Tailored Self-Management App to Support Older Adults With Cancer and Multimorbidity: Development and Usability Testing.

BACKGROUND: Globally, cancer predominates in adults aged older than 60 years, and 70% of older adults have ≥1 chronic condition. Cancer self-management interventions can improve symptom management and confidence, but few interventions target the complex needs of older adults with cancer and multimorbidity. Despite growing evidence of digital health tools in cancer care, there is a paucity of theoretically grounded digital self-management supports for older adults. Many apps for older adults have not been co-designed with older adults to ensure that they are tailored to their specific needs, which would increase usability and uptake. OBJECTIVE: We aim to report on the user evaluations of a self- and symptom-management app to support older adults living with cancer and multimorbidity. METHODS: This study used Grey's self-management framework, a design thinking approach, and involved older adults with lived experiences of cancer to design a medium-fidelity app prototype. Older adults with cancer or caregivers were recruited through community organizations or support groups to participate in co-designing or evaluations of the app. Data from interviews were iteratively integrated into the design process and analyzed using descriptive statistics and thematic analyses. RESULTS: In total, 15 older adults and 3 caregivers (n=18) participated in this study: 10 participated (8 older adults and 2 caregivers) in the design of the low-fidelity prototype, and 10 evaluated (9 older adults and 1 caregiver) the medium-fidelity prototype (2 older adults participated in both phases). Participants emphasized the importance of tracking functions to make sense of information across physical symptoms and psychosocial aspects; a clear display; and the organization of notes and reminders to communicate with care providers. Participants also emphasized the importance of medication initiation or cessation reminders to mitigate concerns related to polypharmacy. CONCLUSIONS: This app has the potential to support the complex health care needs of older adults with cancer, creating a "home base" for symptom management and support. The findings from this study will position the researchers to conduct feasibility testing and real-world implementation.

Caring for older adults with cancer in Canada: Views from healthcare providers and cancer care allies in the community.

BACKGROUND: Cancer is common and disproportionately impacts older adults. Moreover, cancer care of older adults is complex, and the current Canadian cancer care system struggles to address all of the dimensions. In this project, our goal was to understand the barriers and facilitators to caring for older adults with cancer from perspectives of healthcare professionals and cancer care allies, which included community groups, seniors' centers, and other community-based supports. METHODS: In collaboration with a patient advisory board, we conducted focus groups and interviews with multiple local healthcare professionals and cancer care allies in British Columbia, Canada. We used a descriptive qualitative approach and conducted a thematic analysis using NVivo software. RESULTS: A total of 71 participants of various disciplines and cancer care allies participated. They identified both individual and system-level barriers. Priority system-level barriers for older adults included space and staffing constraints and disconnections within healthcare systems, and between healthcare practitioners and cancer care allies. Individual-level barriers relate to the complex health states of older adults, caregiver/support person needs, and the needs of an increasingly diverse population where English may not be a first or preferable language. CONCLUSIONS: This study identified key barriers and facilitators that demonstrate aligned priorities among a diverse group of healthcare practitioners and cancer care allies. In conjunction with perspectives from patients and caregivers, these findings will inform future improvements in cancer care. Namely, we emphasize the importance of connections among health systems and community networks, given the outpatient nature of cancer care and the needs of older adults.

Access to cancer clinical trials for racialised older adults: an equity-focused rapid scoping review protocol.

BACKGROUND: The intersection of race and older age compounds existing health disparities experienced by historically marginalised communities. Therefore, racialised older adults with cancer are more disadvantaged in their access to cancer clinical trials compared with age-matched counterparts. To determine what has already been published in this area, the rapid scoping review question are: what are the barriers, facilitators and potential solutions for enhancing access to cancer clinical trials among racialised older adults? METHODS: We will use a rapid scoping review methodology in which we follow the six-step framework of Arksey and O'Malley, including a systematic search of the literature with abstract and full-text screening to be conducted by two independent reviewers, data abstraction by one reviewer and verification by a second reviewer using an Excel data abstraction sheet. Articles focusing on persons aged 18 and over who identify as a racialised person with cancer, that describe therapies/therapeutic interventions/prevention/outcomes related to barriers, facilitators and solutions to enhancing access to and equity in cancer clinical trials will be eligible for inclusion in this rapid scoping review. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: All data will be extracted from published literature. Hence, ethical approval and patient informed consent are not required. The findings of the scoping review will be submitted for publication in a peer-reviewed journal and presentation at international conferences.

Supportive care and healthcare service utilisation in older adults with a new cancer diagnosis: a population-based review.

OBJECTIVES: Older adults have unique needs and may benefit from additional supportive services through their cancer journey. It can be challenging for older adults to navigate the siloed systems within cancer centres and the community. We aimed to document the use of supportive care services in older adults with a new cancer diagnosis in a public healthcare system. METHODS: We used population-based databases in British Columbia to document referrals to supportive care services. Patients aged 70 years and above with a new diagnosis of solid tumour in the year 2015 were included. Supportive care services captured were social work, psychiatry, palliative care, nutrition and home care. Chart review was used to assess visits to the emergency room and extra calls to the cancer centre help line. RESULTS: 2014 patients were included with a median age of 77, 30% had advanced cancer. 459 (22.8%) of patients accessed one or more services through the cancer centre. The most common service used was patient and family counselling (13%). 309 (15.3%) of patients used community home care services. Patients aged 80 years and above were less likely to access supportive care resources (OR 0.57) compared with those 70-79 years. Patients with advanced cancer, those treated at smaller cancer centres, and patients with colorectal, gynaecological and lung cancer were more likely to have received a supportive care referral. CONCLUSIONS: Older adults, particularly those above 80 years, have low rates of supportive care service utilisation. Barriers to access must be explored, in addition to novel ways of holistic care delivery.

Impact of COVID-19 on older adults with cancer and their caregivers' cancer treatment experiences study: The ICE-OLD study.

The COVID-19 pandemic and health services impacts related to physical distancing posed many challenges for older adults with cancer. The goal of this study was to examine the impact of the pandemic on cancer treatment plans and cancer treatment experiences of older adults (ie, aged 65 years and older) and their caregiver' experiences of caring for older adults during the pandemic to highlight gaps in care experienced. In this multi-centre qualitative study guided by an interpretive descriptive research approach we interviewed older adults diagnosed with cancer and caregivers caring for them. Participants were recruited via cancer treatment centres in the provinces of British Columbia and Ontario (Vancouver and Toronto), Canada, and through an online ad sent out through patient advocacy organization newsletters. Interviews were recorded and transcribed verbatim and data were analyzed using an interpretive thematic analysis approach. A total of 27 individuals (17 older adults, 52.9% female; 10 caregivers, 90% female) participated in interviews lasting on average 45 minutes. Older adults with cancer described many impacts and pressures created by the pandemic on their cancer experiences, though they generally felt that the pandemic did not impact treatment decisions made and access to care. We grouped our findings into two main themes with their accompanying sub-themes, related to: (1) alterations in the individual and dyadic cancer experience; and (2) navigating health and cancer systems during the pandemic. The additional stressors the pandemic placed on older adults during their treatment and decision-making process and their caregivers expose the need to create or avail additional supports for future disruptions in care.

Predictors and effects of toxicity experienced by older adults with cancer receiving systemic therapy in a randomized clinical trial of geriatric assessment.

INTRODUCTION: Older adults represent a large segment of the oncology population, however, they remain underrepresented in clinical research. Treatment of older adults is often extrapolated using data from younger and fitter patients, which may not be appropriate. Furthermore the implications of toxicity from treatment can be greater for this population. Predicting toxicity from treatment and its effect on quality of life and functional status for older adults therefore is important. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We analyzed data from a clinical trial of geriatric assessment and management for Canadian elders with cancer (5C study). We assessed whether the baseline Cancer and Aging Research Group (CARG) toxicity score, G8 score, and Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) performance predicted grade 3-5 toxicity using logistic regression and pattern mixture models. We also assessed the impact of toxicity on quality of life and functional decline. Patients were followed for six months. RESULTS: Three hundred sixteen patients were included. Mean age was 76 years old and 40% of patients were female. One hundred nineteen patients (38%) experienced at least one grade 3-5 toxicity. Neither the CARG toxicity score, G8, or ECOG were predictive of grade 3-5 toxicity. Patients who experienced grade 3-5 toxicity were more likely to have functional impairments over time (odds ratio 3.71, p = 0.03). However, they maintained their quality of life. DISCUSSION: In this secondary analysis of a randomized controlled trial of geriatric assessment and management we did not find any predictors of grade 3-5 toxicity. Patients who did experience toxicity were more likely to report functional decline over time. Older adults who do experience treatment related toxicity may benefit from increased supports. CLINICAL TRIAL INFORMATION: NCT0315467.

Implementing geriatric assessment and management for older Canadians with cancer: Adherence to and satisfaction with the intervention, results of the 5C study.

INTRODUCTION: Geriatric assessment and management (GAM) is recommended by professional organizations and recently several randomized controlled trials (RCTs) demonstrated benefits in multiple health outcomes. GAM typically leads to one or more recommendations for the older adult on how to optimize their health. However, little is known about how well recommendations are adhered to. Understanding these issues is vital to designing GAM trials and clinical programs. Therefore, the aim of this study was to examine the number of GAM recommendations made and adherence to and satisfaction with the intervention in a multicentre RCT of GAM for older adults with cancer. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The 5C study was a two-group parallel RCT conducted in eight hospitals across Canada. Each centre kept a detailed recruitment and retention log. The intervention teams documented adherence to their recommendations. Medical records were also reviewed to assess which recommendations were adhered to. Twenty-three semi-structured interviews were conducted with 12 members of the intervention teams and 11 oncology team members to assess implementation of the study and the intervention. RESULTS: Of the 350 participants who were enrolled, 173 were randomized to the intervention arm. Median number of recommendations was seven. Mean adherence to recommendations based on the GAM was 69%, but it varied by type of recommendation, ranging from 98% for laboratory tests to 28% for psychosocial/psychiatry oncology referrals. There was no difference in the number of recommendations or non-adherence to recommendations by sex, level of frailty, or functional status. Oncologists and intervention team members were satisfied with the study implementation and intervention delivery. DISCUSSION: Adherence to recommendations was variable. Adherence to laboratory investigations and further imaging were generally high but much lower for recommendations regarding psychosocial support. Further collaborative work with older adults with cancer is needed to understand how to optimize the intervention to be consistent with patient goals, priorities, and values to ensure maximal impact on health outcomes.

Impact of Geriatric Assessment and Management on Quality of Life, Unplanned Hospitalizations, Toxicity, and Survival for Older Adults With Cancer: The Randomized 5C Trial.

PURPOSE: American Society of Clinical Oncology recommends that older adults with cancer being considered for chemotherapy receive geriatric assessment (GA) and management (GAM), but few randomized controlled trials have examined its impact on quality of life (QOL). PATIENTS AND METHODS: The 5C study was a two-group parallel 1:1 single-blind multicenter randomized controlled trial of GAM for 6 months versus usual oncologic care. Eligible patients were age 70+ years, diagnosed with a solid tumor, lymphoma, or myeloma, referred for first-/second-line chemotherapy or immunotherapy or targeted therapy, and had an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 0-2. The primary outcome QOL was measured with the global health scale of the European Organisation for the Research and Treatment of Cancer QOL questionnaire and analyzed with a pattern mixture model using an intent-to-treat approach (at 6 and 12 months). Secondary outcomes included functional status, grade 3-5 treatment toxicity; health care use; satisfaction; cancer treatment plan modification; and overall survival. RESULTS: From March 2018 to March 2020, 350 participants were enrolled. Mean age was 76 years and 40.3% were female. Fifty-four percent started treatment with palliative intent. Eighty-one (23.1%) patients died. GAM did not improve QOL (global QOL of 4.4 points [95% CI, 0.9 to 8.0] favoring the control arm). There was also no difference in survival, change in treatment plan, unplanned hospitalization/emergency department visits, and treatment toxicity between groups. CONCLUSION: GAM did not improve QOL. Most intervention group participants received GA on or after treatment initiation per patient request. Considering recent completed trials, GA may have benefit if completed before treatment selection. The COVID-19 pandemic may have affected our QOL outcome and intervention delivery for some participants.

Key Considerations for the Treatment of Advanced Breast Cancer in Older Adults: An Expert Consensus of the Canadian Treatment Landscape.

The prevalence of breast cancer amongst older adults in Canada is increasing. This patient population faces unique challenges in the management of breast cancer, as older adults often have distinct biological, psychosocial, and treatment-related considerations. This paper presents an expert consensus of the Canadian treatment landscape, focusing on key considerations for optimizing selection of systemic therapy for advanced breast cancer in older adults. This paper aims to provide evidence-based recommendations and practical guidance for healthcare professionals involved in the care of older adults with breast cancer. By recognizing and addressing the specific needs of older adults, healthcare providers can optimize treatment outcomes and improve the overall quality of care for this population.

The Impact of Cognitive Impairment on Treatment Toxicity, Treatment Completion, and Survival among Older Adults Receiving Chemotherapy: A Systematic Review.

Cognitive impairment (CI) is common among older adults with cancer, but its effect on cancer outcomes is not known. This systematic review sought to identify research investigating clinical endpoints (toxicity risk, treatment completion, and survival) of chemotherapy treatment in those with baseline CI. A systematic search of five databases (inception to March 2021) was conducted. Eligible studies included randomized trials, prospective studies, and retrospective studies in which the sample or a subgroup were older adults (aged ≥ 65) screened positive for CI prior to receiving chemotherapy. Risk of bias assessment was performed using the Quality in Prognosis Studies (QUIPS) tool. Twenty-three articles were included. Sample sizes ranged from n = 31 to 703. There was heterogeneity of cancer sites, screening tools and cut-offs used to ascertain CI, and proportion of patients with CI within study samples. Severity of CI and corresponding proportion of each level within study samples were unclear in all but one study. Among studies investigating CI in a qualified multivariable model, statistically significant findings were found in 4/6 studies on survival and in 1/1 study on nonhematological toxicity. The lack of robust evidence indicates a need for further research on the role of CI in predicting survival, treatment completion, and toxicity among older adults receiving chemotherapy, and the potential implications that could shape treatment decisions.

Treatment of Older Adult Patients with Glioblastoma: Moving towards the Inclusion of a Comprehensive Geriatric Assessment for Guiding Management.

Glioblastoma (GBM) is the most common primary malignant brain tumor in adults, and over half of patients with newly diagnosed GBM are over the age of 65. Management of glioblastoma in older patients includes maximal safe resection followed by either radiation, chemotherapy, or combined modality treatment. Despite recent advances in the treatment of older patients with GBM, survival is still only approximately 9 months compared to approximately 15 months for the general adult population, suggesting that further research is required to optimize management in the older population. The Comprehensive Geriatric Assessment (CGA) has been shown to have a prognostic and predictive role in the management of older patients with other cancers, and domains of the CGA have demonstrated an association with outcomes in GBM in retrospective studies. Furthermore, the CGA and other geriatric assessment tools are now starting to be prospectively investigated in older GBM populations. This review aims to outline current treatment strategies for older patients with GBM, explore the rationale for inclusion of geriatric assessment in GBM management, and highlight recent data investigating its implementation into practice.

Geriatric assessment-informed treatment decision making and downstream outcomes: what are the research priorities?

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: Geriatric assessment (GA) can predict outcomes relevant to patients and clinicians but is not widely used. The objective of this review is to summarize the evidence supporting use of GA to facilitate decision making and improve outcomes and identify gaps that need to be addressed to further bolster the rationale for the use of GA. RECENT FINDINGS: Recently several randomized controlled studies exploring the impact of GA-directed care have been reported. Although GA-directed care has not been shown to improve survival, it can decrease moderate to severe toxicity from chemotherapy, increase the likelihood of completing planned chemotherapy and improve quality of life without adversely affecting survival. In the surgical setting, GA-directed care may decrease duration of hospitalization, but does not affect rates of re-hospitalization. SUMMARY: GA-directed care can improve patient-important outcomes compared to usual care. However, more research on whether these findings apply to other contexts and whether GA-directed care can improve other outcomes important to patients, such as function and cognition, is needed. Also more clarity about how oncologic treatments should be modified based on results of a GA are needed if oncologists are to utilize this information effectively to obtain the reported results.

A Randomized Trial of Real-Time Geriatric Assessment Reporting in Nonelectively Hospitalized Older Adults with Cancer.

BACKGROUND: Hospitalized older adults have significant geriatric deficits that may lead to poor outcomes. We conducted a randomized trial to investigate the effectiveness of providing clinicians with a real-time geriatric assessment (GA) report in nonelectively hospitalized older patients with cancer. SUBJECTS, MATERIALS, AND METHODS: We developed a web-based software platform for administering a modified GA (Cancer 2005;104:1998-2005) to older (>70 years) nonelectively hospitalized patients with pathologically confirmed malignancy. Patients were randomized to have their GA report provided to their treating clinicians (Intervention arm) or not provided (Control arm). RESULTS: Our study included 135 patients, median age 76 years, 52% female, 75% white, 21% black, 79% greater than high school education, 59% married, and 17% living alone. All patients had at least one GA-identified deficit, including physical function deficits (90%), cognitive impairment (22%), >5 comorbidities (28%), polypharmacy (>9 medications; 38%), weight loss ≥10% in the past 6 months (40%), anxiety (32%), or depression (30%). There was no difference between the Intervention (6%) and Control arms (9%) in the proportion of patients who were referred by their clinical team for an intervention to address a deficit (p = .53). CONCLUSION: Many older nonelectively hospitalized patients with cancer have geriatric deficits that are amenable to evidence-based interventions. Real-time GA reports provided to the care team prior to discharge did not influence provider referral for such interventions. There is a need for systems-level interventions to address deficits in this vulnerable patient population. IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE: Geriatric deficits are common in hospitalized older adults with cancer and lead to poor outcomes. Addressing modifiable deficits represents an appealing way to improve outcomes. Widespread geriatrician consultation is impractical owing to resource and personnel constraints. This work tested whether prompt delivery of a mostly self-administered, web-based geriatric assessment report to clinicians improved referral rates for evidence-informed interventions. It confirmed frequent geriatric deficits and high readmission rates in this population but found that real-time geriatric assessment reporting did not influence provider referral for evidence-informed interventions on geriatric assessment identified deficits. These findings highlight the need for systems-level intervention to improve outcomes in this vulnerable patient population.

Clinical and Cost-effectiveness of a Comprehensive geriatric assessment and management for Canadian elders with Cancer-the 5C study: a study protocol for a randomised controlled phase III trial.

INTRODUCTION: Geriatric assessment and management is recommended for older adults with cancer referred for chemotherapy but no randomised controlled trial has been completed of this intervention in the oncology setting. TRIAL DESIGN: A two-group parallel single blind multi-centre randomised trial with a companion trial-based economic evaluation from both payer and societal perspectives with process evaluation. PARTICIPANTS: A total of 350 participants aged 70+, diagnosed with a solid tumour, lymphoma or myeloma, referred for first/second line chemotherapy, who speak English/French, have an Eastern Collaborative Oncology Group Performance Status 0-2 will be recruited. All participants will be followed for 12 months. INTERVENTION: Geriatric assessment and management for 6 months. The control group will receive usual oncologic care. All participants will receive a monthly healthy ageing booklet for 6 months. OBJECTIVE: To study the clinical and cost-effectiveness of geriatric assessment and management in optimising outcomes compared with usual oncology care. RANDOMISATION: Participants will be allocated to one of the two arms in a 1:1 ratio. The randomisation will be stratified by centre and treatment intent (palliative vs other). OUTCOME: Quality of life. SECONDARY OUTCOMES: (1) Cost-effectiveness, (2) functional status, (3) number of geriatric issues successfully addressed, (4) grades3-5 treatment toxicity, (5) healthcare use, (6) satisfaction, (7) cancer treatment plan modification and (8) overall survival. PLANNED ANALYSIS: For the primary outcome we will use a pattern mixture model using an intent-to-treat approach (at 3, 6 and12 months). We will conduct a cost-utility analysis alongside this clinical trial. For secondary outcomes 2-4, we will use a variety of methods. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Our study has been approved by all required REBs. We will disseminate our findings to stakeholders locally, nationally and internationally and by publishing the findings. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT03154671.

Causes of mortality in older patients with stage 3 colon cancer.

OBJECTIVES: Life expectancy plays a key role in the selection of patients with stage III colon cancer for adjuvant chemotherapy, but little is known about causes of mortality in older patients with colon cancer. We aimed to examine causes of death in this population and compare these causes between patients who received chemotherapy and those who did not. Specifically, we chose to examine the rates of death related to recurrent colon cancer versus non colon cancer. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Patients aged 50 and older diagnosed with stage III colon cancer between 2005 and 2009 were included. Patients were divided into "younger" (aged 50-69) and "older" (aged 70+). Causes of death, which were categorized into colon cancer versus non-colon cancer related. RESULTS: 1361 patients were included, 50% of whom were 70 or older. Younger patients were more likely to receive adjuvant chemotherapy (90% vs. 60%). 601 patients died in the follow up period. Deceased patients in the younger group were more likely to die from colon cancer (81% vs. 62%). The most common cause of non-colon cancer death was other primary malignancies in younger patients and cardiovascular diseases in older patients. In older patients who received chemotherapy, 41% died; 89% of these deaths were related to colon cancer. In older patients who did not receive chemotherapy 72% died, with 38% of patients ultimately dying from colon cancer. CONCLUSIONS: Older patients remain under-treated with chemotherapy. Although non-colon cancer deaths were more frequent in older patients with cancer, colon cancer was a still a significant cause of mortality. These deaths may be preventable with adjuvant chemotherapy.

Evaluating the association between adjuvant chemotherapy and function-related adverse events among older patients with early stage breast cancer.

PURPOSE: The incidence of treatment-related toxicity for adjuvant chemotherapy in breast cancer is well documented in clinical trials. However, the effect of chemotherapy on functional outcomes in older patients is less well known. We identified a cohort of older women diagnosed with early stage breast cancer to examine the association between exposure to chemotherapy and a claims-based measure of function-related adverse events (FAE). METHODS: Using the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER)-Medicare dataset, we identified women aged ≥66 diagnosed with stage I or II breast cancer from 2004 to 2011. FAE were defined as one or more claims suggestive of functional impairment within 24months following chemotherapy including claims for durable medical equipment and skilled care. Women who did not receive chemotherapy were weighted to reflect the covariate distribution of chemotherapy recipients using propensity score weighting for age, stage, baseline healthcare utilization, and comorbidities. RESULTS: The cohort included 44,626 patients, 6892 (15%) received chemotherapy. 19% of the population experienced ≥1 FAE. After propensity weighting, chemotherapy was associated with a small increased risk of FAEs (HR 1.12, 95% confidence interval: 1.04, 1.20). Results were similar in patients 75years and older versus younger patients. In the chemotherapy group, the highest risk of FAE occurred in the first 3months, but persisted through follow-up. CONCLUSIONS: Exposure to chemotherapy was associated with a small increased risk of FAE which did not vary by age. These data can be used to inform treatment decision making for older patients with breast cancer who are eligible for adjuvant chemotherapy.

Healthcare satisfaction in older and younger patients with cancer.

OBJECTIVE: Although older patients represent the most rapidly growing segment of the oncology population, clinical care is guided by very little data on patient-reported outcomes, particularly satisfaction with healthcare. Using a large cancer center registry, we sought to describe factors associated with satisfaction with care for older and younger oncology patients. METHODS: Data were collected through the University of North Carolina Health Registry Cancer Survivorship Cohort. Satisfaction was measured with the Patient Satisfaction Questionnaire Short Form. Quality of life (QOL) measures included were the Promis Global short form and the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy General (FACT-G). RESULTS: A total of 2385 patients were included. 460 (20%) were aged 70 and above (older group). Older patients reported significantly higher levels of satisfaction in domains of time spent with doctor (scores 3.84 versus 3.73 p=0.03) and financial aspects (scores 4.03 versus 3.44 p<0.001) compared to younger patients. In multivariable analysis, higher QOL scores and higher self-reported ECOG performance status were associated with higher satisfaction scores. African American race was associated with lower satisfaction scores in all age groups. QOL was more closely correlated with satisfaction in older patients compared to younger patients. CONCLUSIONS: Older patients with cancer report higher levels of satisfaction with care, in part due to lesser financial burden of care. Better QOL is associated with satisfaction with care in older patients. Use of patient-reported outcomes such as patient satisfaction may help improve patient-centered geriatric oncology care.

Geriatric Assessment of Older Adults With Cancer During Unplanned Hospitalizations: An Opportunity in Disguise.

BACKGROUND: Geriatric assessment (GA) is an important tool for management of older cancer patients; however, GA research has been performed primarily in the outpatient setting. The primary objective of this study was to determine feasibility of GA during an unplanned hospital stay. Secondary objectives were to describe deficits found with GA, to assess whether clinicians recognized and addressed deficits, and to determine 30-day readmission rates. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The study was designed as an extension of an existing registry, "Carolina Senior: Registry for Older Patients." Inclusion criteria were age 70 and older and biopsy-proven solid tumor, myeloma, or lymphoma. Patients had to complete the GA within 7 days of nonelective admission to University of North Carolina Hospital. RESULTS: A total of 142 patients were approached, and 90 (63%) consented to participation. All sections of GA had at least an 83% completion rate. Overall, 53% of patients reported problems with physical function, 63% had deficits in instrumental activities of daily living, 34% reported falls, 12% reported depression, 31% had ≥10% weight loss, and 12% had abnormalities in cognition. Physician documentation of each deficit ranged from 20% to 46%. Rates of referrals to allied health professionals were not significantly different between patients with and without deficits. The 30-day readmission rate was 29%. CONCLUSION: GA was feasible in this population. Hospitalized older cancer patients have high levels of functional and psychosocial deficits; however, clinician recognition and management of deficits were poor. The use of GA instruments to guide referrals to appropriate services is a way to potentially improve outcomes in this vulnerable population. IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE: Geriatric assessment (GA) is an important tool in the management of older cancer patients; however, its primary clinical use has been in the outpatient setting. During an unplanned hospitalization, patients are extremely frail and are most likely to benefit from GA. This study demonstrates that hospitalized older adults with cancer have high levels of functional deficits on GA. These deficits are under-recognized and poorly managed by hospital-based clinicians in a tertiary care setting. Incorporation of GA measures during a hospital stay is a way to improve outcomes in this population.

Comparison of toxicity experienced by older versus younger patients enrolled in breast cancer clinical trials.

BACKGROUND: Elderly patients form a large proportion of patients with breast cancer but are underrepresented in clinical trials. We examined whether elderly patients experience more toxicity than younger patients within breast cancer clinical trials. MATERIALS AND METHODS: All breast cancer trials open from 1999 to 2012 at BCCA, Vancouver Center, were reviewed. The primary endpoint was meaningful toxicity (MTOX), defined as any grade 3 or 4 adverse event (AE), any AE leading to dose delay or reduction, or premature discontinuation of therapy. RESULTS: In the 46 trials enrolling 799 patients, the therapy given was chemotherapy to 18% of the patients, hormonal therapy to 40%, skeletal therapy to 14%, and targeted therapy and a combination of chemotherapy and targeted therapy to 14%. Elderly patients were more likely to enroll in hormonal and skeletal therapy trials, and younger patients were evenly distributed among the therapy types. Toxicity data were available for 778 patients (97%). Elderly patients and younger patients experienced a similar number and frequency of MTOX. The therapy type was the strongest predictor of toxicity on multivariate analysis. In non-chemotherapy-containing trials, elderly and younger patients had a similar frequency and number of toxicities. Few elderly patients were enrolled in cytotoxic chemotherapy trials, but they experienced no more toxicity than did the younger patients. CONCLUSION: The appropriate selection of elderly patients using eligibility criteria, self selection, and/or clinician assessment will allow safe participation of elderly patients in breast cancer trials.