ABSTRACT
Oncology services do not routinely assess broader needs of older people with cancer. This study evaluates a comprehensive geriatric assessment and comorbidity screening questionnaire (CGA-GOLD) covering evidence-based domains and quality of life (EORTC-QLQ-C30). Patients aged 65+ attending oncology services were recruited into (1) Observational cohort (completed CGA-GOLD, received standard oncology care), (2) Intervention cohort (responses categorised 'low-risk', 'high-risk', 'possible need' by geriatricians). N = 417 observational patients (1002 invited by post, 418 consented, age 73.9 ± 5.4) completed CGA-GOLD in 11.7 ± 7.9 min, 86.3% required no assistance, 3.1% overall missing responses. Multiple problems reported: hypertension (18.1%), diabetes (16.9%), dyspnoea on flat surfaces (27.6%), polypharmacy (46%), difficulty walking (14.9%), fatigue (40.5%), living alone (30.9%), social isolation (11.2%), recent functional dependence (27.8%), urinary incontinence (21.4%), falls (13.3%). 237/239 intervention patients completed CGA-GOLD and consecutive subsets examined. The doctor and nurse specialist independently identified same need level in 87.3% (high inter-rater reliability kappa = 0.80), taking 1-2 min per questionnaire. Need level remained unchanged following hospital notes review against responses in 90% (75/83). 'Possible need' patients were telephoned with change in 29% (16/55) to low-risk and none to high-risk, confirming high need was not being missed. CGA-GOLD screening questionnaire was acceptable to older patients, feasibly administered in NHS cancer services, described comorbidities, CGA and QOL needs, and reliably identified higher risk patients requiring further input for optimal cancer treatment.
Subject(s)
Geriatric Assessment/methods , Needs Assessment , Neoplasms/therapy , Activities of Daily Living , Aged , Aged, 80 and over , Cohort Studies , Comorbidity , Diabetes Mellitus/diagnosis , Diabetes Mellitus/epidemiology , Dyspnea/diagnosis , Dyspnea/epidemiology , Fatigue/diagnosis , Fatigue/epidemiology , Female , Humans , Hypertension/diagnosis , Hypertension/epidemiology , London/epidemiology , Male , Mass Screening/methods , Mobility Limitation , Neoplasms/epidemiology , Polypharmacy , Residence Characteristics , Risk Assessment , Social Isolation , Surveys and Questionnaires , Urinary Incontinence/diagnosis , Urinary Incontinence/epidemiologyABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Although comorbidities are identified in routine oncology practice, intervention plans for the coexisting needs of older people receiving chemotherapy are rarely made. This study evaluates the impact of geriatrician-delivered comprehensive geriatric assessment (CGA) interventions on chemotherapy toxicity and tolerance for older people with cancer. METHODS: Comparative study of two cohorts of older patients (aged 70+ years) undergoing chemotherapy in a London Hospital. The observational control group (N=70, October 2010-July 2012) received standard oncology care. The intervention group (N=65, September 2011-February 2013) underwent risk stratification using a patient-completed screening questionnaire and high-risk patients received CGA. Impact of CGA interventions on chemotherapy tolerance outcomes and grade 3+ toxicity rate were evaluated. Outcomes were adjusted for age, comorbidity, metastatic disease and initial dose reductions. RESULTS: Intervention participants undergoing CGA received mean of 6.2±2.6 (range 0-15) CGA intervention plans each. They were more likely to complete cancer treatment as planned (odds ratio (OR) 4.14 (95% CI: 1.50-11.42), P=0.006) and fewer required treatment modifications (OR 0.34 (95% CI: 0.16-0.73), P=0.006). Overall grade 3+ toxicity rate was 43.8% in the intervention group and 52.9% in the control (P=0.292). CONCLUSIONS: Geriatrician-led CGA interventions were associated with improved chemotherapy tolerance. Standard oncology care should shift towards modifying coexisting conditions to optimise chemotherapy outcomes for older people.
Subject(s)
Antineoplastic Combined Chemotherapy Protocols/adverse effects , Drug-Related Side Effects and Adverse Reactions/epidemiology , Geriatric Assessment , Neoplasms/drug therapy , Neoplasms/rehabilitation , Aged , Aged, 80 and over , Case-Control Studies , Comorbidity , Drug Tolerance , Female , Follow-Up Studies , Humans , London/epidemiology , Male , Neoplasm Metastasis , Patient Care Planning , Prognosis , Prospective StudiesABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Significant toxicity in chemotherapy trials is usually defined as grade ⩾3. In clinical practice, however, multiple lower grade toxicities are often considered meaningful. The purpose of this observational cohort study was to identify which level of toxicity triggers treatment modification and early discontinuation of chemotherapy in older people. METHODS: Patients aged 65+ were recruited in a central London hospital. A total of 108 patients were recruited at the start of new chemotherapy treatment between October 2010 and July 2012. RESULTS: Mean age was 72.1 ± 5 years, median 72 and range 65-86 years. Of the patients, 50.9% (55) were male with gastrointestinal (49), gynaecological (18), lung (15) and other cancers (26). Chemotherapy was palliative in 59.3% (64/108), curative/ neoadjuvant/adjuvant in the others. Mean number of cycles completed was 4.2 ± 3. Treatment modifications due to toxicity occurred in 60 (55.6%) patients, 35% (21/60) of whom had no greater than grade 2 toxicity. Early treatment discontinuation because of toxicity occurred in 23 patients (21.3%), 39.1% (9/23) of whom had no greater than grade 2 toxicity. CONCLUSIONS: Many older patients did not complete treatment as planned. Treatment was modified/discontinued even for one or two low-grade toxicities. Further work is required to clarify whether low-grade toxicity has a greater clinical impact in older people, or whether clinicians have a lower threshold for modifying/discontinuing treatment in older people.
