Fairness in Predicting Cancer Mortality Across Racial Subgroups.

Importance: Machine learning has potential to transform cancer care by helping clinicians prioritize patients for serious illness conversations. However, models need to be evaluated for unequal performance across racial groups (ie, racial bias) so that existing racial disparities are not exacerbated. Objective: To evaluate whether racial bias exists in a predictive machine learning model that identifies 180-day cancer mortality risk among patients with solid malignant tumors. Design, Setting, and Participants: In this cohort study, a machine learning model to predict cancer mortality for patients aged 21 years or older diagnosed with cancer between January 2016 and December 2021 was developed with a random forest algorithm using retrospective data from the Mount Sinai Health System cancer registry, Social Security Death Index, and electronic health records up to the date when databases were accessed for cohort extraction (February 2022). Exposure: Race category. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcomes were model discriminatory performance (area under the receiver operating characteristic curve [AUROC], F1 score) among each race category (Asian, Black, Native American, White, and other or unknown) and fairness metrics (equal opportunity, equalized odds, and disparate impact) among each pairwise comparison of race categories. True-positive rate ratios represented equal opportunity; both true-positive and false-positive rate ratios, equalized odds; and the percentage of predictive positive rate ratios, disparate impact. All metrics were estimated as a proportion or ratio, with variability captured through 95% CIs. The prespecified criterion for the model's clinical use was a threshold of at least 80% for fairness metrics across different racial groups to ensure the model's prediction would not be biased against any specific race. Results: The test validation dataset included 43 274 patients with balanced demographics. Mean (SD) age was 64.09 (14.26) years, with 49.6% older than 65 years. A total of 53.3% were female; 9.5%, Asian; 18.9%, Black; 0.1%, Native American; 52.2%, White; and 19.2%, other or unknown race; 0.1% had missing race data. A total of 88.9% of patients were alive, and 11.1% were dead. The AUROCs, F1 scores, and fairness metrics maintained reasonable concordance among the racial subgroups: the AUROCs ranged from 0.75 (95% CI, 0.72-0.78) for Asian patients and 0.75 (95% CI, 0.73-0.77) for Black patients to 0.77 (95% CI, 0.75-0.79) for patients with other or unknown race; F1 scores, from 0.32 (95% CI, 0.32-0.33) for White patients to 0.40 (95% CI, 0.39-0.42) for Black patients; equal opportunity ratios, from 0.96 (95% CI, 0.95-0.98) for Black patients compared with White patients to 1.02 (95% CI, 1.00-1.04) for Black patients compared with patients with other or unknown race; equalized odds ratios, from 0.87 (95% CI, 0.85-0.92) for Black patients compared with White patients to 1.16 (1.10-1.21) for Black patients compared with patients with other or unknown race; and disparate impact ratios, from 0.86 (95% CI, 0.82-0.89) for Black patients compared with White patients to 1.17 (95% CI, 1.12-1.22) for Black patients compared with patients with other or unknown race. Conclusions and Relevance: In this cohort study, the lack of significant variation in performance or fairness metrics indicated an absence of racial bias, suggesting that the model fairly identified cancer mortality risk across racial groups. It remains essential to consistently review the model's application in clinical settings to ensure equitable patient care.

"If we don't speak the language, we aren't offered the same opportunities": Qualitative perspectives of palliative care access for women of color living with advanced breast cancer.

Context: Despite efforts to enhance equity, disparities in early palliative care (PC) access for historically minoritized patients with advanced breast cancer (ABC) persist. Insight into patient and clinician perspectives are needed to inform future models aimed at improving equity in PC access and outcomes. Objectives: To explore qualitative barriers and facilitators to early PC access in an urban setting with Black and Latina women with ABC. Methods: In this qualitative descriptive study, we conducted one-on-one interviews with Black and Latina women with ABC (N = 20) and interdisciplinary clinicians (N = 20) between February 2022 and February 2023. Participants were recruited from urban academic and community cancer clinics. Transcripts were analyzed using an inductive coding and thematic analysis approach. Results: Barriers identified by both patients and clinicians included lack of communication between oncology, PC, and primary care teams, limited understanding of PC among patients and non-PC clinicians, language and health literacy-related communication challenges, and racism and marginalization, including implicit bias and lack of diverse racial/ethnic representation in the supportive care workforce. Facilitators identified by both patients and clinicians included patient-to-patient referrals, support groups breaking cultural stigma on topics including self-advocacy and PC, referrals from trusted providers, and community organizations' abilities to overcome challenges related to social determinants of health, most specifically logistical and financial support. Conclusions: Patients and clinicians reported similar barriers and facilitators to PC access, most commonly through the lens of care coordination and communication. These findings will inform future adaptation of a culturally and linguistically care model to improve access to early PC services for Black and Latina women with ABC.

Prognostic Understanding, Goals of Care, and Quality of Life in Hospitalized Patients with Leukemia or Multiple Myeloma.

Background: Prior studies reveal a lack of illness understanding and prognostic awareness among patients with hematological malignancies. We evaluated prognostic awareness and illness understanding among patients with acute leukemia and multiple myeloma (MM) and measured patient-hematologist discordance. Methods: We prospectively enrolled patients with acute leukemia and MM at Mount Sinai Hospital or Yale New Haven Hospital between August 2015 and February 2020. Patients were administered a survey assessing prognostic awareness, goals of care (GOC), and quality of life. Hematologists completed a similar survey for each patient. We assessed discordance across the cohort of patients and hematologists using the likelihood-ratio chi-square test and within patient-hematologist pairs using the kappa (κ) statistic. Results: We enrolled 185 patients (137 with leukemia and 48 with MM) and 29 hematologists. Among patients, 137 (74%) self-identified as White, 27 (15%) as Black, and 21 (11%) as Hispanic. Across the entire cohort, patients were significantly more optimistic about treatment goals compared with hematologists (p = 0.027). Within patient-hematologist pairs, hematologists were significantly more optimistic than patients with respect to line of treatment (κ = 0.03). For both leukemia and MM cohorts, patients were significantly more likely to respond "don't know" or deferring to a faith-based response with 88 (64%) and 34 (71%), respectively, compared with only 28 (20%) and 11 (23%) of hematologists, respectively. Conclusions: We observed significant discordance regarding prognosis and GOC among patients with hematological malignancies and their hematologists. These data support future interventions to improve prognostic understanding among this patient population to facilitate informed treatment choices.

Parent Perspectives on Communication Quality in the Neonatal Intensive Care Unit.

BACKGROUND: Though prior literature has demonstrated that communication in the Neonatal Intensive Care Unit (NICU) needs to be improved, in-depth descriptions of parents' views of NICU communication are lacking. PURPOSE: We sought (1) to explore parent perceptions of communication in the NICU and (2) to understand parents' communication needs and preferences. METHODS: We conducted in-depth semi-structured cognitive interviews utilizing concurrent probes with parents of 10 patients in our urban level IV Neonatal Intensive Care Unit over a period of 4 months (July 2021-October 2021). Interview questions were derived from the Quality of Communication scale. We conducted thematic analysis of interview transcripts modeled after work by Braun and Clarke. RESULTS: Four overarching themes were identified: Strengths, Challenges, People, and Coping Strategies. Parents reported a range of communication quality in the NICU. Results revealed that the first 48 hours of NICU hospitalization represent a period of vulnerability and uncertainty for parents. Parents value clear yet hopeful communication about a baby's clinical status and expected course. IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE AND RESEARCH: We hope that the concrete findings from this study can both inform practice in the NICU now and influence practice guidelines to include such components as emphasis on the first 48 hours, desire for proactive information sharing, and the importance of including hope.

Multi-cancer early detection (MCED) tests: prioritizing equity from bench to bedside.

Multi-cancer early detection (MCED) tests are blood-based tests designed to screen for signals of multiple cancers. There is growing interest and investment in examining the potential benefits and applications of MCED tests. If MCED tests are shown to have clinical utility, it is important to ensure that all people-regardless of their demographic or socioeconomic background-equitably benefit from these tests. Unfortunately, with health care innovation, such considerations are often ignored until after inequities emerge. We urge for-profit companies, scientists, clinicians, payers, and government agencies to prioritize equity now-when MCEDs are still being developed and researched. In an effort to avoid creating and exacerbating cancer inequities, we propose 9 equity considerations for MCEDs.

Longitudinal quality of life after sublobar resection and stereotactic body radiation therapy for early-stage non-small cell lung cancer.

BACKGROUND: Many patients with early-stage lung cancer are not candidates for lobectomy because of various factors, with treatment options including sublobar resection or stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT). Limited information exists regarding patient-centered outcomes after these treatments. METHODS: Subjects with stage I-IIA non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) at high risk for lobectomy who underwent treatment with sublobar resection or SBRT were recruited from five medical centers. Quality of life (QOL) was compared with the Short Form 8 (SF-8) for physical and mental health and Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-Lung (FACT-L) surveys at baseline (pretreatment) and 7 days, 30 days, 6 months, and 12 months after treatment. Propensity score methods were used to control for confounders. RESULTS: Of 337 subjects enrolled before treatment, 63% received SBRT. Among patients undergoing resection, 89% underwent minimally invasive video-assisted thoracic surgery or robot-assisted resection. Adjusted analyses showed that SBRT-treated patients had both higher physical health SF-8 scores (difference in differences [DID], 6.42; p = .0008) and FACT-L scores (DID, 2.47; p = .004) at 7 days posttreatment. Mental health SF-8 scores were not different at 7 days (p = .06). There were no significant differences in QOL at other time points, and all QOL scores returned to baseline by 12 months for both groups. CONCLUSIONS: SBRT is associated with better QOL immediately posttreatment compared with sublobar resection. However, both treatment groups reported similar QOL at later time points, with a return to baseline QOL. These findings suggest that sublobar resection and SBRT have a similar impact on the QOL of patients with early-stage lung cancer deemed ineligible for lobectomy.

Benefits, Harms, and Stakeholder Perspectives Regarding Opioid Therapy for Pain in Individuals With Metastatic Cancer: Protocol for a Descriptive Cohort Study.

BACKGROUND: Opioids are a key component of pain management among patients with metastatic cancer pain. However, the evidence base available to guide opioid-related decision-making in individuals with advanced cancer is limited. Patients with advanced cancer or cancer that is unlikely to be cured frequently experience pain. Opioids are a key component of pain management among patients with metastatic cancer pain. Many individuals with advanced cancer are now living long enough to experience opioid-related harm. Emerging evidence from chronic noncancer pain literature suggests that longer-term opioid therapy may have limited benefits for pain and function, and opioid-related harms are also a major concern. However, whether these benefits and harms of opioids apply to patients with cancer-related pain is unknown. OBJECTIVE: This manuscript outlines the protocol for the "Opioid Therapy for Pain in Individuals With Metastatic Cancer: The Benefits, Harms, and Stakeholder Perspectives (BEST) Study." The study aims to better understand opioid decision-making in patients with advanced cancer, along with opioid benefits and harms, through prospective examination of patients' pain experiences and opioid side effects and understanding the decision-making by patients, care partners, and clinicians. METHODS: This is a multicenter, prospective cohort study that aims to enroll 630 patients with advanced cancer, 20 care partners, and 20 clinicians (670 total participants). Patient participants must have an advanced solid cancer diagnosis, defined by the American Cancer Society as cancer that is unlikely to be cured. We will recruit patient participants within 12 weeks after diagnosis so that we can understand opioid benefits, harms, and perspectives on opioid decision-making throughout the course of their advanced cancer (up to 2 years). We will also specifically elicit information regarding long-term opioid use (ie, opioids for ≥90 consecutive days) and exclude patients on long-term opioid therapy before an advanced cancer diagnosis. Lived-experience perspectives related to opioid use in those with advanced cancer will be captured by qualitative interviews with a subset of patients, clinicians, and care partners. Our data collection will be grounded in a behavioral decision research approach that will allow us to develop future interventions to inform opioid-related decision-making for patients with metastatic cancer. RESULTS: Data collection began in October 2022 and is anticipated to end by November 2024. CONCLUSIONS: Upon successful execution of our study protocol, we anticipate the development of a comprehensive evidence base on opioid therapy in individuals with advanced cancer guided by the behavioral decision research framework. The information gained from this study will be used to guide interventions to facilitate opioid decisions among patients, clinicians, and care partners. Given the limited evidence base about opioid therapy in people with cancer, we envision this study will have significant real-world implications for cancer-related pain management and opioid-related clinical decision-making. INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT IDENTIFIER (IRRID): DERR1-10.2196/54953.

Balancing risks and rewards: How hematologists discuss uncertainty in allogeneic hematopoietic cell transplantation outcomes.

OBJECTIVE: Allogeneic hematopoietic cell transplant (alloHCT) offers many patients with blood cancers a chance of cure but carries risks. We characterized how hematologists discuss the high-risk, high-reward concept of alloHCT. METHODS: Qualitative analysis of video-recorded virtual encounters of hematologists who routinely perform alloHCT with actors portraying an older man recently diagnosed with high-risk myelodysplastic syndrome. RESULTS: Hematologists (n = 37) were a median age of 44 years, 65% male, and 68% white. They frequently used "teeter-totter" language that juxtaposed alloHCT's risks and rewards in a dynamic, quickly alternating fashion and communicated uncertainty in transplant outcomes. This dialogue oscillated between encouragement about alloHCT's potential for cure and caution about its risks and occurred within single speech turns and in exchanges between hematologist and patient. Fewer hematologists outlined their big-picture stance on transplant's risks and benefits early in the conversation. Meanwhile, hematologists varied in how they counseled patients to manage transplant-related uncertainty and consider treatment decision making. CONCLUSION: Hematologists use "teeter-totter" language to express hope and concern, confidence and uncertainty, and encouragement and caution about the high-risk, high-reward nature of alloHCT. PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS: Teeter-totter language may help frame big-picture content about alloHCT's risks and benefits that is essential for patient education and decision making.

Communication Strategies of Transplant Hematologists in High-Risk Decision-Making Conversations.

PURPOSE: Shared decision making (SDM) is essential to empower patients with blood cancers to make goal-concordant decisions about allogeneic hematopoietic cell transplantation. This study characterizes communication strategies used by hematologists to discuss treatment options and facilitate SDM with patients in this high-risk, high-reward setting. METHODS AND MATERIALS: We recruited US hematologists who routinely perform allogeneic hematopoietic cell transplant through email. Participants conducted up to an hour-long video-recorded encounter with an actor portraying a 67-year-old man with recently diagnosed high-risk myelodysplastic syndrome. We transcribed and qualitatively analyzed video-recorded data. RESULTS: The mean age of participants (N = 37) was 44 years, 65% male, and 68% White. Many hematologists included similar key points in this initial consultation, although varied in how much detail they provided. Their discussion of treatment options included transplant and chemotherapy and less commonly supportive care or clinical trials. They often emphasized transplant's potential for cure, discussed transplant chronologically from pretransplant considerations through the post-transplant course, and outlined risks, complications, and major outcomes. Hematologists referred to several elements that formed the basis of treatment decision making. The strength of their treatment recommendations ranged from strong recommendations for transplant or chemotherapy to deferrals pending more information. Hematologists also varied in the extent to which they indicated the decision was physician-driven, patient-led, or shared. CONCLUSION: The transplant decision-making discussion is complex. Identification of similar content areas used by hematologists can be used as the basis for a communication tool to help hematologists discuss allogeneic hematopoietic cell transplant with patients.

NeoTalk: Communication Skills Training for Neonatal Clinicians.

BACKGROUND: Despite proven benefit, pediatric subspecialists often have not been offered formal serious illness communication skills training. We sought to: 1) develop and evaluate the impact of a communication skills course, based on the VitalTalk framework, on Neonatal Intensive Care Unit (NICU) clinicians; 2) evaluate provider comfort with key serious illness communication skills and frequency of use of those skills, before and after "NeoTalk" and; 3) explore differences and similarities between adult and pediatric serious illness communication skills courses. METHODS: We developed a NICU specific communication skills course and surveyed course participants to evaluate comfort with key communication skills before and after course participation, and frequency of use of key skills before and 2 months after our course. Wilcoxon signed rank tests and Kruskal-Wallis tests were performed to compare participant responses across time points. RESULTS: 34 providers completed NeoTalk training. Complete pre- and post-course data was available for 29 participants. Participants reported increased comfort with skills including 'sharing difficult news' (P = .018), and 'responding to emotion' (P = .002). Participants did not report increased frequency in using target skills 2 months after training. CONCLUSIONS: A multi-disciplinary cohort of NICU providers endorsed increased confidence in key communication skills but not increased skill application 2-months post-course completion. While a single course can successfully teach skills, additional exposure may be necessary to build new communication habits. Our experience developing NeoTalk helped elucidate some of the ways in which conversations about seriously ill infants may be different from conversations about seriously ill adults.

Acceptability and usability of the Planning Advance Care Together (PACT) website for improving patients' engagement in advance care planning.

Objectives: Most prior advance care planning (ACP) interventions lack integration of the social context of patients' ACP process, which patients indicate is critically important. The current study developed the Planning Advance Care Together (PACT) website to foster inclusion of loved ones in the ACP process. Methods: To provide feedback about the PACT website, patients with advanced cancer (N = 11), their caregivers (N = 11), and experts (N = 10) participated in semi-structured interviews. Patients and caregivers also completed standardized ratings of acceptability and usability. Results: Overall, patient (n = 11) and caregiver (n = 11) ratings of acceptability and usability of the website exceeded benchmark cut-offs (≥24 on the Acceptability E-Scale and ≥ 68 on the System Usability Scale). Patients, caregivers, and experts liked the topic of ACP but felt that it could be emotionally challenging. They recommended focusing more on planning and less on end of life. They appreciated being able to include loved ones and recommended adding resources for caregivers. Conclusions: Study findings support the preliminary usability and acceptability of the PACT website. Findings will be used to inform a modified prototype of the PACT website that is interactive and ready for field testing with patients with advanced cancer and their loved ones. Innovation: We utilized a novel application of the shared mind framework to support patients with advanced cancer in engaging their loved ones in the ACP process.

Benefits of an Early Mobility Program for Hospitalized Patients With Cancer.

PURPOSE: Patients with cancer are often hospitalized with complications from cancer and cancer treatment. Many experience a decline in physical functioning, including loss of mobility, which likely contributes to increased length of stay (LOS) and increased readmissions. We aimed to determine whether a mobility program would improve quality of care and decrease health care utilization. METHODS: We implemented a mobility aide program on an oncology unit in a large academic medical center for all patients without bedrest orders between October 1, 2018, and February 28, 2021. The program consisted of nursing evaluation using the Activity Measure for Post-Acute Care (AMPAC), an ordinal scale ranging from bed rest to ambulating ≥ 250 feet, to quantify mobility. Plan of care was determined in a multidisciplinary manner with physical therapy (PT), nursing, and a mobility aide, who is a medical assistant with enhanced rehabilitation training. Patients were then mobilized two times per day 7 days a week. Using descriptive statistics and mixed effects logistic regression, we evaluated the programs impact on LOS, readmissions, and changes in mobility during this time period compared with the 6-month interval before implementation. RESULTS: A total of 1,496 hospitalized patients were identified. The odds of hospital readmission within 30 days of discharge was significantly less for those who received the intervention (OR, 0.53; 95% CI, 0.37 to 0.78; P = .001). The odds ratio (OR) of having a final AMPAC score at or above the median was significantly higher for those who received the intervention (OR, 1.60; 95% CI, 1.04 to 2.45; P < .05). There was no significant difference in LOS. CONCLUSION: Use of this mobility program resulted in a significant decrease in readmissions and maintained or improved patients' mobility. This demonstrates that non-PT professionals can effectively mobilize hospitalized patients with cancer, thereby decreasing the burden on PT and nursing resources. Future work will evaluate the sustainability of the program and evaluate association with health care costs.

Associations of Early Completion of Advance Directives With Key End-of-Life Quality Measures: Analysis of an ASCO Quality Oncology Practice Initiative Patient Cohort.

PURPOSE: Despite the growing calls for early and ubiquitous completion of advance directives (ADs), studies exploring links between AD completion and their impact on outcomes of patients with cancer have mixed conclusions. We used the ASCO Quality Oncology Practice Initiative (QOPI) registry to compare end-of-life (EOL) quality measures and the effect of QOPI certification among patients with and without early AD completion, defined as completion within the first three oncology visits after cancer diagnosis. METHODS: Deidentified patient-level data were analyzed from the QOPI database from 2015 through 2017. Associations were assessed using Chi-square tests between early AD completion and patient enrollment in hospice < 7 days before death, chemotherapy receipt in the last 14 days of life, or with emergency room visits or intensive care unit admissions in the last 30 days of life. RESULTS: Data from 31,558 patients eligible for the AD question were analyzed. Patients treated at QOPI-certified practices had higher rates of early AD completion than patients at non-certified practices. Early AD completion was not associated with differences in hospice enrollment for < 7 days before death, chemotherapy receipt in the last 14 days of life, or emergency room visits or intensive care unit encounters in the last 30 days of life. CONCLUSION: The study found that QOPI certification is associated with higher rates of early AD completion. However, early AD completion was not associated with recognized EOL quality measures. Future research should focus on the timing, frequency, and content of AD conversations to demonstrate the impact on care at the EOL.

Virtual Geritalk: Does Intensive Virtual Communication Skills Training Improve Use of Serious Illness Communication Skills?

Background: The COVID-19 pandemic presented a unique opportunity to adapt in-person communication skills training to a virtual format. Objective: Examine use of serious illness communication skills by learners after participating in an intensive virtual communication skills training. Design: Prospective cohort study. Setting/Subjects: Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai, Clinical Fellows. Measurements: Family Meeting Communication Assessment Tool (FAMCAT) assessed fundamental and advanced communication skills. Results: As compared to a historical benchmark obtained after a prior in-person course, the virtual course showed equivalent or better use of communication skills across fundamental skills and advanced skills. Conclusions: Our findings suggest that a virtual communication skills training is associated with the use of serious illness communication skills in the clinical setting by learners.

Standard Naloxone Prescribing for Palliative Care Cancer Patients on Opioid Therapy: A Single-Site Quality Improvement Pilot to Assess Attitudes and Access.

BACKGROUND: Limited data exist on when to offer naloxone to cancer patients on opioid therapy. MEASURES: We assessed patient and clinician attitudes on naloxone education (done via surveys at initial and follow up visits) and prescribing rates (via chart reviews) at a single ambulatory palliative care practice. Pharmacy records assessed naloxone dispense rates. INTERVENTION: During a three-month period, all new patients receiving opioid therapy were offered naloxone. Standardized educational materials on opioid safety and naloxone use were created and shared by clinical team. OUTCOMES: Naloxone prescribing rates increased from 5% to 66%. 92% (n = 23) of clinicians reported education/prescribing took ≤ five minutes, and 100% reported either a positive or neutral impact on the encounter. A total of 81% (n = 25) of patients reported no increased worry about opioid use, 68% (n = 21) felt safer with naloxone, and 97% rated the encounter as neutral or positive. 88% (n = 37) of prescriptions were dispensed and 67% of patients (n = 16) paid <$10. CONCLUSIONS/LESSONS LEARNED: Opioid safety education and naloxone prescribing can be done quickly and is well-received by clinicians and patients.

The benefits and harms of adjuvant chemotherapy for non-small cell lung cancer in patients with major comorbidities: A simulation study.

BACKGROUND: Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) have demonstrated a survival benefit for adjuvant platinum-based chemotherapy after resection of locoregional non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). The relative benefits and harms and optimal approach to treatment for NSCLC patients who have major comorbidities (chronic obstructive pulmonary disease [COPD], coronary artery disease [CAD], and congestive heart failure [CHF]) are unclear, however. METHODS: We used a simulation model to run in-silico comparative trials of adjuvant chemotherapy versus observation in locoregional NSCLC in patients with comorbidities. The model estimated quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) gained by each treatment strategy stratified by age, comorbidity, and stage. The model was parameterized using outcomes and quality-of-life data from RCTs and primary analyses from large cancer databases. RESULTS: Adjuvant chemotherapy was associated with clinically significant QALY gains for all patient age/stage combinations with COPD except for patients >80 years old with Stage IB and IIA cancers. For patients with CHF and Stage IB and IIA disease, adjuvant chemotherapy was not advantageous; in contrast, it was associated with QALY gains for more advanced stages for younger patients with CHF. For stages IIB and IIIA NSCLC, most patient groups benefited from adjuvant chemotherapy. However, In general, patients with multiple comorbidities benefited less from adjuvant chemotherapy than those with single comorbidities and women with comorbidities in older age categories benefited more from adjuvant chemotherapy than their male counterparts. CONCLUSIONS: Older, multimorbid patients may derive QALY gains from adjuvant chemotherapy after NSCLC surgery. These results help extend existing clinical trial data to specific unstudied, high-risk populations and may reduce the uncertainty regarding adjuvant chemotherapy use in these patients.

Adverse Events Following Limited Resection versus Stereotactic Body Radiation Therapy for Early Stage Lung Cancer.

Rationale: Approximately a quarter of patients with early stage lung cancer are not medically fit for lobectomy. Limited resection and stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) have emerged as alternatives for these patients. Given the equipoise on the effectiveness of the two treatments, treatment-related adverse events (AEs) could have a significant impact on patients' decision-making and treatment outcomes. Objectives: To compare the AE profile between SBRT versus limited resection. Methods: Data were derived from a prospective cohort of patients with stage I-IIA non-small cell lung cancer who were deemed as high-risk for lobectomy recruited from five centers across the United States. Propensity scores and inverse probability weighting were used to compare the rates of 30- and 90-day AEs among patients treated with limited resection versus SBRT. Results: Overall, 65% of 252 patients underwent SBRT. After adjusting for propensity scores, there was no significant difference in developing at least one AE comparing SBRT to limited resection (odds ratio [OR]: 1.00; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.65-1.55 and OR: 1.27; 95% CI: 0.84-1.91 at 30 and 90 days, respectively). SBRT was associated with lower risk of infectious AEs than limited resection at 30 days (OR: 0.05; 95% CI: 0.01-0.39) and 90 days posttreatment (OR: 0.41; 95% CI: 0.17-0.98). Additionally, SBRT was associated with persistently elevated risk of fatigue (OR: 2.47; 95% CI: 1.34-4.54 at 30 days and OR: 2.69; 95% CI: 1.52-4.77 at 90 days, respectively), but significantly lower risks of respiratory AEs (OR: 0.36; 95% CI: 0.20-0.65 and OR: 0.51; 95% CI: 0.31-0.86 at 30 and 90 days, respectively). Conclusions: Though equivalent in developing at least one AE, we found that SBRT is associated with less toxicity than limited resection in terms of infectious and respiratory AEs but higher rates of fatigue that persisted up to 3 months posttreatment. This information, combined with data about oncologic effectiveness, can help patients' decision-making regarding these alternative therapies.