Decreasing polypharmacy in older adults with cancer: A pilot cluster-randomized trial protocol.

INTRODUCTION: Polypharmacy is prevalent in older adults with cancer and associated with multiple adverse outcomes. A single-site, cluster-randomized clinical trial will enroll older adults with cancer and polypharmacy starting chemotherapy and will assess the effectiveness and feasibility of deprescribing interventions by comparing two arms: a pharmacist-led deprescribing intervention and a patient educational brochure. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The study will be conducted in two phases. In phase I, focus groups and semi-structured individual interviews will guide adaptation of deprescribing interventions for the oncology clinic (phase Ia), and eight patients will undergo the pharmacist-led deprescribing intervention with iterative adaptations (phase Ib). In phase II, a pilot cluster-randomized trial (n = 72) will compare a pharmacist-led deprescribing intervention with a patient education brochure, with treating oncologists as the cluster. Both efficacy (relative dose intensity of planned chemotherapy, potentially inappropriate medications successfully deprescribed, chemotherapy toxicity, functional status, hospitalizations, falls, and symptoms) and implementation outcomes (barriers and facilitators) will be assessed. DISCUSSION: This study is anticipated to provide pilot data to inform a nationwide randomized clinical trial of deprescribing in older adults starting cancer treatment. The cluster randomization is intended to provide an initial estimate for the intervention effect as well as oncologists' intra-class correlation coefficient. Deprescribing interventions may improve outcomes in older adults starting cancer treatment, but these interventions are understudied in this population, and it is unknown how best to implement them into oncology practice. The results of this trial will inform the design of large, randomized phase III trials of deprescribing. CLINICALTRIALS: gov Identifier:NCT05046171. Date of registration: September 16, 2021.

New Onset Geriatric Syndromes and One-year Outcomes Following Elective Gastrointestinal Cancer Surgery.

OBJECTIVE: To assess whether older adults who develop geriatric syndromes following elective gastrointestinal surgery have poorer 1-year outcomes. BACKGROUND: Within 10 years, 70% of all cancers will occur in older adults ≥65 years old. The rise in older adults requiring major surgery has brought attention to age-related complications termed geriatric syndromes. However, whether postoperative geriatric syndromes are associated with long-term outcomes is unclear. METHODS: A population-based retrospective cohort study using the New York State Cancer Registry and the Statewide Planning and Research Cooperative System was performed including patients >55 years with pathologic stage I-III esophageal, gastric, pancreatic, colon, or rectal cancer who underwent elective resection between 2004 and 2018. Those aged 55 to 64 served as the reference group. The exposure of interest was a geriatric syndrome [fracture, fall, delirium, pressure ulcer, depression, malnutrition, failure to thrive, dehydration, or incontinence (urinary/fecal)] during the surgical admission. Patients with any geriatric syndrome within 1 year of surgery were excluded. Outcomes included incident geriatric syndrome, 1-year days alive and out of the hospital, and 1-year all-cause mortality. RESULTS: In this study, 37,998 patients with a median age of 71 years without a prior geriatric syndrome were included. Of those 65 years or more, 6.4% developed a geriatric syndrome. Factors associated with an incident geriatric syndrome were age, alcohol/tobacco use, comorbidities, neoadjuvant therapy, ostomies, open surgery, and upper gastrointestinal cancers. An incident geriatric syndrome was associated with a 43% higher risk of 1-year mortality (hazard ratio, 1.43; 95% confidence interval, 1.27-1.60). For those aged 65+ discharged alive and not to hospice, a geriatric syndrome was associated with significantly fewer days alive and out of hospital (322 vs 346 days, P < 0.0001). There was an indirect relationship between the number of geriatric syndromes and 1-year mortality and days alive and out of the hospital after adjusting for surgical complications. CONCLUSIONS: Given the increase in older adults requiring major surgical intervention, and the establishment of geriatric surgery accreditation programs, these data suggest that morbidity and mortality metrics should be adjusted to accommodate the independent relationship between geriatric syndromes and long-term outcomes.

Emotional barriers and facilitators of deprescribing for older adults with cancer and polypharmacy: a qualitative study.

PURPOSE: To describe emotional barriers and facilitators to deprescribing (the planned reduction or discontinuation of medications) in older adults with cancer and polypharmacy. METHODS: Virtual focus groups were conducted over Zoom with 5 key informant groups: oncologists, oncology nurses, primary care physicians, pharmacists, and patients. All groups were video- and audio-recorded and transcribed verbatim. Focus group transcripts were analyzed using inductive content analysis, and open coding was performed by two coders. A codebook was generated based on the initial round of open coding and updated throughout the analytic process. Codes and themes were discussed for each transcript until consensus was reached. Emotion coding (identifying text segments expressing emotion, naming the emotion, and assigning a label of positive or negative) was performed by both coders to validate the open coding findings. RESULTS: All groups agreed that polypharmacy is a significant problem. For clinicians, emotional barriers to deprescribing include fear of moral judgment from patients and colleagues, frustration toward patients, and feelings of incompetence. Oncologists and patients expressed ambivalence about deprescribing due to role expectations that physicians "heal with med[ication]s." Emotional facilitators of deprescribing included the involvement of pharmacists, who were perceived to be neutral, discerning experts. Pharmacists described emotionally aware communication strategies when discussing deprescribing with other clinicians and expressed increased awareness of patient context. CONCLUSION: Deprescribing can elicit strong and predominantly negative emotions among clinicians and patients which could inhibit deprescribing interventions. The involvement of pharmacists in deprescribing interventions could mitigate these emotional barriers. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT05046171 . Date of registration: September 16, 2021.

Modifiable fall risk factors among older adults with advanced cancer: Secondary analysis of a cluster-randomized clinical trial.

INTRODUCTION: Older adults with cancer have unique fall risk factors related to their disease and treatment such as polypharmacy and neurotoxic treatments. In this secondary analysis, we identified modifiable risk factors associated with future falls among older adults with advanced cancers. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Data were from the COACH study (ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT02107443; PI: Mohile). Patients were age ≥ 70, had stage III/IV solid tumor or lymphoma, ≥1 geriatric assessment impairment, and were receiving palliative intent treatment. Falls were self-reported at baseline (in the past six months), four to six weeks, three months, and six months. We generated inverse probability weights to account for mortality-related loss to follow-up and applied these in generalized linear mixed models to estimate incidence rate ratios. RESULTS: Of 541 patients (mean age: 77, standard deviation [SD]: 5.27), 140 (26%) reported prior falls at baseline, and 467 (86%) had falls data for ≥1 follow-up timepoint. Of those, 103 (22%) reported at least one fall during the follow-up period, and 112 (24%) had incomplete follow-up due to death. In fully adjusted models, prior falls and impaired Timed Up and Go score were associated with higher incidence of falls over 6 months. DISCUSSION: We identified several potentially modifiable fall risk factors in older adults with advanced cancers. Future studies should consider ways to integrate fall risk assessment into ongoing cancer care and intervene to reduce falls in this population.

Supervised learning applied to classifying fallers versus non-fallers among older adults with cancer.

INTRODUCTION: Supervised machine learning approaches are increasingly used to analyze clinical data, including in geriatric oncology. This study presents a machine learning approach to understand falls in a cohort of older adults with advanced cancer starting chemotherapy, including fall prediction and identification of contributing factors. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This secondary analysis of prospectively collected data from the GAP 70+ Trial (NCT02054741; PI: Mohile) enrolled patients aged ≥70 with advanced cancer and ≥ 1 geriatric assessment domain impairment who planned to start a new cancer treatment regimen. Of ≥2000 baseline variables ("features") collected, 73 were selected based on clinical judgment. Machine learning models to predict falls at three months were developed, optimized, and tested using data from 522 patients. A custom data preprocessing pipeline was implemented to prepare data for analysis. Both undersampling and oversampling techniques were applied to balance the outcome measure. Ensemble feature selection was applied to identify and select the most relevant features. Four models (logistic regression [LR], k-nearest neighbor [kNN], random forest [RF], and MultiLayer Perceptron [MLP]) were trained and subsequently tested on a holdout set. Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves were generated and area under the curve (AUC) was calculated for each model. SHapley Additive exPlanations (SHAP) values were utilized to further understand individual feature contributions to observed predictions. RESULTS: Based on the ensemble feature selection algorithm, the top eight features were selected for inclusion in the final models. Selected features aligned with clinical intuition and prior literature. The LR, kNN, and RF models performed equivalently well in predicting falls in the test set, with AUC values 0.66-0.67, and the MLP model showed AUC 0.75. Ensemble feature selection resulted in improved AUC values compared to using LASSO alone. SHAP values, a model-agnostic technique, revealed logical associations between selected features and model predictions. DISCUSSION: Machine learning techniques can augment hypothesis-driven research, including in older adults for whom randomized trial data are limited. Interpretable machine learning is particularly important, as understanding which features impact predictions is a critical aspect of decision-making and intervention. Clinicians should understand the philosophy, strengths, and limitations of a machine learning approach applied to patient data.

An Unsupervised Machine Learning Approach to Evaluating the Association of Symptom Clusters With Adverse Outcomes Among Older Adults With Advanced Cancer: A Secondary Analysis of a Randomized Clinical Trial.

Importance: Older adults with advanced cancer who have high pretreatment symptom severity often experience adverse events during cancer treatments. Unsupervised machine learning may help stratify patients into different risk groups. Objective: To evaluate whether clusters identified from baseline patient-reported symptom severity were associated with adverse outcomes. Design, Setting, and Participants: This secondary analysis of the Geriatric Assessment Intervention for Reducing Toxicity in Older Patients With Advanced Cancer (GAP70+) Trial (2014-2019) included patients who completed the National Cancer Institute Patient-Reported Outcomes version of the Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (PRO-CTCAE) before starting a new cancer treatment regimen and received care at community oncology sites across the United States. An unsupervised machine learning algorithm (k-means with Euclidean distance) clustered patients based on similarities of baseline symptom severities. Clustering variables included severity items of 24 PRO-CTCAE symptoms (range, 0-4; corresponding to none, mild, moderate, severe, and very severe). Total severity score was calculated as the sum of 24 items (range, 0-96). Whether the clusters were associated with unplanned hospitalization, death, and toxic effects was then examined. Analyses were conducted in January and February 2022. Exposures: Symptom severity. Main Outcomes and Measures: Unplanned hospitalization over 3 months (primary), all-cause mortality over 1 year, and any clinician-rated grade 3 to 5 toxic effect over 3 months. Results: Of 718 enrolled patients, 706 completed baseline PRO-CTCAE and were included (mean [SD] age, 77.2 [5.5] years, 401 [56.8%] male patients; 51 [7.2%] Black and 619 [87.8%] non-Hispanic White patients; 245 [34.7%] with gastrointestinal cancer; 175 [24.8%] with lung cancer; mean [SD] impaired Geriatric Assessment domains, 4.5 [1.6]). The algorithm classified 310 (43.9%), 295 (41.8%), and 101 (14.3%) into low-, medium-, and high-severity clusters (within-cluster mean [SD] severity scores: low, 6.3 [3.4]; moderate, 16.6 [4.3]; high, 29.8 [7.8]; P < .001). Controlling for sociodemographic variables, clinical factors, study group, and practice site, compared with patients in the low-severity cluster, those in the moderate-severity cluster were more likely to experience hospitalization (risk ratio, 1.36; 95% CI, 1.01-1.84; P = .046). Moderate- and high-severity clusters were associated with a higher risk of death (moderate: hazard ratio, 1.31; 95% CI, 1.01-1.69; P = .04; high: hazard ratio, 2.00; 95% CI, 1.43-2.78; P < .001), but not toxic effects. Conclusions and Relevance: In this study, unsupervised machine learning partitioned patients into distinct symptom severity clusters; patients with higher pretreatment severity were more likely to experience hospitalization and death. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02054741.

Association of polypharmacy and potential drug-drug interactions with adverse treatment outcomes in older adults with advanced cancer.

BACKGROUND: Polypharmacy is common in older adults who are starting cancer treatment and is associated with an increased risk of potentially inappropriate medications (PIMs) and potential drug-drug interactions (PDIs). The authors evaluated the association of medication measures with adverse outcomes in older adults with advanced cancer who were receiving systemic therapy. METHODS: This secondary analysis from GAP 70+ Trial (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier NCT02054741; principal investigator, Supriya G. Mohile) enrolled patients aged 70 years and older with advanced cancer who planned to start a new treatment regimen (n = 718). Polypharmacy was assessed before the initiation of treatment and was defined as the concurrent use of eight or more medications. PIMs were categorized using 2019 Beers Criteria and the Screening Tool of Older Persons' Prescriptions. PDIs were evaluated using Lexi-Interact Online. Study outcomes were assessed within 3 months of treatment and included: (1) the number of grade ≥2 and ≥3 toxicities according to the National Cancer Institute Common Toxicity Criteria, (2) treatment-related unplanned hospitalization, and (3) early treatment discontinuation. Multivariable regression models examined the association of medication measures with outcomes. RESULTS: The mean patient age was 77 years, and 57% had lung or gastrointestinal cancers. The median number of medications was five (range, 0-24 medications), 28% of patients received eight or more medications, 67% received one or more PIM, and 25% had one or more major PDI. The mean number of grade ≥2 toxicities in patients with polypharmacy was 9.8 versus 7.7 in those without polypharmacy (adjusted ß = 1.87; standard error, 0.71; p <.01). The mean number of grade ≥3 toxicities in patients with polypharmacy was 2.9 versus 2.2 in patients without polypharmacy (adjusted ß = 0.59; standard error, 0.29; p = .04). Patients with who had one or more major PDI had 59% higher odds of early treatment discontinuation (odds ratio, 1.59; 95% confidence interval, 1.03-2.46; p = .03). CONCLUSIONS: In a cohort of older adults with advanced cancer, polypharmacy and PDIs were associated with an increased risk of adverse treatment outcomes. Providing meaningful screening and interventional tools to optimize medication use may improve treatment-related outcomes in these patients.

How "age-friendly" are deprescribing interventions? A scoping review of deprescribing trials.

OBJECTIVE: To assess how age-friendly deprescribing trials are regarding intervention design and outcome assessment. Reduced use of potentially inappropriate medications (PIMs) can be addressed by deprescribing-a systematic process of discontinuing and/or reducing the use of PIMs. The 4Ms-"Medication", "Mentation", "Mobility", and "What Matters Most" to the person-can be used to guide assessment of age-friendliness of deprescribing trials. DATA SOURCE: Published literature. STUDY DESIGN: Scoping review. DATA EXTRACTION METHODS: The literature was identified using keywords related to deprescribing and polypharmacy in PubMed, EMBASE, Web of Science, ProQuest, CINAHL, and Cochrane and snowballing. Study characteristics were extracted and evaluated for consideration of 4Ms. PRINCIPAL FINDINGS: Thirty-seven of the 564 trials identified met the review eligibility criteria. Intervention design: "Medication" was considered in the intervention design of all trials; "Mentation" was considered in eight trials; "Mobility" (n = 2) and "What Matters Most" (n = 6) were less often considered in the design of intervention. Most trials targeted providers without specifying how matters important to older adults and their families were aligned with deprescribing decisions. OUTCOME ASSESSMENT: "Medication" was the most commonly assessed outcome (n = 33), followed by "Mobility" (n = 13) and "Mentation" (n = 10) outcomes, with no study examining "What Matters Most" outcomes. CONCLUSIONS: "Mentation" and "Mobility", and "What Matters Most" have been considered to varying degrees in deprescribing trials, limiting the potential of deprescribing evidence to contribute to improved clinical practice in building an age-friendly health care system.

Effects of a Geriatric Assessment Intervention on Patient-Reported Symptomatic Toxicity in Older Adults With Advanced Cancer.

PURPOSE: Providing a geriatric assessment (GA) summary with management recommendations to oncologists reduces clinician-rated toxicity in older patients with advanced cancer receiving treatment. This secondary analysis of a national cluster randomized clinical trial (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT02054741) aims to assess the effects of a GA intervention on symptomatic toxicity measured by Patient-Reported Outcomes Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (PRO-CTCAE). METHODS: From 2014 to 2019, the study enrolled patients age ≥ 70 years, with advanced solid tumors or lymphoma and ≥ 1 GA domain impairment, who were initiating a regimen with high prevalence of toxicity. Patients completed PRO-CTCAEs, including the severity of 24 symptoms (11 classified as core symptoms) at enrollment, 4-6 weeks, 3 months, and 6 months. Symptoms were scored as grade ≥ 2 (at least moderate) and grade ≥ 3 (severe/very severe). Symptomatic toxicity was determined by an increase in severity during treatment. A generalized estimating equation model was used to assess the effects of the GA intervention on symptomatic toxicity. RESULTS: Mean age was 77 years (range, 70-96 years), 43% were female, and 88% were White, 59% had GI or lung cancers, and 27% received prior chemotherapy. In 706 patients who provided PRO-CTCAEs at baseline, 86.1% reported at least one moderate symptom and 49.7% reported severe/very severe symptoms at regimen initiation. In 623 patients with follow-up PRO-CTCAE data, compared with usual care, fewer patients in the GA intervention arm reported grade ≥ 2 symptomatic toxicity (overall: 88.9% v 94.8%, P = .035; core symptoms: 83.4% v 91.7%, P = .001). The results for grade ≥ 3 toxicity were comparable but not significant (P > .05). CONCLUSION: In the presence of a high baseline symptom burden, a GA intervention for older patients with advanced cancer reduces patient-reported symptomatic toxicity.

Implementation considerations of deprescribing interventions: A scoping review.

Over half of older adults experience polypharmacy, including medications that may be inappropriate or unnecessary. Deprescribing, which is the process of discontinuing or reducing inappropriate and/or unnecessary medications, is an effective way to reduce polypharmacy. This review summarizes (1) the process of deprescribing and conceptual models and tools that have been developed to facilitate deprescribing, (2) barriers, enablers, and factors associated with deprescribing, and (3) characteristics of deprescribing interventions in completed trials, as well as (4) implementation considerations for deprescribing in routine practice. In conceptual models of deprescribing, multilevel factors of the patient, clinician, and health-care system are all related to the efficacy of deprescribing. Numerous tools have been developed for clinicians to facilitate deprescribing, yet most require substantial time and, thus, may be difficult to implement during routine health-care encounters. Multiple deprescribing interventions have been evaluated, which mostly include one or more of the following components: patient education, medication review, identification of deprescribing targets, and patient and/or provider communication about high-risk medications. Yet, there has been limited consideration of implementation factors in prior deprescribing interventions, especially with regard to the personnel and resources in existing health-care systems and the feasibility of incorporating components of deprescribing interventions into the routine care processes of clinicians. Future trials require a more balanced consideration of both effectiveness and implementation when designing deprescribing interventions.

Communication About Fall Risk in Community Oncology Practice: The Role of Geriatric Assessment.

PURPOSE: Falls are a modifiable source of morbidity for older adults with cancer, yet are underassessed in oncology practice. In this secondary analysis of a nationwide cluster-randomized controlled trial, we examined characteristics associated with patient-oncologist conversations about falls, and whether oncologist knowledge of geriatric assessment (GA) resulted in more conversations. METHODS: Eligible patients (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT02107443) were age ≥ 70 years, had stage III/IV solid tumor or lymphoma, were being treated with noncurative treatment intent, and ≥ 1 GA domain impairment. Patients in both arms underwent GA. At practices randomly assigned to the intervention arm, oncologists were provided a GA summary with management recommendations. In both arms, patients had one clinical encounter audio-recorded, transcribed, and coded to categorize whether a conversation about falls occurred. Generalized linear mixed models adjusted for arm, practice site, and other important covariates were used to generate proportions and odds ratios (ORs) from the full sample. RESULTS: Of 541 patients (intervention N = 293 and usual care N = 248, mean age: 77 years, standard deviation: 5.3), 528 had evaluable audio recordings. More patients had conversations about falls in the intervention versus usual care arm (61.3% v 10.3%, P < .001). Controlling for the intervention and practice site, history of falls (OR, 2.1; 95% CI, 1.3 to 3.6; P = .005) and impaired physical performance (OR, 4.7; 95% CI, 1.7 to 12.8; P = .002) were significantly associated with patient-oncologist conversations about falls. CONCLUSION: GA intervention increased conversations about falls. History of falls and impaired physical performance were associated with patient-oncologist conversations about falls in community oncology practice.

An assessment of left-digit bias in the treatment of older patients with potentially curable rectal cancer.

BACKGROUND: Patient age is associated with poorer rectal cancer treatment compliance. However, it is unknown whether left-digit bias (disproportionate influence of leftmost age digit) influences this association. METHODS: The patients diagnosed with stage I-III rectal cancer between 2006 to 2017 in the National Cancer Database were identified. The association between age and receipt of guideline-adherent care was assessed using mixed-effects multivariable analyses. RESULTS: Among 97,960 patients, 46.2% received guideline-adherent overall treatment and 73.3% underwent guideline-adherent surgical resection. Of those who underwent guideline-adherent surgery, 86.4% received guideline-adherent radiotherapy and 56.6% received guideline-adherent chemotherapy. After risk-adjustment, each decade increase in age was associated with 36% decreased odds of guideline-adherent therapy (odds ratio = 0.64, 95% confidence interval = 0.63-0.65). Patients aged 58 to 59 (odds ratio = 1.15, 95% confidence interval = 1.02-1.27) and 78 to 79 (odds ratio = 1.28, 95% confidence interval = 1.08-1.51) had higher odds of guideline-adherent overall treatment compared with patients aged 60 and 80, respectively. However, there were no significant differences in the receipt of guideline-adherent treatment between patients aged 60 vs 61-62 and 80 vs 81-82. CONCLUSION: Older patients with rectal cancer are less likely to receive guideline-adherent care, and a left-digit bias is present. Geriatric assessment-guided treatment decisions could help mitigate this bias.

Medications Associated With Geriatric Syndromes (MAGS) and Hospitalization Risk in Home Health Care Patients.

OBJECTIVES: Polypharmacy is common in home health care (HHC). This study examined the prevalence of medications associated with geriatric syndromes (MAGS), its predictors, and association with subsequent hospitalization in HHC. DESIGN: Analysis of HHC electronic medical records, the Outcome and Assessment Information Set (OASIS), and Medicare HHC claims. SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS: A total of 6882 adults ≥65 years old receiving HHC in 2019 from a large, not-for-profit home health agency serving multiple counties in New York State. MEASURES: MAGS use was identified from active medications reconciled during HHC visits (HHC electronic medical records). MAGS use was operationalized as count and in quartiles. Hospitalization during the HHC episode was operationalized as a time-to-event variable (ie, number of days from HHC admission to hospitalization). We used regression analyses to identify predictors of MAGS use, and survival analyses to examine the association between MAGS and hospitalization. RESULTS: Nearly all (98%) of the HHC patients used at least 1 MAGS and 41% of all active medications used by the sample were MAGS. More MAGS use was found in HHC patients who were community-referred, taking more medications, and having more diagnoses, depressive symptoms, and functional limitations. Adjusted for covariates, higher MAGS quartiles were not independently associated with the risk of hospitalization, but higher MAGS quartiles combined with multimorbidity (ie, having ≥10 diagnoses) were associated with a 2.3-fold increase in hospitalization risk (hazard ratio 2.24; 95% confidence interval: 1.61-3.13; P < .001), relative to the lowest quartile of MAGS use and having <10 diagnoses. CONCLUSIONS AND IMPLICATIONS: More than 40% of medications taken by HHC patients are MAGS. Multimorbidity and MAGS use collectively increased the risk of hospitalization by up to 2.3 times. HHC clinicians should carefully review patients' medications and use information about MAGS to facilitate discussion about deprescribing with patients and their prescribers.

Polypharmacy, Potentially Inappropriate Medications, and Drug-Drug Interactions in Vulnerable Older Adults With Advanced Cancer Initiating Cancer Treatment.

PURPOSE: Polypharmacy is prevalent in older adults starting cancer treatment and associated with potentially inappropriate medications (PIM), potential drug-drug interactions (DDI), and drug-cancer treatment interactions (DCI). For a large cohort of vulnerable older adults with advanced cancer starting treatment, we describe patterns of prescription and nonprescription medication usage, the prevalence of PIM, and the prevalence, severity, and type of DDI/DCI. METHODS: This secondary analysis used baseline data from a randomized study enrolling patients aged ≥70 years with advanced cancer starting a new systemic cancer treatment (University of Rochester Cancer Center [URCC] 13059; PI: Mohile). PIM were categorized using 2019 Beers criteria and Screening Tool of Older Persons' Prescriptions. Potential DDI/DCI were evaluated using Lexi-Interact Online. Medication classification followed the World Health Organization Anatomical Therapeutic Chemical system. Bivariate associations were evaluated between sociodemographic and geriatric assessment (GA) measures and medication measures. Chord diagrams and network analysis were used to understand and describe DDI/DCI. RESULTS: Among 718 patients (mean age 77.6 years), polypharmacy (≥5 medications), excessive polypharmacy (≥10 medications), and ≥1 PIM were identified in 61.3%,14.5%, and 67.1%, respectively. Cardiovascular medications were the most prevalent (47%), and nonprescription medications accounted for 26% of total medications and 40% of PIM. One-quarter of patients had ≥1 potential major DDI not involving cancer treatment, and 5.4% had ≥1 potential major DCI. Each additional medication increased the odds of a potential major DDI and DCI by 39% and 12%, respectively. Polypharmacy and PIM are associated with multiple GA domains. CONCLUSION: In a cohort of vulnerable older adults with advanced cancer starting treatment, polypharmacy, PIM, and potential DDI/DCI are very common. Nonprescription medications are frequently PIMs and/or involved in potential DDI/DCI.

Association of Oncologist-Patient Communication With Functional Status and Physical Performance in Older Adults: A Secondary Analysis of a Cluster Randomized Clinical Trial.

Importance: The functional status and physical performance of older adults with cancer are underassessed and undertreated despite the high prevalence of impaired functional status and physical performance in this population and their associations with chemotherapy-induced toxic effects and mortality. Objective: To examine the association between providing oncologists with a geriatric assessment (GA) summary with recommendations and having oncologist-patient conversations about functional and physical performance. Design, Setting, and Participants: Data for this secondary analysis were collected from October 29, 2014, to April 28, 2017, for a national cluster randomized clinical trial conducted by the University of Rochester Cancer Center National Cancer Institute Community Oncology Research Program evaluating the effect of a GA intervention on patient satisfaction with communication about aging-related concerns. There were 17 practice clusters in the intervention group and 14 in the usual care group. All 541 participants underwent a GA including standardized functional and physical performance measures and had 1 clinical encounter audio-recorded, transcribed, and blindly coded to categorize conversations by GA domain. Participants were aged 70 years or older, with a stage III or IV solid tumor or lymphoma with palliative treatment intent, and impairment in 1 or more GA domain. Statistical analysis was performed from August 18, 2020, to January 10, 2022. Interventions: Oncologist practices randomized to the intervention received a GA summary and validated recommendations for each patient prior to the audio-recorded clinical encounter. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary analysis of this clinical trial assessed the effect of the intervention on patient satisfaction with oncologist communication about aging-related concerns. This secondary analysis assessed the post hoc hypothesis that the intervention would be associated with an increase in the proportion of patients having conversations with their oncologists and receiving oncologist recommendations specific to functional and physical performance concerns. Results: A total of 541 patients (276 men [51%]; mean [SD] age, 77.5 [5.2] years [range, 70-96 years]) were analyzed at baseline. Excluding 13 patients without audio recordings, 86% of patients (95% CI, 78%-91%) in the intervention group vs 59% of patients (95% CI, 47%-69%; P < .001) receiving usual care had conversations about functional or physical performance. Conversations were more frequently initiated by oncologists in the intervention group (84%; 95% CI, 77%-90%) than oncologists in the usual care group (58%; 95% CI, 45%-70%; P < .001). Oncologists in the intervention group were more likely to address patients' concerns (43%; 95% CI, 33%-53%) than oncologists in the usual care group (17%; 95% CI, 10%-26%; P < .001). Conclusions and Relevance: In this secondary analysis of a cluster randomized clinical trial, providing oncologists with a GA summary was associated with an increase in the number of oncologist-patient conversations about functional and physical performance-related concerns with recommendations to address these concerns. These findings support the use of the GA summary and recommendations as important tools in caring for older adults with advanced cancer and functional or physical impairments. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02107443.

Evaluating the association of frailty with communication about aging-related concerns between older patients with advanced cancer and their oncologists.

BACKGROUND: A geriatric assessment (GA) intervention improves communication about aging-related concerns, but its effect on communication in patients with various levels of frailty is unknown. METHODS: This was a secondary analysis of a nationwide trial of patients aged ≥70 years with incurable cancer and impairment on 1 or more GA domains (ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier NCT02107443; principal investigator Supriya G. Mohile). Practice sites were randomized to either the GA-intervention or usual care. Frailty was assessed with a deficit accumulation index (range, 0-1), and patients were stratified as robust (0 to <0.2), prefrail (0.2 to <0.35), or frail (≥0.35). The clinic visit after the GA-intervention was audio-recorded, transcribed, and coded to evaluate the number and quality of conversations about aging-related concerns. Linear mixed models examined differences in the number and quality of conversations within and between arms. All P values were 2-sided. RESULTS: Patients (n = 541) were classified as robust (27%), prefrail (42%), or frail (31%). In the usual care arm, frail patients (vs robust ones) engaged in more aging-related conversations (adjusted mean difference, 1.73; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.59-2.87), conversations of higher quality (difference, 1.12; 95% CI, 0.24-2.0), and more discussions about evidence-based recommendations (difference, 0.71; 95% CI, 0.04-1.38; all P values ≤ .01). Similarly, in the GA intervention arm, frail patients (vs robust ones) engaged in more aging-related conversations (difference, 2.49; 95% CI, 1.51-3.47), conversations of higher quality (difference, 1.31; 95% CI, 0.56-2.06), and more discussions about evidence-based recommendations (difference, 0.87; 95% CI, 0.32-1.42; all P values ≤ .01). Furthermore, the GA-intervention significantly improved the number and quality of conversations in all patients: robust, prefrail, and frail (all P values ≤ .01). CONCLUSIONS: Patients with higher degrees of frailty and those exposed to the GA-intervention had more and higher quality conversations about aging-related concerns with oncologists. LAY SUMMARY: A geriatric assessment (GA) intervention improves communication about aging-related concerns, but its effect on communication in patients with various levels of frailty is unknown. This study conducted a secondary analysis of a nationwide trial of patients aged ≥70 years with incurable cancer and 1 or more GA domain impairments. Patients were stratified as robust, prefrail, or frail. The number and quality of conversations about aging-related concerns that occurred during the clinic visit after the GA-intervention were determined. Patients with higher degrees of frailty and those in the GA intervention arm had more and higher quality conversations about aging-related concerns with oncologists.

Factors affecting short-term survival in patients older than 85 treated with resection for stage II and III colon cancer.

BACKGROUND: Patients ≥85 years of age have high rates of colon cancer but disproportionately poor outcomes. Factors affecting short-term (90-day) survival in patients ≥85 undergoing surgery for stage II and III colon cancer were examined to identify potentially modifiable factors to improve outcomes. METHODS: The New York State Cancer Registry and Statewide Planning Research and Cooperative System were queried for patients ≥85 years who underwent colectomy for stage II and III colon cancer between 2004 and 2012. Regression analyses were performed for factors associated with 90-day mortality and stratified by elective and nonelective surgery. RESULTS: In total, 3,779 patients ≥85 years of age underwent colectomy between 2004 and 2012 for stage II or III colon cancer. Of these, 48.4% underwent nonelective colectomy, 79.9% had an open operation, and 90-day survival was 83.2%. Worse survival was associated with nonelective surgery (odds ratio = 3.81, 95% confidence interval = 3.03-4.89). Improved survival in the nonelective and overall groups was associated with a minimally invasive operation (nonelective group: odds ratio = 0.35, 95% confidence interval = 0.21-0.58; overall group: odds ratio = 0.50, 95% confidence interval = 0.36-0.73) and discharged to another health care facility (nonelective group: odds ratio = 0.30, 95% confidence interval = 0.22-0.39; overall group: odds ratio = 0.42, 95% confidence interval = 0.33-0.53). High surgeon annual operating volume was associated with improved survival in the elective and nonelective groups (P < .001). CONCLUSION: Factors associated with greater odds of 90-day mortality in this population include nonelective surgery, preoperative weight loss, and multiple comorbidities, whereas a minimally invasive approach was associated with lower mortality. Potential areas to improve outcomes in this population include using a multidisciplinary team approach, addressing frailty preoperatively when possible, and potentially reconsidering screening guidelines for colorectal cancer to reduce rates of emergency operations.

From months to minutes: Creating Hyperion, a novel data management system expediting data insights for oncology research and patient care.

Here we describe the design and implementation of a novel data management platform for an academic cancer center which meets the needs of multiple stakeholders. A small, cross-functional technical team identified key challenges to creating a broad data management and access software solution: lowering the technical skill floor, reducing cost, enhancing user autonomy, optimizing data governance, and reimagining technical team structures in academia. The Hyperion data management platform was designed to meet these challenges in addition to usual considerations of data quality, security, access, stability, and scalability. Implemented between May 2019 and December 2020 at the Wilmot Cancer Institute, Hyperion includes a sophisticated custom validation and interface engine to process data from multiple sources, storing it in a database. Graphical user interfaces and custom wizards permit users to directly interact with data across operational, clinical, research, and administrative contexts. The use of multi-threaded processing, open-source programming languages, and automated system tasks (normally requiring technical expertise) minimizes costs. An integrated ticketing system and active stakeholder committee support data governance and project management. A co-directed, cross-functional team with flattened hierarchy and integration of industry software management practices enhances problem solving and responsiveness to user needs. Access to validated, organized, and current data is critical to the functioning of multiple domains in medicine. Although there are downsides to developing in-house customized software, we describe a successful implementation of custom data management software in an academic cancer center.