Geriatric Oncology: A 5-Year Strategic Plan.

The increasing rate of the older adult population across the world over the next 20 years along with significant developments in the treatment of oncology will require a more granular understanding of the older adult population with cancer. The ASCO Geriatric Oncology Community of Practice (COP) herein provides an outline for the field along three fundamental pillars: education, research, and implementation, inspired by ASCO's 5-Year Strategic Plan. Fundamental to improving the understanding of geriatric oncology is research that intentionally includes older adults with clinically meaningful data supported by grants across all career stages. The increased knowledge base that is developed should be conveyed among health care providers through core competencies for trainees and continuing education for practicing oncologists. ASCO's infrastructure can serve as a resource for fellowship programs interested in acquiring geriatric oncology content and provide recommendations on developing training pathways for fellows interested in pursuing formalized training in geriatrics. Incorporating geriatric oncology into everyday practice is challenging as each clinical setting has unique operational workflows with barriers that limit implementation of valuable geriatric tools such as Geriatric Assessment. Partnerships among experts in quality improvement from the ASCO Geriatric Oncology COP, the Cancer and Aging Research Group, and ASCO's Quality Training Program can provide one such venue for implementation of geriatric oncology through a structured support mechanism. The field of geriatric oncology must continue to find innovative strategies using existing resources and partnerships to address the pressing needs of the older adult population with cancer to improve patient outcomes.

Supportive care needs among older Mexican adults with metastatic cancer.

INTRODUCTION: Supportive care needs may vary according to age. The purpose of this research is to describe and compare supportive care needs between older adults with metastatic cancer (age ≥ 65 years) and their younger counterparts. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We conducted a retrospective secondary analysis of a cohort of patients with newly diagnosed metastatic solid tumors. Supportive care needs were assessed at baseline and at a three-month follow-up. Patients were divided into two groups (aged ≥65/<65 years). Differences in clinical characteristics and supportive care needs were compared utilizing descriptive statistics. Multivariate logistic regression models were employed to identify patient characteristics associated with specific supportive care needs. RESULTS: Between 2018 and 2022, 375 patients were enrolled. Median age was 66 years (interquartile range 19-94). At baseline, older adults had a higher number of supportive care needs (4.8 vs. 4.2, p = 0.01) and were at higher risk of malnutrition (75 vs. 65%, p = 0.05). Increasing age (odds ratio [OR] 1.02 (95% confidence interval [CI] 1.0-1.04, p = 0.03) and an estimated life expectancy <6 months (OR 3.0, 95%CI 1.5-6.1; p < 0.01) were associated with higher odds of malnutrition, while a higher educational level was associated with decreased odds (OR 0.68, 95%CI 0.5-0.8; p < 0.01). At three-month follow-up, older adults still had a higher number of supportive care needs (3.8 vs.2.6, p < 0.01) and were more likely to have fatigue (62 vs. 47%, p = 0.02). An estimated life expectancy of <6 months was associated with increased odds of fatigue (OR 3.0, 95%CI 1.5-6.3; p < 0.01). DISCUSSION: Older adults reported significantly more supportive care needs, particularly risk of malnutrition and fatigue. This information can help in the creation of supportive care services tailored to the needs of older individuals.

Outcome prioritization and preferences among older adults with cancer starting chemotherapy in a randomized clinical trial.

INTRODUCTION: Older adults with cancer facing competing treatments must prioritize between various outcomes. This study assessed health outcome prioritization among older adults with cancer starting chemotherapy. METHODS: Secondary analysis of a randomized trial addressing vulnerabilities in older adults with cancer. Patients completed three validated outcome prioritization tools: 1) Health Outcomes Tool: prioritizes outcomes (survival, independence, symptoms) using a visual analog scale; 2) Now vs. Later Tool: rates the importance of quality of life at three times-today versus 1 or 5 years in the future; and 3) Attitude Scale: rates agreement with outcome-related statements. The authors measured the proportion of patients prioritizing various outcomes and evaluated their characteristics. RESULTS: A total of 219 patients (median [range] age 71 [65-88], 68% with metastatic disease) were included. On the Health Outcomes Tool, 60.7% prioritized survival over other outcomes. Having localized disease was associated with choosing survival as top priority. On the Now vs. Later Tool, 50% gave equal importance to current versus future quality of life. On the Attitude Scale, 53.4% disagreed with the statement "the most important thing to me is living as long as I can, no matter what my quality of life is"; and 82.2% agreed with the statement "it is more important to me to maintain my thinking ability than to live as long as possible". CONCLUSION: Although survival was the top priority for most participants, some older individuals with cancer prioritize other outcomes, such as cognition and function. Clinicians should elicit patient-defined priorities and include them in decision-making.

Equity, diversity, and inclusion in the Multinational Association for Supportive Care in Cancer: a global membership survey.

Equity, diversity, and inclusion (EDI) are essential for healthcare organizations since they allow for the development of programs and initiatives that bring together diverse perspectives and knowledge. Global multidisciplinary organizations, such as the Multinational Association for Supportive Care in Cancer (MASCC), need to understand the perspective of their members regarding EDI to identify opportunities to enhance diversity and inclusiveness and to better meet the needs of members from different backgrounds and resources. The MASCC Health Disparities Committee designed a survey to identify issues related to disparities faced by MASCC members when providing supportive care to patients with cancer and to examine the EDI landscape within the organization. Here, we report results related to EDI initiatives within the organization. Two-hundred and eighteen MASCC members responded to the survey (response rate 10.2%). The results indicated that respondents were generally satisfied with how MASCC manages leadership, membership, and organization-related EDI issues. Opportunities for improvement noted by respondents included developing strategies to foster a more diverse membership, improving communication regarding diversity in the organization, and increasing EDI content in educational sessions and publications. The results of this survey represent the first attempt at understanding how to improve EDI within MASCC and will be utilized to guide further initiatives and programs.

Local Sociocultural Practice Specific Financial Toxicity Assessment Tool for Cancer: An Emerging Need.

It is relevant to study the financial toxicity of cancer to address it. However, the existing tools fail to capture the financial destruction of cancer on patients and their families in resource-limited countries. The authors discuss the need for a new tool in this article.

TOward a comPrehensive supportive Care intervention for Older men with metastatic Prostate cancer (TOPCOP3): A pilot randomized controlled trial and process evaluation.

INTRODUCTION: Current management of metastatic prostate cancer (mPC) includes androgen receptor axis-targeted therapy (ARATs), which is associated with substantial toxicity in older adults. Geriatric assessment and management and remote symptom monitoring have been shown to reduce toxicity and improve quality of life in patients undergoing chemotherapy, but their efficacy in patients being treated with ARATs has not been explored. The purpose of this study is to examine whether these interventions, alone or in combination, can improve treatment tolerability and quality of life (QOL) for older adults with metastatic prostate cancer on ARATs. MATERIALS AND METHODS: TOPCOP3 is a multi-centre, factorial pilot clinical trial coupled with an embedded process evaluation. The study includes four treatment arms: geriatric assessment and management (GA + M); remote symptom monitoring (RSM); geriatric assessment and management plus remote symptom monitoring; and usual care and will be followed for six months. The aim is to recruit 168 patients between two cancer centres in Toronto, Canada. Eligible participants will be randomized equally via REDCap. Participants in all arms will complete a comprehensive baseline assessment upon enrollment following the Geriatric Core dataset, as well as follow-up assessments at 1.5, 3, 4.5, and 6 months. The co-primary outcomes will be grade 3-5 toxicity and QOL. Toxicities will be graded using the National Cancer Institute Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events version 5.0. QOL will be measured by patient self-reporting using the EuroQol 5 dimensions of health questionnaire. Secondary outcomes include fatigue, insomnia, and depression. Finally, four process evaluation outcomes will also be observed, namely feasibility, fidelity, and acceptability, along with implementation barriers and facilitators. DISCUSSION: Data will be collected to observe the effects of GA + M and RSM on QOL and toxicities experienced by older adults receiving ARATs for metastatic prostate cancer. Data will also be collected to help the design and conduct of a definitive multicentre phase III randomized controlled trial. This study will extend supportive care interventions for older adults with cancer into new areas and inform the design of larger trials. TRIAL REGISTRATION: The trial is registered at clinicaltrials.gov (registration number: NCT05582772).

Understanding the incidence, duration, and severity of symptoms through daily symptom monitoring among frail and non-frail older patients receiving metastatic prostate cancer treatments.

INTRODUCTION: Older adults with metastatic prostate cancer (mPC) experience high symptom burden associated with treatment. Frailty may exacerbate treatment toxicity. The aim of this study was to explore short-term treatment toxicity in patients with metastatic prostate cancer. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Older adults with metastatic prostate cancer starting chemotherapy, androgen-receptor-axis targeted therapies, or radium-223 participated in a prospective, multicentre, observational study. Participants self-reported symptoms daily using the Edmonton Symptom Assessment System for one treatment cycle via internet or telephone. The most common moderate-to-severe symptoms (score≥4), their duration, and the proportion of participants who experienced improvements in symptom severity (score<4) after reporting moderate-to-severe symptoms at baseline were determined using descriptive statistics. Once-weekly symptom questionnaires were administered and analyzed using linear mixed effect models. Symptom incidence, duration, and frailty associations were assessed using t-tests and chi-square tests. RESULTS: Ninety participants completed the study (mean age=77 years [standard deviation=6.1], 42% frail [Vulnerable Elders Survey≥3]). The most common moderate-to-severe symptoms across cohorts were fatigue (46.8%), insomnia (42.9%), poor wellbeing (41.2%), pain (37.5%), and decreased appetite (37.1%). Poor wellbeing had a higher incidence in frail participants (62.5% in frail vs. 31.4% in non-frail, p=0.039). Symptom duration varied across cohorts and between frail and non-frail participants. Among participants who reported moderate-to-severe symptoms at baseline, no more than 15% improved in any symptom. There were statistically significant improvements in weekly symptoms for fatigue, decreased appetite, and insomnia in the chemotherapy cohort only. DISCUSSION: Limitations include a short follow-up duration, lack of a control group, and few radium-223 participants. Regular symptom monitoring can help clinicians understand temporal patterns and durations of symptoms and inform supportive care approaches.

Cost-effectiveness of the addition of CDK4/6 inhibitors to standard endocrine therapy in first-line treatment of women with advanced HR+/HER2− breast cancer in Mexico

Purpose To estimate the cost-effectiveness of adding a CDK4/6 inhibitor to standard endocrine therapy in the first-line setting for advanced HR+/HER2− breast cancer in postmenopausal and premenopausal women, from the perspective of the Mexican public healthcare system. Methods We used a partitioned survival model to simulate relevant health outcomes in a synthetic cohort of patients with breast cancer derived from the PALOMA-2, MONALEESA-2, MONARCH-3 trials for postmenopausal patients, and from the MONALEESA-7 study for premenopausal patients. Effectiveness was measured in life years gained. Cost-effectiveness is reported through incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICER). Results In postmenopausal patients, palbociclib led to an increase of 1.51 life years, ribociclib of 1.58 years, and abemaciclib of 1.75 years, compared to letrozole alone. The ICER was 36,648 USD, 32,422 USD, and 26,888 USD, respectively. In premenopausal patients, ribociclib led to an increase of 1.82 life years when added to goserelin and endocrine therapy, with an ICER of 44,579 USD. In the cost minimization analysis, for postmenopausal patients, ribociclib was the treatment with the highest costs due to follow-up requirements. Conclusion Palbociclib, ribociclib, and abemaciclib demonstrated a significant increase in effectiveness in postmenopausal patients, and ribociclib in premenopausal patients, when added to standard endocrine therapy for patients with advanced HR+/HER2− breast cancer. At the national stablished willingness to pay, only the addition of abemaciclib to standard endocrine therapy in postmenopausal women would be considered cost-effective. However, differences on results between therapies for postmenopausal patients were not statistically significant (AU)

Cost-effectiveness of the addition of CDK4/6 inhibitors to standard endocrine therapy in first-line treatment of women with advanced HR+/HER2- breast cancer in Mexico.

PURPOSE: To estimate the cost-effectiveness of adding a CDK4/6 inhibitor to standard endocrine therapy in the first-line setting for advanced HR+/HER2- breast cancer in postmenopausal and premenopausal women, from the perspective of the Mexican public healthcare system. METHODS: We used a partitioned survival model to simulate relevant health outcomes in a synthetic cohort of patients with breast cancer derived from the PALOMA-2, MONALEESA-2, MONARCH-3 trials for postmenopausal patients, and from the MONALEESA-7 study for premenopausal patients. Effectiveness was measured in life years gained. Cost-effectiveness is reported through incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICER). RESULTS: In postmenopausal patients, palbociclib led to an increase of 1.51 life years, ribociclib of 1.58 years, and abemaciclib of 1.75 years, compared to letrozole alone. The ICER was 36,648 USD, 32,422 USD, and 26,888 USD, respectively. In premenopausal patients, ribociclib led to an increase of 1.82 life years when added to goserelin and endocrine therapy, with an ICER of 44,579 USD. In the cost minimization analysis, for postmenopausal patients, ribociclib was the treatment with the highest costs due to follow-up requirements. CONCLUSION: Palbociclib, ribociclib, and abemaciclib demonstrated a significant increase in effectiveness in postmenopausal patients, and ribociclib in premenopausal patients, when added to standard endocrine therapy for patients with advanced HR+/HER2- breast cancer. At the national stablished willingness to pay, only the addition of abemaciclib to standard endocrine therapy in postmenopausal women would be considered cost-effective. However, differences on results between therapies for postmenopausal patients were not statistically significant.

Development of geriatric oncology in Latin America: A report from the Latin American Cooperative Oncology Group.

Population aging represents a critical issue for global cancer care, notably in low- and middle-income countries (LMIC). Latin America is a large region composed of 21 countries with notable diversity in both human development and access to quality healthcare. Thus, it is necessary to understand how care for older individuals is being delivered in such large and diverse regions of the world. This review describes the recent advances made in Mexico, Brazil, and Chile, focusing on the creation and implementation of educational, research, and clinical activities in geriatric oncology. These initiatives intend to change healthcare professionals' perceptions about the care for older adults and to improve the way older patients are being treated.

Cross-border utilization of cancer care by patients in the US and Mexico - a survey of Mexican oncologists.

BACKGROUND: The US-Mexico border is the busiest in the world, with millions of people crossing it daily. However, little is known about cross-border utilization of cancer care, or about the reasons driving it. We designed a cross sectional online survey to understand the type of care patients with cancer who live in the US and Mexico seek outside their home country, the reasons why patients traveled across the border to receive care, and the barriers faced when seeking cross-border care. RESULTS: The online survey was sent to the 248 cancer care providers working in the six Mexican border states who were registered members of the Mexican Society of Oncology. Responses were collected between September-November 2022. Sixty-six providers (response rate 26%) completed the survey. Fifty-nine (89%) reported interacting with US-based patients traveling to Mexico to receive various treatment modalities, with curative surgery (n = 38) and adjuvant chemotherapy (n = 31) being the most common. Forty-nine (74%) reported interacting with Mexico-based patients traveling to the US to receive various treatment modalities, with immunotherapy (n = 29) and curative surgery (n = 27) being the most common. The most frequently reported reason US-based patients sought care in Mexico was inadequate health insurance (n = 45). The most frequently reported reason Mexico-based patients sought care in the US was patients' perception of superior healthcare (n = 38). CONCLUSIONS: Most Mexican oncologists working along the Mexico-US border have interacted with patients seeking or receiving binational cancer care. The type of care sought, as well as the reasons for seeking it, differ between US and Mexico-based patients. These patterns of cross-border healthcare utilization highlight unmet needs for patients with cancer in both countries and call for policy changes to improve outcomes in border regions.

Factors associated with the evaluation of geriatric assessment (GA) domains by oncology specialists in Mexico.

The use of geriatric assessment (GA) by oncology specialists in Mexico is low. We aimed to explore factors associated with the evaluation of individual GA domains by Mexican oncology specialists. We performed an exploratory analysis of a sequential explanatory mixed-methods study consisting of an online cross-sectional survey of Mexican oncology specialists and follow-up interviews on the use of GA in cancer care. For each GA domain, we performed multivariable logistic regression analyses with the frequency of evaluation of the domains as the dependent variable (dichotomised as never/rarely/sometimes versus most of the time/always). A p-value <0.05 was considered significant. Qualitative data from the interviews were analysed inductively. Of 196 respondents, 62% were male, 50% were surgical oncologists, 51% took care of >10 patients per day and 61.7% had access to a geriatrician. Self-perceived confidence in managing common geriatric conditions was associated with the evaluation of specific GA domains. For instance, self-perceived confidence in managing dementia (OR 2.72; 95% CI 1.42-5.51, p = 0.008) was associated with cognition evaluation, while for evaluation of falls, self-perceived confidence in evaluation of falls (OR 6.31; 95% CI 3.19-12.46, p < 0.001) was significantly associated. Follow-up interviews showed quality and appropriateness of evaluations may not be ideal: in many cases, physicians do not use guideline-recommended tools. For example, evaluation of cognition is commonly performed through non-validated methods which may miss the detection of patients with an impairment in this domain, partly due to limitations in knowledge and time to use recommended tools. In conclusion, self-perceived confidence in evaluating and managing common situations in older adults was associated with the evaluation of GA domains as part of everyday practice in a sample of oncology specialists in Mexico. This analysis supports the use of educational interventions to boost knowledge and confidence regarding the proper use of validated GA tools among oncology specialists.

Cancer incidence estimates in adults aged 60 years and older living in low-and-middle-income countries for the years 2020 and 2040.

Previous studies have shown a disproportionate rise in cancer incidence in low-and-middle-income countries (LMICs) due to rapid population ageing. This study aims to describe the cancer incidence in adults aged 60 years and older in LMICs to inform cancer control planning. Using the latest GLOBOCAN estimates for 2020, we describe the cancer incidence and the top five cancer sites among adults aged 60 years and older living in LMICs. We also project the incidence in 2040 by applying population projections, assuming no changes in incidence rates and risk profiles over time. In 2020, 6.3 million new cancer cases were diagnosed in older adults in LMICs, constituting over half of the global incidence burden (55%). In females aged 60 years and older living in LMICs, breast, lung, colon, stomach, and cervix uteri were the most frequent cancer types representing 51% of the total number of new cancer cases in older females. In males aged 60 years and older living in LMICs, lung, prostate, stomach, liver and colon were the most frequent cancer types representing 58% of the total number of new cancer cases in this subgroup. Variations were observed between income categories. The number of new cancer diagnoses in adults aged 60 years and older living in LMICs will almost double by 2040, reaching 11.5 million new cancer cases. The greatest increase is expected to happen in lower-income countries (+158% in lower-middle-income countries (excluding India) and +99% in low-income countries versus +38% in upper-middle-income countries). In conclusion, our findings call for an urgent adaptation of healthcare systems in LMICs by developing geriatric oncology and by including older adults in research, clinical guidelines, insurance schemes and cancer prevention policies.

Delivering Palliative and Supportive Care for Older Adults with Cancer: Interactions between Palliative Medicine and Geriatrics.

The world's population is aging rapidly, with projections indicating that by 2050 one in six people will be aged ≥65 years. As a result, the number of cancer cases in older people is expected to increase significantly. Palliative care is an essential component of cancer care with a direct impact on quality of life. However, older adults with cancer often suffer from multiple comorbidities, cognitive impairment, and frailty, posing unique challenges in the delivery of palliative care. The complex healthcare needs of older patients with cancer therefore require a comprehensive assessment, including a geriatric evaluation. Collaboration between geriatrics and palliative care can offer a solution to the challenges faced by older people with cancer, since this is a population with overlapping concerns for both disciplines. This review highlights the importance of palliative care for older adults with cancer and the benefits of a multidisciplinary approach. It also addresses the coordination of palliative care and geriatrics for specific symptom management and decision making.