patient support and monitoring to maintain quality of life and functioning, and one overarching theme addresses care coordination to prevent fragmentation of care. DISCUSSION: In conclusion, the management of older patients with multimorbidity including cancer is complex and although progress has been made on improving aspects of their care, challenges remain and patients are at risk of receiving inappropriate, unnecessary, and potentially harmful treatment. A patient-centred care pathway that integrates solutions to the five main themes and that moves away from a single-disease centred approach is needed.

Association between pre-diagnosis geriatric syndromes and overall survival in older adults with cancer (the INCAPAC study).

INTRODUCTION: Several population-based studies have reported disparities in overall survival (OS) among older patients with cancer. However, geriatric syndromes, known to be associated with OS in the geriatric population, were rarely studied. Thus, our aim was to identify the determinants of OS among French older adults with cancer, including geriatric syndromes before cancer diagnosis. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Using cancer registries, we identified older subjects (≥65 years) with cancer in three French prospective cohort studies on aging from the Gironde department. Survival time was calculated from the date of diagnosis to the date of all-cause death or to the date of last follow-up, whichever came first. Demographic and socioeconomic characteristics, smoking status, self-rated health, cancer-related factors (stage at diagnosis, treatment), as well as geriatric syndromes (polypharmacy, activity limitation, depressive symptomatology, and cognitive impairment or dementia) were studied. Analyses were performed using Cox proportional hazard models for the whole population, then by age group (65-84 and 85+). RESULTS: Among the 607 subjects included in the study, the median age at cancer diagnosis was 84 years. Smoking habits, activity limitations, cognitive impairment or dementia, advanced cancer stage and absence of treatment were significantly associated with lower OS in the analysis including the whole population. Women presented higher OS. Factors associated with OS differed by age group. Polypharmacy was inversely associated with OS in older adults aged 65-84 and 85 + . DISCUSSION: Our findings support that geriatric assessment is needed to identify patients at higher risk of death and that an evaluation of activity limitation in older adults is essential. Improving early detection could enable interventions to address factors (activity limitations, cognitive impairment) associated with OS, potentially reducing disparities and lead to earlier palliative care.

A Two-Step Frailty Assessment Strategy in Older Patients With Solid Tumors: A Decision Curve Analysis.

PURPOSE: The intended clinical value of frailty screening is to identify unfit patients needing geriatric assessment (GA) and to prevent unnecessary GA in fit patients. These hypotheses rely on the sensitivity and specificity of screening tests, but they have not been verified. METHODS: We performed a cross-sectional analysis of outpatients age ≥ 70 years with prostate, breast, colorectal, or lung cancer included in the ELCAPA cohort study (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT02884375) between February 2007 and December 2019. The diagnostic accuracy of the G8 Geriatric Screening Tool (G8) and modified G8 scores for identifying unfit patients was determined on the basis of GA results. We used decision curve analysis to calculate the benefit of frailty screening for detecting unfit patients and avoiding unnecessary GA in fit patients across different threshold probabilities. RESULTS: We included 1,648 patients (median age, 81 years), and 1,428 (87%) were unfit. The sensitivity and specificity were, respectively, 85% (95% CI, 84 to 87) and 59% (95% CI, 57 to 61) for G8, and 86% (95% CI, 84 to 87) and 60% (95% CI, 58 to 63) for the modified G8 score. For decision curve analysis, the net benefit (NB) for identifying unfit patients were 0.72 for G8, 0.72 for the modified G8, and 0.82 for GA at a threshold probability of 0.25. At a threshold probability of 0.33, the NBs were 0.71, 0.72, and 0.80, respectively. At a threshold probability of 0.5, the NBs were 0.68, 0.69, and 0.73, respectively. No screening tool reduced unnecessary GA in fit patients at predefined threshold probabilities. CONCLUSION: Although frailty screening tests showed good diagnostic accuracy, screening showed no clinical benefits over the GA-for-all strategy. NB approaches, in addition to diagnostic accuracy, are necessary to assess the clinical value of tests.

Advances in Geriatric Oncology: Exploring Practical Ways to Optimize Treatment in Older Patients with Cancer.

Cancer is a disease associated with aging, with patients over 70 accounting for 50% of newly diagnosed malignancies and 70% of all cancer deaths [...].

Geriatric assessment in the management of older patients with cancer - A systematic review (update).

AIM: The aim of this systematic review is to summarize all available data on the effect of a geriatric assessment in older patients with cancer, for oncologic treatment decisions, the implementation of non-oncologic interventions, patient-doctor communication, and treatment outcome. Additionally, we examined the impact of the type of assessment used. METHODS: Systematic Medline and Embase search for studies on the effect of a geriatric assessment on oncologic treatment decisions, non-oncologic interventions, communication, and outcome. RESULTS: Sixty-five publications from 61 studies were included. After a geriatric assessment, the oncologic treatment plan was altered in a median of 31% of patients (range 7-56%), with highest change rates in studies using a multidisciplinary team evaluation. Non-oncologic interventions were recommended in over 70% of patients, provided that an intervention plan or specific expertise was in place. A geriatric assessment led to more goals-of-care discussions and improved communication. The geriatric assessment also led to lower toxicity/complication rates (most strongly if the assessment outcomes were considered during decision making), improved likelihood of treatment completion, and improved physical functioning and quality of life in the majority of included studies. CONCLUSION: A geriatric assessment can change oncologic treatment plans, leads to non-oncologic interventions, and improve communication about care planning and ageing-related issues. It can decrease toxicity/complications and improve treatment completion and patient-centred outcomes. If multidisciplinary or geriatric input is not available, having a pre-defined non-oncologic intervention plan is important. To maximize the effect on outcomes, the result of the geriatric assessment should be incorporated into oncologic decision-making.

[Rethinking the management of elderly cancer patients : Proposals from the Age Cancer Priorities French Group]. / Repenser la prise en charge des sujets âgés atteints d'un cancer : propositions du groupe Priorités Âge Cancer.

The growing incidence of cancer associated with an aging population implies important health challenges that require questioning on the care management of older adults with cancer. There is a need to rethink the care management of older cancer patients with patient-centered decisions and an adjustment of the care pathway for this population. The Priorities Age Cancer (PAC) French group, made up of physicians, pharmacists and researchers in geriatric oncology, set up proposals to answer this need. First, the heterogeneity and the specificities of older adults as well as their preferences regarding cancer treatment goals, care management decisions must be patient-centered. The frailty screening tools should be generalized in clinical practice to provide geriatric assessment-guided recommendations and help for treatment decisions, and patients' involvement and shared decision should be developed. Second, older adults with cancer confront a complex health care system that demands a high level of health literacy. The caregivers, playing an essential role, may not be prepared for all these challenges. Thus, there is a need to promote health literacy by patient education, and patient-experts should be involved in health pathway. Third, there is a need to deal with dedicated partners and adjust the care pathway. New pathway careers as case-management nurses and specialized pharmacists should be involved in patient care and may play a central role together with other careers. Community-Hospital coordination should also be reinforced.

Does Inflammation Contribute to Cancer Incidence and Mortality during Aging? A Conceptual Review.

Aging is associated with chronic low-grade inflammation, cancer incidence and mortality. As inflammation contributes to cancer initiation and progression, one could hypothesize that age-associated chronic low-grade inflammation contributes to the increase in cancer incidence and/or mortality observed during aging. Here, we review the evidence supporting this hypothesis: (1) epidemiological associations between biomarkers of systemic inflammation and cancer incidence and mortality in older people, (2) therapeutic clues suggesting that targeting inflammation could reduce cancer incidence and mortality and (3) experimental evidence from animal models highlighting inflammation as a link between various mechanisms of aging and cancer initiation and progression. Despite a large body of literature linking aging, inflammation and cancer, convincing evidence for the clear implication of specific inflammatory pathways explaining cancer incidence or mortality during aging is still lacking. Further dedicated research is needed to fill these gaps in evidence and pave the way for the development of applications in clinical care.

Exploring Determinants of Interdisciplinary Collaboration within a Geriatric Oncology Setting: A Mixed-Method Study.

Therapeutic challenges regarding the population of elderly cancer patients and their heterogeneity lead to the need to implement person-centered approaches in order to optimize care strategies and adapt oncology treatments to each pattern of aging. The International Society of Geriatric Oncology recommends a multidisciplinary evaluation of these patients and the use of screening tools prior to the initiation of treatments. However, previous research shows a poor implementation of these recommendations in geriatric oncology. Although some studies have identified how different perceptions of geriatric oncology might hinder routine teamwork, little is known about the impact of other factors on promoting the collaboration between the two specialties. This mixed-method exploratory study used an online questionnaire to assess the perception of a group of 22 geriatricians and oncology physicians on different determinants of oncology care and teamwork. In this sample, older oncology patients benefited from geriatric care. However, there was a variability regarding age criteria and a limited use of screening tools. The multidimensional framework for interprofessional teamwork by Reeves has been used to analyze some of the determinants of the collaboration between oncology physicians and geriatricians. This study has identified systematic issues to consider when promoting communication and common values between the two disciplines, including available resources in terms of shared time, space and routine actions.

What Defines Quality of Life for Older Patients Diagnosed with Cancer? A Qualitative Study.

The treatment of cancer can have a significant impact on quality of life in older patients and this needs to be taken into account in decision making. However, quality of life can consist of many different components with varying importance between individuals. We set out to assess how older patients with cancer define quality of life and the components that are most significant to them. This was a single-centre, qualitative interview study. Patients aged 70 years or older with cancer were asked to answer open-ended questions: What makes life worthwhile? What does quality of life mean to you? What could affect your quality of life? Subsequently, they were asked to choose the five most important determinants of quality of life from a predefined list: cognition, contact with family or with community, independence, staying in your own home, helping others, having enough energy, emotional well-being, life satisfaction, religion and leisure activities. Afterwards, answers to the open-ended questions were independently categorized by two authors. The proportion of patients mentioning each category in the open-ended questions were compared to the predefined questions. Overall, 63 patients (median age 76 years) were included. When asked, "What makes life worthwhile?", patients identified social functioning (86%) most frequently. Moreover, to define quality of life, patients most frequently mentioned categories in the domains of physical functioning (70%) and physical health (48%). Maintaining cognition was mentioned in 17% of the open-ended questions and it was the most commonly chosen option from the list of determinants (72% of respondents). In conclusion, physical functioning, social functioning, physical health and cognition are important components in quality of life. When discussing treatment options, the impact of treatment on these aspects should be taken into consideration.