Search

Introduction: Aging-related concerns can increase the risk of treatment toxicities among older adults considering adjuvant chemotherapy. We previously demonstrated that older adults with cancer who reported feeling older than their chronological age (i.e., self-perceived age) were more likely to have aging-related concerns identified during a geriatric assessment. We explored how decisions about adjuvant chemotherapy vary with or are related to older adults' self-perceived age., Materials and Methods: We conducted a secondary analysis of a multi-phased feasibility pilot using semi-structured interviews that were conducted to explore the patient decision-making process for adjuvant chemotherapy. Interviews incorporated questions about chronological and perceived age as factors for decision-making. Patient eligibility for the study included (1) age ≥ 70 years and older, (2) a diagnosis of breast, colon, or lung cancer and considering adjuvant chemotherapy, and (3) able to read size 18 font in English. Interview data were analyzed using constant comparative method., Results: Twenty-one patients were enrolled. The mean chronological age was 78 years (range 71-91). The average perceived age of patients was 57 years (range 21-80). Eleven patients chose to receive treatment while ten patients did not. Aging-related themes illustrated that self-perceived age plays an important role when patients make decisions about adjuvant chemotherapy. More specifically, patients who reported their self-perceived age as younger than their chronological age also reported better perceived health status and chose to receive adjuvant chemotherapy., Discussion: Patients' experiences of aging and self-perceived age may have different implications for decision-making., (Copyright © 2023 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Background: The purpose of this study was to determine the effects of time from diagnosis to treatment (TTI) on survival in patients with nonmetastatic non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC)., Materials and Methods: The National Cancer Database was queried for patients with stages 1 to 3 NSCLC between 2004 and 2013. Patients with missing survival status/time, unknown TTI, or receipt of palliative therapy were excluded. Multivariable Cox proportional hazards modeling, logistic regression, and recursive partitioning analysis were performed to determine associated variables and survival outcomes., Results: Altogether, 1,393,232 patients met inclusion criteria. The median follow-up was 36 months. The median TTI increased between 2004 and 2013 from 35 to 39 days (P < .001). On multivariable Cox proportional hazards modeling, TTI groups 31 to 60 days, 61 to 90 days, and > 90 days were independently related to poorer overall survival (OS) compared with TTI 1 to 30 days (hazard ratio, 1.04, 1.10, and 1.14; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.02-1.06, 1.07-1.12, and 1.11-1.17, respectively; P < .001 for all). Recursive partitioning analysis revealed that TTI of ≤ 45 days was the most optimal threshold for survival (P < .001); patients with TTI ≤ 45 days had a median OS of 70.2 months (95% CI, 69.3-71.1 months) versus 61.5 months (95% CI, 60.5-62.4) (P < .001). There were significant disparities by age, race, ethnicity, and income for delayed (> 45 days) TTI (P < .001 for all). Subgroup analysis revealed that stage 1 and 2 patients with TTI > 45 days had a higher risk of mortality compared with TTI ≤ 45 days (hazard ratio, 1.15 and 1.05; 95% CI, 1.12-1.17 and 1.01-1.09, respectively) (P < .001)., Conclusions: Increased TTI is independently associated with poorer survival in non-metastatic NSCLC. TTI ≤ 45 days is a clinically targetable time frame associated with improved outcomes and ought to be considered for patients with lung cancer undergoing definitive therapy., (Copyright © 2020 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Introduction: Older adults are underrepresented in landmark trials that determine treatment guidelines for pancreatic cancer. We used the National Cancer Database (NCDB) to compare treatment patterns and outcomes in stage I-III pancreatic cancer between older adult patients, defined as age 80 or older, to patients younger than 80., Material and Methods: We identified 140,678 patients in the NCDB diagnosed with pancreatic cancer from 2004 to 2015. Patients with metastatic disease or non-adenocarcinoma histologies were excluded. Descriptive statistics comparing patients age 80+ and age <80 were generated. Logistic regression was used to evaluate predictors of cancer-directed therapy receipt (defined as receipt of chemotherapy, radiation, or surgery) in older patients, and Cox proportional hazards modeling was performed to evaluate survival in the older cohort., Results: We identified 140,678 patients with non-metastatic pancreatic cancer, of which 23,395 patients (16.6%) were 80 or older. Among older patients, 44.5% of patients received cancer-directed therapy compared to 78.7% among other patients (p < .001). Older patients had worse 2-year survival at 11.3% versus 27.5% for younger (p < .001). 2-year survivorship decreased further in older patients who received no cancer-directed treatment, at 4.7% compared with 19.5% for older patients receiving treatment (p < .001). After propensity score matching, cancer-directed treatment remained associated with improved survival for older patients (hazard ratio 0.42; 95% confidence interval 0.41-0.43; p < .001)., Discussion: Rates of cancer-directed therapy were low in patients age 80+, with 55.5% receiving no therapy. Cancer-directed treatment was associated with an overall survival benefit. Future trials are needed to define optimal treatment paradigms in this population., Competing Interests: Declaration of Competing Interest We have no conflicts of interest to declare., (Copyright © 2019. Published by Elsevier Ltd.)

Objective: The WHISPER randomized controlled trial (RCT) evaluates safety and clinical effectiveness of subperception spinal cord stimulation (SCS) at ≤1.2 kHz in subjects previously implanted with an SCS system for treatment of chronic, neuropathic pain., Methods: WHISPER is a prospective, multicenter RCT with a crossover design sponsored by Boston Scientific, Marlborough, MA (ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT02314000). Eligible subjects were randomized (N = 140) to receive subperception or supraperception for three months and then crossed over to receive the alternative. Upon completion of crossover period, subjects who preferred subperception were followed up to one year. Overall pain, quality-of-life, and other outcomes were collected in the study. The primary endpoint was the overall pain responder rate (≥50% improvement from baseline) with no increase in medications. Secondary endpoints consisted of pain scores, physical disability, quality of life, and treatment preference., Results: The study met its primary endpoint and demonstrated noninferiority between supraperception and subperception in a prespecified cohort of 70 randomized subjects (Interim Analysis). Thirty-nine percent of subjects with subperception settings and 29% with supraperception settings had a greater than or equal to 50% reduction in their overall pain scores with no increase in average daily medication at three-months post-activation as compared with baseline. Further assessment of all participating study subjects (N = 140) revealed similar results. Subjects were previously implanted 3.8 ± 2 years and had a disability score (Oswestry Disability Index) of 70.2 ± 11.4 at study start. Of the randomized subjects that completed the End of Period 2 Visit, 93 (66%) preferred subperception SCS and their mean overall pain reduced from 7.3 ± 1.1 (N = 89) at baseline to 4.0 ± 2.1 (N = 80) at 12-months post-activation. Post hoc analysis also demonstrated that multiple options provide superior outcomes, as supported by a 74% increase in the responder rate when subjects could choose their most effective option (47%) compared with supraperception alone (27%)., Discussion: Subperception SCS at ≤1.2 kHz is safe and effective in subjects with extreme physical disability and previously implanted for chronic pain. Further, by providing study participants with different waveform options, increased pain relief was achieved., (© 2019 The Authors. Neuromodulation: Technology at the Neural Interface published by Wiley Periodicals, Inc. on behalf of International Neuromodulation Society.)