Search

PURPOSE: Performance status (PS) is a subjective assessment of patients' overall health. Quantification of physical activity using a wearable tracker (Fitbit Charge [FC]) may provide an objective measure of patient's overall PS and treatment tolerance. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Patients with colorectal cancer were prospectively enrolled into two cohorts (medical and surgical) and asked to wear FC for 4 days at baseline (start of new chemotherapy [± 4 weeks] or prior to curative resection) and follow-up (4 weeks [± 2 weeks] after initial assessment in medical and postoperative discharge in surgical cohort). Primary end point was feasibility, defined as 75% of patients wearing FC for at least 12 hours/d, 3 of 4 assigned days. Mean steps per day (SPD) were correlated with toxicities of interest (postoperative complication or ≥ grade 3 toxicity). A cutoff of 5,000 SPD was selected to compare outcomes. RESULTS: Eighty patients were accrued over 3 years with 55% males and a median age of 59.5 years. Feasibility end point was met with 68 patients (85%) wearing FC more than predefined duration and majority (91%) finding its use acceptable. The mean SPD count for patients with PS 0 was 6,313, and for those with PS 1, it was 2,925 (122 and 54 active minutes, respectively) (P =.0003). Occurrence of toxicity of interest was lower among patients with SPD > 5,000 (7 of 33, 21%) compared with those with SPD < 5,000 (14 of 43, 32%), although not significant (P =.31). CONCLUSION: Assessment of physical activity with FC is feasible in patients with colorectal cancer and well-accepted. SPD may serve as an adjunct to PS assessment and a possible tool to help predict toxicities, regardless of type of therapy. Future studies incorporating FC can standardize patient assessment and help identify vulnerable population. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article addresses the challenges associated with caring for an older patient with cancer. Topics include the projected increase in the number of older people with cancer by 2050, obstacles and concerns that arise at different stages of the disease according to an article by A. Shahrokni and colleagues, and a model proposed by Shahrokni et al for the identification of geriatric syndromes and referral to support services.

Purpose Older adults compose the majority of patients with cancer in the United States; however, it is unclear how well geriatrics or geriatric oncology training is being incorporated into hematology-oncology (hem-onc) fellowships. Methods A convenience sample of hem-onc fellows completed a (written or electronic) survey assessing their education, clinical experiences, and perceived proficiency in geriatric oncology during training; knowledge base in geriatric oncology; confidence in managing older adults with cancer; and general attitudes toward geriatric oncology principles. Results Forty-five percent of respondents (N = 138) were female, 67% were based in the United States, and most (60%) were past their first year of training. Most fellows rated geriatric oncology as important or very important (84%); however, only 25% reported having access to a geriatric oncology clinic and more than one half (53%) reported no lectures in geriatric oncology. Fellows reported fewer educational experiences in geriatric oncology than in nongeriatric oncology. For example, among procedure-based activities, 12% learned how to perform a geriatric assessment but 78% learned how to perform a bone marrow biopsy (P , .05). Of those completing the knowledge-based items, 41% were able to identify correctly the predictors of chemotherapy toxicity in older adults with cancer. Conclusion Despite the prevalence of cancer in older adults, hem-onc fellows report limited education in or exposure to geriatric oncology. The high value fellows place on geriatric oncology suggests that they would be receptive to additional training in this area. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose: Platinum-based therapy is the standard of care in patients who have HER2-negative, advanced esophagogastric cancer (AEGC). Retrospective data suggest that intratumoral ERCC1 levels may determine platinum sensitivity. A randomized, phase II study was performed in patients with AEGC to explore whether the efficacy of a platinum-based therapy with fluorouracil, leucovorin, and oxaliplatin (FOLFOX) versus a non-platinum-containing regimen of irinotecan and docetaxel (IT) differed according to ERCC1 levels., Patients and Methods: Overall, 202 untreated patients with HER2-negative AEGC and a Zubrod performance status of 0-1 were evaluated prospectively for mRNA expression of ERCC1 level and then randomly assigned to FOLFOX or IT, stratified by the intratumoral statuses of ERCC1 low (< 1.7) or high (≥ 1.7). Objectives were to assess progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) in all patients treated with FOLFOX compared with IT, stratified by low and high ERCC1 levels, and to assess for interactive effects between ERCC1 expression and treatment arm., Results: Eighty-six percent of patients had ERCC1 values < 1.7. Thus, evaluation of the ERCC1 -high subgroup was limited. Grade ≥ 3 anemia, dehydration, diarrhea, and fatigue were greater in patients with IT. Occurrences of grade ≥ 3 neuropathy and decreased neutrophils were greater in patients with FOLFOX. In all patients, FOLFOX had a statistically superior median PFS compared with IT (5.7 v 2.9 months; hazard ratio, 0.68; P = .02). In patients with ERCC1 levels < 1.7 receiving FOLFOX, PFS and response rate were statistically superior to IT, with no significant difference in OS., Conclusion: The evaluation of ERCC1 in patients with upper GI tumors was thwarted by an overwhelming predominance of low ERCC1 mRNA expression. Nonetheless, distribution of treatment effects on PFS did not vary with expression. For all patients and for those with low ERCC1 expression, FOLFOX was superior in efficacy to IT.