Feasibility of a Geriatric Oncology Longitudinal End to End (GOLDEN) Program in a Tertiary Cancer Center in Singapore.

INTRODUCTION: In the National University Cancer Institute, Singapore (NCIS), 2 pilot programs providing (i) surgical prehabilitation before cancer surgery and (ii) geriatric oncology support for older adults planned for chemotherapy and/or radiotherapy were merged to form the Geriatric Oncology Longitudinal End to eNd (GOLDEN) program in 2019 to support patients from the time of their cancer diagnosis, through their treatment process, to cancer survivorship. METHODS AND MATERIALS: Older adults aged ≥65 years were enrolled in either surgical prehabilitation, the geriatric medical oncology (GO) arm, or both. All patients undergo a geriatric assessment. We assessed if patients had a change in treatment plans based on GOLDEN recommendations, and the impact on patient related outcomes. RESULTS: There were 777 patients enrolled in the GOLDEN program over 2 years; 569 (73%) were enrolled in surgical prehabilitation, 308 (40%) were enrolled in the GO arm, with 100 (12.8%) enrolled in both. 56.9% were females. Median age was 73. Lower gastrointestinal (51.2%) and hepatobiliary cancers (24.1%) were the most common cancer types. 43.4% were pre-frail and 11.7% were frail. Of the 308 patients in the GO arm, 86.0% had geriatric syndromes, while 60.7% had a change in their treatment plans based on GOLDEN recommendations. 31.5% reported an improved global health status, while 38.3% maintained their global health status. 226 (73%) responded that they had benefited from the GOLDEN. CONCLUSION: More than half of the population was either pre-frail or frail. Amongst those in the GO arm, the majority had geriatric syndromes and had a change in their treatment plans based on GOLDEN recommendations. Majority reported either improvement or maintenance in global health status, with most feeling they have benefited from the program. Further evaluation of the longitudinal geriatric hematology-oncology program for cancer-related outcomes and sustainability should be carried out.

Multimodal prehabilitation before major abdominal surgery: A retrospective study.

INTRODUCTION: Prehabilitation may benefit older patients undergoing major surgeries. Currently, its efficacy has not been conclusively proven. This is a retrospective review of a multimodal prehabilitation programme. METHODS: Patients aged 65 years and above undergoing major abdominal surgery between May 2015 and December 2019 in the National University Hospital were included in our institutional programme that incorporated aspects of multimodal prehabilitation and Enhanced Recovery After Surgery concepts as 1 holistic perioperative pathway to deal with issues specific to older patients. Physical therapy, nutritional advice and psychosocial support were provided as part of prehabilitation. RESULTS: There were 335 patients in the prehabilitation cohort and 256 patients whose records were reviewed as control. No difference in postoperative length of stay (P=0.150) or major complications (P=0.690) were noted. Patients in the prehabilitation group were observed to ambulate a longer distance and participate more actively with their physiotherapists from postoperative day 1 until 4. In the subgroup of patients with cancer, more patients had undergone neoadjuvant therapy in the prehabilitation group compared to the control group (21.7% versus 12.6%, P=0.009). Prehabilitation patients were more likely to proceed to adjuvant chemotherapy (prehabilitation 87.2% vs control 65.6%, P<0.001) if it had been recommended. CONCLUSION: The current study found no differences in traditional surgical outcome measures with and without prehabilitation. An increase in patient mobility in the immediate postoperative period was noted with prehabilitation, as well as an association between prehabilitation and increased adherence to postoperative adjuvant therapy. Larger prospective studies will be needed to validate the findings of this retrospective review.

Conceptualizing and measuring health-related quality of life in critical care.

INTRODUCTION: When assessing health-related quality of life (HRQL), critical care outcomes research generally uses generic measures in the absence of a suitable critical care-specific measure. Our aims were to construct a conceptual framework of survivors' HRQL and assess the extent to which the 2 most commonly used generic measures (the Short Form 36 Health Survey and EuroQol-5D) covered the framework. METHODS: A preliminary framework for survivors' HRQL was constructed based on a systematic literature review and on a secondary analysis of 40 existing in-depth interviews with adult, critical care survivors. Its adequacy was then tested using new in-depth interviews with a maximum variation sample of critical care survivors. The extent of coverage of the final framework by the 2 generic HRQL instruments was then evaluated in 2 ways: by comparison with critical care survivors' accounts from the new in-depth interviews and by eliciting survivors' views on the adequacy of the 2 generic HRQL instruments using cognitive debriefing. RESULTS: The final framework recognized 3 aspects of health status that affected 9 areas of life. The 2 most commonly used generic measures had substantial gaps in their coverage of the framework of survivors' HRQL. CONCLUSIONS: The findings argue strongly for a new critical care-specific HRQL measure.