Atypical presentation of COVID-19 in older patients is associated with frailty but not with adverse outcomes.

PURPOSE: Older patients with COVID-19 can present with atypical complaints, such as falls or delirium. In other diseases, such an atypical presentation is associated with worse clinical outcomes. However, it is not known whether this extends to COVID-19. We aimed to study the association between atypical presentation of COVID-19, frailty and adverse outcomes, as well as the incidence of atypical presentation. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective observational multi-center cohort study in eight hospitals in the Netherlands. We included patients aged ≥ 70 years hospitalized with COVID-19 between February 2020 until May 2020. Atypical presentation of COVID-19 was defined as presentation without fever, cough and/or dyspnea. We collected data concerning symptoms on admission, demographics and frailty parameters [e.g., Charlson Comorbidity Index (CCI) and Clinical Frailty Scale (CFS)]. Outcome data included Intensive Care Unit (ICU) admission, discharge destination and 30-day mortality. RESULTS: We included 780 patients, 9.5% (n = 74) of those patients had an atypical presentation. Patients with an atypical presentation were older (80 years, IQR 76-86 years; versus 79 years, IQR 74-84, p = 0.044) and were more often classified as severely frail (CFS 6-9) compared to patients with a typical presentation (47.6% vs 28.7%, p = 0.004). Overall, there was no significant difference in 30-day mortality between the two groups in univariate analysis (32.4% vs 41.5%; p = 0.173) or in multivariate analysis [OR 0.59 (95% CI 0.34-1.0); p = 0.058]. CONCLUSIONS: In this study, patients with an atypical presentation of COVID-19 were more frail compared to patients with a typical presentation. Contrary to our expectations, an atypical presentation was not associated with worse outcomes.

Improved Postoperative Outcomes after Prehabilitation for Colorectal Cancer Surgery in Older Patients: An Emulated Target Trial.

BACKGROUND: The aim of this study was to assess the effect of a multimodal prehabilitation program on perioperative outcomes in colorectal cancer patients with a higher postoperative complication risk, using an emulated target trial (ETT) design. PATIENTS AND METHODS: An ETT design including overlap weighting based on propensity score was performed. The study consisted of all patients with newly diagnosed colorectal cancer (2016-2021), in a large nonacademic training hospital, who were candidate to elective colorectal cancer surgery and had a higher risk for postoperative complications defined by: age ≥ 65 years and or American Society of Anesthesiologists score III/IV. Intention-to-treat (ITT) and per-protocol analyses were performed to evaluate the effect of prehabilitation compared with usual care on perioperative complications and length of stay (LOS). RESULTS: Two hundred fifty-one patients were included: 128 in the usual care group and 123 patients in the prehabilitation group. In the ITT analysis, the number needed to treat to reduce one or more complications in one person was 4.2 (95% CI 2.6-10). Compared with patients in the usual care group, patients undergoing prehabilitation had a 55% lower comprehensive complication score (95% CI -71 to -32%). There was a 33% reduction (95% CI -44 to -18%) in LOS from 7 to 5 days. CONCLUSIONS: This study showed a clinically relevant reduction of complications and LOS after multimodal prehabilitation in patients undergoing colorectal cancer surgery with a higher postoperative complication risk. The study methodology used may serve as an example for further larger multicenter comparative effectiveness research on prehabilitation.

[Prehabilitation before surgery: in all cases?] / Prehabilitatie voorafgaand aan iedere operatie?

While the concept of prehabilitation sounds logical and study results are promising, so far there is no unequivocal answer to the question whether prehabilitation is (cost-)effective. Therefore, positioning prehabilitation as standard care is not yet on the agenda. To achieve this multicenter research should be stimulated through national coordination and research funding in order to clarify the (cost-)effectiveness of prehabilitation.

Trajectories and prognostic factors for recovery after hip fracture: a longitudinal cohort study.

PURPOSE: The aim of this study was to determine recovery trajectories and prognostic factors for poor recovery in frail and non-frail patients after hip fracture. METHODS: Patients with a hip fracture aged 65 years and older admitted to a hospital in the Netherlands from August 2015 to November 2016 were asked to complete questionnaires at one week and one, three, six, 12, and 24 months after injury. The questionnaires included the ICEpop CAPability measure for older people, Health Utility Index, and the Hospital Anxiety Depression Scale. Latent class trajectory analysis was used to determine trajectories of recovery. Patient and injury characteristics for favourable and unfavourable outcome were compared with logistic regression. RESULTS: In total, 696 patients were included of which 367 (53%) patients were frail. Overall, recovery trajectories in frail patients were worse compared to trajectories in non-frail patients. In frail patients, poor recovery was significantly associated with dementia. Lower age was a prognostic factor for good recovery. Immobility, loneliness and weight loss were prognostic for respectively poor capability and symptoms of anxiety and depression. In non-frail patients, recovery after hip fracture was associated with loneliness and the type of hip fracture. CONCLUSION: Although frailty is associated with poor recovery in older patients with hip fracture, a large proportion of frail patients show good recovery. Loneliness determines poor recovery with anxiety and depressive symptoms. TRAIL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT02508675 (July 27, 2015).

Implementation of prehabilitation in colorectal cancer surgery: qualitative research on how to strengthen facilitators and overcome barriers.

PURPOSE: Prehabilitation is increasingly offered to patients with colorectal cancer (CRC) undergoing surgery as it could prevent complications and facilitate recovery. However, implementation of such a complex multidisciplinary intervention is challenging. This study aims to explore perspectives of professionals involved in prehabilitation to gain understanding of barriers or facilitators to its implementation and to identify strategies to successful operationalization of prehabilitation. METHODS: In this qualitative study, semi-structured interviews were performed with healthcare professionals involved in prehabilitation for patients with CRC. Prehabilitation was defined as a preoperative program with the aim of improving physical fitness and nutritional status. Parallel with data collection, open coding was applied to the transcribed interviews. The Ottawa Model of Research Use (OMRU) framework, a comprehensive interdisciplinary model guide to promote implementation of research findings into healthcare practice, was used to categorize obtained codes and structure the barriers and facilitators into relevant themes for change. RESULTS: Thirteen interviews were conducted. Important barriers were the conflicting scientific evidence on (cost-)effectiveness of prehabilitation, the current inability to offer a personalized prehabilitation program, the complex logistic organization of the program, and the unawareness of (the importance of) a prehabilitation program among healthcare professionals and patients. Relevant facilitators were availability of program coordinators, availability of physician leadership, and involving skeptical colleagues in the implementation process from the start. CONCLUSIONS: Important barriers to prehabilitation implementation are mainly related to the intervention being complex, relatively unknown and only evaluated in a research setting. Therefore, physicians' leadership is needed to transform care towards more integration of personalized prehabilitation programs. IMPLICATIONS FOR CANCER SURVIVORS: By strengthening prehabilitation programs and evidence of their efficacy using these recommendations, it should be possible to enhance both the pre- and postoperative quality of life for colorectal cancer patients during survivorship.

Characteristics and outcomes of older patients hospitalised for COVID-19 in the first and second wave of the pandemic in The Netherlands: the COVID-OLD study.

BACKGROUND: as the coronavirus disease of 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic progressed diagnostics and treatment changed. OBJECTIVE: to investigate differences in characteristics, disease presentation and outcomes of older hospitalised COVID-19 patients between the first and second pandemic wave in The Netherlands. METHODS: this was a multicentre retrospective cohort study in 16 hospitals in The Netherlands including patients aged ≥ 70 years, hospitalised for COVID-19 in Spring 2020 (first wave) and Autumn 2020 (second wave). Data included Charlson comorbidity index (CCI), disease severity and Clinical Frailty Scale (CFS). Main outcome was in-hospital mortality. RESULTS: a total of 1,376 patients in the first wave (median age 78 years, 60% male) and 946 patients in the second wave (median age 79 years, 61% male) were included. There was no relevant difference in presence of comorbidity (median CCI 2) or frailty (median CFS 4). Patients in the second wave were admitted earlier in the disease course (median 6 versus 7 symptomatic days; P < 0.001). In-hospital mortality was lower in the second wave (38.1% first wave versus 27.0% second wave; P < 0.001). Mortality risk was 40% lower in the second wave compared with the first wave (95% confidence interval: 28-51%) after adjustment for differences in patient characteristics, comorbidity, symptomatic days until admission, disease severity and frailty. CONCLUSIONS: compared with older patients hospitalised in the first COVID-19 wave, patients in the second wave had lower in-hospital mortality, independent of risk factors for mortality.The better prognosis likely reflects earlier diagnosis, the effect of improvement in treatment and is relevant for future guidelines and treatment decisions.

Technical efficiency evaluation of colorectal cancer care for older patients in Dutch hospitals.

BACKGROUND: Preoperative colorectal cancer care pathways for older patients show considerable practice variation between Dutch hospitals due to differences in interpretation and implementation of guideline-based recommendations. This study aims to report this practice variation in preoperative care between Dutch hospitals in terms of technical efficiency and identifying associated factors. METHODS: Data on preoperative involvement of geriatricians, physical therapists and dieticians and the clinicians' judgement on prehabilitation implementation were collected using quality indicators and questionnaires among colorectal cancer surgeons and specialized nurses. These data were combined with registry-based data on postoperative outcomes obtained from the Dutch Surgical Colorectal Audit for patients aged ≥75 years. A two-stage data envelopment analysis (DEA) approach was used to calculate bias-corrected DEA technical efficiency scores, reflecting the extent to which a hospital invests in multidisciplinary preoperative care (input) in relation to postoperative outcomes (output). In the second stage, hospital care characteristics were used in a bootstrap truncated regression to explain variations in measured efficiency scores. RESULTS: Data of 25 Dutch hospitals were analyzed. There was relevant practice variation in bias-corrected technical efficiency scores (ranging from 0.416 to 0.968) regarding preoperative colorectal cancer surgery. The average efficiency score of hospitals was significantly different from the efficient frontier (p = <0.001). After case-mix correction, higher technical efficiency was associated with larger practice size (p = <0.001), surgery performed in a general hospital versus a university hospital (p = <0.001) and implementation of prehabilitation (p = <0.001). CONCLUSION: This study showed considerable variation in technical efficiency of preoperative colorectal cancer care for older patients as provided by Dutch hospitals. In addition to higher technical efficiency in high-volume hospitals and general hospitals, offering a care pathway that includes prehabilitation was positively related to technical efficiency of hospitals offering colorectal cancer care.

Frailty is associated with in-hospital mortality in older hospitalised COVID-19 patients in the Netherlands: the COVID-OLD study.

BACKGROUND: During the first wave of the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, older patients had an increased risk of hospitalisation and death. Reports on the association of frailty with poor outcome have been conflicting. OBJECTIVE: The aim of the present study was to investigate the independent association between frailty and in-hospital mortality in older hospitalised COVID-19 patients in the Netherlands. METHODS: This was a multicentre retrospective cohort study in 15 hospitals in the Netherlands, including all patients aged ≥70 years, who were hospitalised with clinically confirmed COVID-19 between February and May 2020. Data were collected on demographics, co-morbidity, disease severity and Clinical Frailty Scale (CFS). Primary outcome was in-hospital mortality. RESULTS: A total of 1,376 patients were included (median age 78 years (interquartile range 74-84), 60% male). In total, 499 (38%) patients died during hospital admission. Parameters indicating presence of frailty (CFS 6-9) were associated with more co-morbidities, shorter symptom duration upon presentation (median 4 versus 7 days), lower oxygen demand and lower levels of C-reactive protein. In multivariable analyses, the CFS was independently associated with in-hospital mortality: compared with patients with CFS 1-3, patients with CFS 4-5 had a two times higher risk (odds ratio (OR) 2.0 (95% confidence interval (CI) 1.3-3.0)) and patients with CFS 6-9 had a three times higher risk of in-hospital mortality (OR 2.8 (95% CI 1.8-4.3)). CONCLUSIONS: The in-hospital mortality of older hospitalised COVID-19 patients in the Netherlands was 38%. Frailty was independently associated with higher in-hospital mortality, even though COVID-19 patients with frailty presented earlier to the hospital with less severe symptoms.

Frailty screening by Geriatric-8 and 4-meter gait speed test is feasible and predicts postoperative complications in elderly colorectal cancer patients.

INTRODUCTION: Identification of frail older colorectal cancer patients might help to select those prone to adverse events and may lead to adjustment of treatment plans. However, the prognostic validity of screening for frailty is unknown. METHODS: This retrospective study evaluates colorectal cancer patients ≥70 years who underwent elective surgery between May 2016 and December 2018. The Geriatric-8 (G8) and 4-m gait speed test (4MGST) were used as frailty screening tools. According to hospital guidelines, patients were referred to a geriatrician when screening was indicative for frailty (G8 ≤ 14 and/or 4MGST < 1 m/s). Patients were categorized as fit, vulnerable or frail by comprehensive geriatric assessment (CGA). The clinical implications and prognostic validity of frailty screening and CGA were evaluated. RESULTS: 149 patients were included, of whom 132 (89%) were screened for frailty. Frailty was suspected in 40% of screened patients (n = 53) of whom 89% (n = 47) was referred for CGA. A higher complication rate was seen in patients with G8 ≤ 14 and/or 4MGST < 1 m/s compared to those with G8 > 14 and 4MGST ≥1 m/s (respectively 62% versus 28%,p < 0.001). Pneumonia (21% versus 6%, p = 0.013) and cardiac complications (11% versus 4%, p = 0.093) were more prevalent in patients with G8 ≤ 14 and/or 4MGST < 1 m/s. CGA identified frail patients as a group with a high complication rate of 68%. CONCLUSION: Screening for frailty with subsequent referral for CGA is feasible in older colorectal cancer patients. Our study suggests that screening for frailty by G8 + 4MGST can identify patients with higher risk for postoperative complications.

[American guideline for geriatric oncology; applicable to Dutch clinical practice?] / Amerikaanse richtlijn voor geriatrische oncologie.

American guideline for geriatric oncology; applicable to Dutch clinical practice? The American Society of Clinical Oncology (ASCO) has recently issued a guideline for geriatric oncology that provides guidance regarding the practical assessment and management of vulnerabilities in older patients undergoing chemotherapy. The recommendations are discussed and a practical framework for implementation in Dutch oncology practice is described.

Age-related systemic treatment and survival of patients with metachronous metastases from colorectal cancer.

BACKGROUND: Although the spectrum of systemic treatment for metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) has widened, there is a paucity of evidence for the feasibility and optimal use of these systemic agents in elderly patients. The present study provides real world data on the age-related systemic treatment and survival of CRC patients with non-resectable metachronous metastases. METHODS: All consecutive patients with non-resectable metastases from primary resected CRC were extracted from the Eindhoven area of the Netherlands Cancer Registry (NCR). Patients receiving palliative systemic therapy were enrolled (n = 385). Systemic treatment and survival were analyzed according to age at diagnosis of metastases. RESULTS: Patients aged ≥75 years more often received first-line single-agent chemotherapy than their younger counterparts (63% vs. 32%, p < .0001). First-line single-agent chemotherapy was often prescribed without additional targeted therapy (78%). Advanced age (≥75 years) was associated with a lower probability of receiving all active cytotoxic agents compared to patients aged <60 years at time of diagnosis of metastases (odds ratio (OR) 0.2, 95% CI 0.10-0.77). In a multivariable Cox regression analysis with adjustment for age and other relevant prognostic factors, the total number of received systemic agents was the only predictor of death (hazard ratio (HR) 0.7, 95% CI 0.61-0.81). CONCLUSION: The beneficial effect of treatment with all active systemic agents on survival (simultaneously or sequentially prescribed) should be taken into account when considering systemic therapy in patients with mCRC. In light of our results, future studies are warranted to clarify the role of potential targeted therapy in elderly mCRC patients, who are often not candidates for combination chemotherapy and treatment with all active cytotoxic agents.

Deciding on adjuvant chemotherapy for elderly patients with stage III colon cancer: a qualitative insight into the perspectives of surgeons and medical oncologists.

OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study is to identify doctor-related factors determining the decision-making for adjuvant chemotherapy for patients with stage III colon cancer aged ≥75years. MATERIALS AND METHODS: 21 surgeons and 15 medical oncologists from 10 community hospitals were asked to complete a short questionnaire including tick-box questions regarding motives for non-referral/non-treatment, consultation of geriatricians, chemotherapy schemes prescribed and an open question regarding tolerability of chemotherapy. RESULTS: 29 medical specialists returned a completed questionnaire (response 81%). The motives for non-referral/non-treatment reported most often were comorbidity/bad general health condition of the patient; surgical complications; and treatment offered but refused by patient/family. 39% of the surgeons and 55% of the medical oncologists reported consultation of a geriatrician in 2-30% of their decisions. CAPOX and capecitabine were reported by medical oncologists as the most frequently prescribed regimens. Factors that influenced the decision for monotherapy or combination therapy were comorbidity; general health condition of the patient; and toxicity profile of the chemotherapeutics. In general, medical oncologists defined grade ≤2 toxicities as tolerable, with the exception of neuropathy, for which grade ≤1 toxicity was accepted. CONCLUSIONS: In case medical oncologists prescribe adjuvant chemotherapy to elderly patients with stage III colon cancer, the chemotherapy schemes used are in line with clinical guidelines and they agree on acceptable levels of toxicity. However, the variation among surgeons and medical oncologists in motives for non-referral, non-treatment and consultation of geriatricians when deciding on adjuvant chemotherapy for elderly patients with stage III colon cancer, shows the complexity and need for specific knowledge.

Tolerance and benefits of treatment for elderly patients with limited small-cell lung cancer.

OBJECTIVES: Over 20% of all newly diagnosed Dutch patients with small-cell lung cancer (SCLC) are aged ≥75 years. Uncertainties still exist about safety and efficacy of chemotherapy and chemoradiation in elderly patients. We evaluated the association between patient characteristics and (completion of) treatment and also evaluated toxicity, response and survival in elderly patients with SCLC. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Population-based data from patients aged 75 years or older and diagnosed with limited SCLC in 1997-2004 in The Netherlands were used (N = 368). Additional data on co-morbidity, motive for deviating from guidelines, grades 3-5 toxicity, response and survival were gathered from medical records. RESULTS: Although only relatively fit elderly were selected for chemotherapy, almost 70% developed toxicity, leading to early termination of chemotherapy in over half of all patients. Median survival time was 6.7 months, but differed strongly according to type and completion of treatment (13.5 months for chemoradiation, 7.1 months for chemotherapy, 2.9 months for best supportive care, 11.5 months for patients receiving at least 4 cycles of chemotherapy and 3.6 months for less than 4 cycles). CONCLUSION: Although toxicity rate was high and many patients could not complete the full chemotherapy, those who received chemotherapy or chemoradiation had a significantly better survival. We hypothesize that a better selection by proper geriatric assessments is needed to achieve a more favourable balance between benefit and harm.

Assessment and treatment of malnutrition in Dutch geriatric practice: consensus through a modified Delphi study.

OBJECTIVE: scientific evidence regarding the optimal management of malnutrition in geriatric patients is scarce. Our aim was to develop a consensus statement for geriatric hospital practice concerning six elements: (i) definition of malnutrition, (ii) screening and assessment, (iii) treatment and monitoring, (iv) roles and responsibilities of involved health care professionals, (v) communication and coordination of care between hospital and community health care professionals, (vi) quality indicators for malnutrition management. DESIGN: a modified Delphi study. METHODS: eleven geriatricians with special interest in malnutrition participated. In four rounds the experts rated the relevance of 204 statements, which were based on a literature review, on a five-point Likert scale. From the responses, means and 95% CIs were calculated. Consensus was defined as a lower 95% confidence limit ≥4.0. RESULTS: the panel reached consensus that malnutrition should be considered a geriatric syndrome. The nutritional status should be assessed using the Mini Nutritional Assessment combined with comprehensive geriatric assessment. Nutritional interventions should be combined with interventions targeting underlying factors. Specific goals for nutritional therapy and ways to achieve them were agreed upon. According to the experts, malnutrition is best managed by a multidisciplinary team for whom roles and responsibilities were specified. At discharge written information about the nutritional problem, treatment plan and goals should be provided to the patient, caregiver and community health care professionals. CONCLUSION: this study shows that a qualitative study based on a modified Delphi technique can result in national consensus on essential ingredients for a practical malnutrition guideline for geriatric patients.

Cancer patients with cardiovascular disease have survival rates comparable to cancer patients within the age-cohort of 10 years older without cardiovascular morbidity.

UNLABELLED: Due to aging of the population the prevalence of both cardiovascular diseases (CVDs) and cancer is increasing. Elderly patients are often under-represented in clinical trials, resulting in limited guidance about treatment and outcome. This study gives insight into the prevalence of CVD among unselected patients with colon, rectum, lung, breast and prostate cancer and its effects on cancer treatment and outcome. Over one fourth (N=11,200) of all included cancer patients aged 50 or older (N=41,126) also suffered from CVD, especially those with lung (34%) or colon cancer (30%). These patients were often treated less aggressively, especially in case COPD or diabetes was also present. CVD had an independent prognostic effect among patients with colon, rectum and prostate cancer. This prognostic effect could not be fully explained by differences in treatment. CONCLUSIONS: Many cancer patients with severe CVD have a poorer prognosis. More research is needed for explaining the underlying factors for the decreased survival. Such research should lead to treatment guidelines for these patients.