Role of the vulnerable elders survey-13 screening tool in predicting treatment plan modification for older adults with cancer.

BACKGROUND: The Vulnerable Elders Survey (VES-13) is commonly used to identify older patients who may benefit from Comprehensive Geriatric Assessment (CGA) prior to cancer treatment. The optimal cut point of the VES-13 to identify those whose final oncologic treatment plan would change after CGA is unclear. We hypothesized that patients with high positive VES-13 scores (7-10)have a higher likelihood of a change in treatment compared to low positive scores (3-6). METHODS: Retrospective review of a customized database of all patients seen for pre-treatment assessment in an academic geriatric oncology clinic from June 2015 to June 2019. Various VES-13 cut points were analyzed to identify those individuals whose treatment was modified after CGA. Area under the curve (AUC) was calculated and subgroups of patients treated locally or systemically were also examined to determine if performance varied by treatment modality. RESULTS: We included 386 patients with mean age 81, 58% males. Gastrointestinal cancer was the most common site (31%) and 60% were planned to receive curative treatment. The final treatment plan was modified in 59% overall, with 52.7% modified with VES-13 scores 7-10, 50.8% with scores 3-6 and 28.1% with scores <3 (P = 0.002). VES-13 performance in predicting treatment modification was similar for cut points 3 (AUC 0.58), 4 (0.59), 5 (0.59), and 6 (0.59) and in those considering local treatment vs. chemotherapy. CONCLUSIONS: A positive VES-13 score was associated with final oncologic treatment plan modification. A high positive score was not superior to the conventional cut point of ≥3.

Comprehensive Geriatric Assessment: A Case Report on Personalizing Cancer Care of an Older Adult Patient With Head and Neck Cancer.

BACKGROUND: Understanding multidimensional screening and assessment is key to optimizing cancer care in older adults. OBJECTIVES: This article aims to present comprehensive geriatric assessment (CGA) as an approach to personalizing care for older adults with cancer. METHODS: A case study of an 89-year-old man with head and neck cancer is presented as a framework to describe the process of CGA and an overview of geriatric oncology screening and assessment. FINDINGS: CGA enables personalized care by informing decision making about cancer treatment and guiding implementation of enhanced supportive interventions. Screening tools can help identify older adult patients who would benefit from CGA. Oncology nurses can integrate geriatric assessment tools into practice to identify and address age-related concerns, facilitate communication, and contribute to personalization of care.

Downstream consequences of abnormal cognitive screening in older adults seen pretreatment in a geriatric oncology clinic.

INTRODUCTION: Although screening for cognitive impairment (CI) is an important part of a comprehensive geriatric assessment (CGA), little is known about the downstream work-up of abnormal screening or its impact on cancer treatment. We characterized the downstream workup in diagnosing CI and its impact on cancer treatment decision-making. METHODS: Patients who underwent a pre-treatment CGA at an academic Geriatric Oncology (GO) clinic between July 2015 and June 2018 and had a positive Mini-Cog (≤ 3 out of 5) screen were included. Data were collected from medical charts and database review. Analyses were primarily descriptive. RESULTS: Of 82 patients seen in the pre-treatment setting, 46 (56.1%) had a positive Mini-Cog screen. Of those, 12 (26.1%) were diagnosed with dementia, 8 (17.4%) were diagnosed with mild cognitive impairment and 10 (21.7%) had CI not otherwise specified. Although 46 patients had a positive screen, only 30 patients (65.2%) were classified as cognitively "abnormal" in the GO team final assessment. Change to oncologic treatment due to CI was seen in 12 (40.0%) cases. Increased delirium risk was identified in 9 (75.0%) of 12 surgical cases; however, delirium prevention was only recommended in 5 cases (55.6%). Strategies to optimize patients with CI included targeting falls prevention (n = 13), home/personal safety (n = 7), medication safety (n = 7), and nutrition (n = 6). Pharmacotherapy for cognition was not recommended in any case. CONCLUSION: Undiagnosed CI is prevalent in the GO setting and influenced treatment in 40.0% of cases. Gaps were identified in clinician and patient/caregiver education around delirium risk. Addressing these issues may improve patient care.

Performance of the Vulnerable Elders Survey 13 screening tool in identifying cancer treatment modification after geriatric assessment in pre-treatment patients: A retrospective analysis.

PURPOSE: Geriatric assessment (GA) is recommended for older adults ≥ 70 years with cancer to guide treatment selection. Screening tools such as the Vulnerable Elders Survey (VES-13) and G6 have been used to identify patients at highest need of GA. Whether either tool predicts a change in oncologic treatment following GA is unclear. METHODS: Patients attending a geriatric oncology clinic between July 2015 and June 2017 who completed a VES-13 and underwent subsequent GA were included. Clinical information was extracted from a prospectively maintained database. G6 scores were assigned retrospectively. Patients were stratified into those who were "VES-13 positive" (score ≥ 3) and "VES-13 negative" (score < 3). Logistic regression was used to explore the relationship between VES-13 score, G6 score, and treatment modification. RESULTS: Ninety-nine patients were seen prior to initiating cancer treatment. The median VES-13 score was 7; with 81.8% of patients scoring ≥3. The treatment plan was modified in 47.5% of patients after GA. VES-13 score was predictive of treatment plan modification (63.0% among VES-13 positive versus 16.7% among VES-13 negative patients; p = 0.001). G6 performed similarly to the VES-13. The only statistically significant predictor of treatment change in multivariable analysis was performance status. CONCLUSION: VES-13 positive patients are more likely to undergo treatment modification to reduce treatment intensity or supportive care only. The VES-13 may provide oncologists with a rapid, reliable way of identifying vulnerability in older adults with cancer who may need further GA prior to commencing cancer treatment.

Role of the geriatrician, primary care practitioner, nurses, and collaboration with oncologists during cancer treatment delivery for older adults: A narrative review of the literature.

Cancer is a disease that mostly affects older adults. With the aging of the population there will be a considerable increase in the number of older adults with cancer. Optimal care of the older adult with cancer requires the involvement of many types of health care providers, including oncologists, nurses, primary care practitioners, and geriatricians. In this narrative review, the literature for evidence relating to the roles of and collaboration between geriatricians, primary care practitioners, nurses, and the oncology team during cancer treatment delivery to older adults was examined. Relevant abstracts were reviewed by all team members. The full texts were reviewed to identify common themes related to roles and collaboration. The results showed that primary care practitioners felt underutilized and that the communication and collaboration between oncologists and primary care practitioners is challenging due to lack of clarity about roles and lack of timely communication/sharing of all relevant information. Furthermore, some of oncology staff, but not all, saw a need for greater collaboration between oncologists and geriatricians. The lack of availability of geriatricians limited the collaboration. Geriatric oncology nurses perceived themselves as having an important role in geriatric assessment and management, but there was no data on their collaboration with these medical specialists. There is a clear need for improvement of collaboration to improve patient outcomes. In conclusion, further research is needed to examine the impact of geriatric oncology team collaboration on the quality of cancer care, in particular, the role of nurses in supporting quality of care during treatment.

Beyond the black box of geriatric assessment: Understanding enhancements to care by the geriatric oncology clinic.

OBJECTIVE: Comprehensive geriatric assessment (CGA) of older adults with cancer aids treatment decision-making and prognostication. Much less is known about the supportive care elements or enhancements to care afforded by the CGA. We characterized the enhancements to care provided by a geriatric oncology clinic and determined how these vary by indication for referral. MATERIALS AND METHODS: All patients age 65 or older referred to a single academic geriatric oncology clinic between July 2015 (clinic opening) and June 2017 were included. Treatment enhancements were prospectively recorded in 5 categories: educational support, comorbidity management, symptom management, oncologic treatment delivery, and peri-operative management recommendations. Indications for referral were categorized into 3 groups: pre-treatment (n = 97, 44%), on active treatment (n = 89, 41%), and survivorship phase (n = 33, 15%). Data were analyzed using descriptive statistics and multivariable logistic regression. RESULTS: 219 patients were seen during the study period (mean age 79.7 years, 69% male). Overall, educational support (96%) and comorbidity management (95%) were the most common enhancements, whereas peri-operative management (10%) was the least common and provided only to pre-treatment patients. Enhancements to cancer treatment delivery were offered more often to patients pre-treatment than on active treatment (61% versus 41%, p < 0.001). Other enhancements to care did not vary by indication for referral. CONCLUSION: Educational support and comorbidity management are nearly universally offered. Most enhancements to care do not vary by indication for referral. Understanding the enhancements to care provided by geriatric oncology clinics can help with resource planning and program design.