Quality of life among cancer inpatients 80 years and older: a systematic review.

OBJECTIVE: The aim of this systematic review was to summarize and assess the literature on quality of life (QoL) among cancer patients 80 years and older admitted to hospitals and what QoL instruments have been used. METHODS: We searched systematically in Medline, Embase and Cinahl. Eligibility criteria included studies with any design measuring QoL among cancer patients 80 years and older hospitalized for treatment (surgery, chemotherapy or radiation therapy). EXCLUSION CRITERIA: studies not available in English, French, German or Spanish. We screened the titles and abstracts according to a predefined set of inclusion criteria. All the included studies were assessed according to the Critical Appraisal Skills Programme checklists, and the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses Statement checklist was used to ensure rigor in conducting and reporting. This systematic review was registered in PROSPERO (CRD42017058290). RESULTS: We included 17 studies with 2005 participants with various cancer diagnoses and Classification of Malignant Tumors stages (TNM). The included studies used a range of different QoL instruments and had different aims and outcomes. Both cancer-specific and generic instruments were used. Only one of the 17 studies used an age-specific instrument. All the studies included patients 80 years and older in their cohort, but none specifically analyzed QoL outcomes in this particular subgroup. Based on findings in the age-heterogeneous population (age range 20-100 years), QoL seems to be correlated with the type of diagnosed carcinoma, length of stay, depression and severe symptom burden. CONCLUSION: We were unable to find any research directly exploring QoL and its determinants among cancer patients 80 years and older since none of the included studies presented specific analysis of data in this particular age subgroup. This finding represents a major gap in the knowledge base in this patient group. Based on this finding, we strongly recommend future studies that include this increasingly important and challenging patient group to use valid age- and diagnosis-specific QoL instruments.

Baseline frailty status and outcomes important for shared decision-making in older adults receiving transcatheter aortic valve implantation, a prospective observational study.

AIMS: The objective of this study was to examine baseline frailty status (including cognitive deficits) and important clinical outcomes, to inform shared decision-making in older adults receiving transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI). METHODS AND RESULTS: We conducted a prospective, observational study of 82 TAVI patients, recruited 2013 to 2015, with 2-year follow-up. Mean age was 83 years (standard deviation (SD) 4.7). Eighteen percent of the patients were frail, as assessed with an 8-item frailty scale. Fifteen patients (18%) had a Mini-Mental Status Examination (MMSE) score below 24 points at baseline, indicating cognitive impairment or dementia and five patients had an MMSE below 20 points. Mean New York Heart Association (NYHA) class at baseline and 6 months was 2.5 (SD 0.6) and 1.4 (SD 0.6), (p < 0.001). There was no change in mean Nottingham Extended Activities of Daily Living (NEADL) scale between baseline and 6 months, 54.2 (SD 11.5) and 54.5 (SD 10.3) points, respectively, mean difference 0.3 (p = 0.7). At 2 years, six patients (7%) had died, four (5%, n = 79) lived in a nursing home, four (5%) suffered from disabling stroke, and six (7%) contracted infective endocarditis. CONCLUSIONS: TAVI patients had improvement in symptoms and maintenance of activity of daily living at 6 months. They had low mortality and most patients lived in their own home 2 years after TAVI. Complications like death, stroke, and endocarditis occurred. Some patients had cognitive impairment before the procedure which might influence decision-making. Our findings may be used to develop pre-TAVI decision aids.

A novel geriatric assessment frailty score predicts 2-year mortality after transcatheter aortic valve implantation.

AIMS: Established surgical scores have limitations in delineating risk among candidates for transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI). Assessment of frailty might help to estimate the mortality risk and identify patients likely to benefit from treatment. The aim of the study was to develop a frailty score to guide the decision for TAVI. METHODS AND RESULTS: We conducted a prospective observational study in patients ≥70 years referred for TAVI during 2011-15. A Heart Team had declined the patients for open heart surgery due to high risk but accepted them for TAVI. Prior to the procedure, a geriatric assessment (GA) was performed. Based on this, an 8-element frailty score with a 0-9 (least frail-most frail) scale was developed. A total of 142 patients, 54% women, mean age 83 (standard deviation 4) years, with severe and symptomatic aortic stenosis were assessed. All-cause 2 year mortality was 11%. The novel GA frailty score predicted 2-year mortality in Cox analyses, also when adjusted for age, gender, and logistic EuroSCORE [hazard ratio (HR) 1.75, 95% confidence interval (CI): 1.28-2.42, P < 0.001]. A receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve analysis indicated that a GA frailty score cut-off at ≥4 predicted 2-year mortality with a specificity of 80% (95% CI: 73-86%) and a sensitivity of 60% (95% CI: 36-80%). The area under the curve was 0.81 (95% CI 0.71-0.90). CONCLUSION: A novel 8-element GA frailty score identified gradations in survival in patients declined for open heart surgery. Patients with higher GA frailty scores had significantly higher 2-year mortality after TAVI.