Search

Cancer is a disease of aging and, as the world's population ages, the number of older persons with cancer is increasing and will make up a growing share of the oncology population in virtually every country. Despite this, older patients remain vastly underrepresented in research that sets the standards for cancer treatments. Consequently, most of what we know about cancer therapeutics is based on clinical trials conducted in younger, healthier patients, and effective strategies to improve clinical trial participation of older adults with cancer remain sparse. For this systematic review, the authors evaluated published studies regarding barriers to participation and interventions to improve participation of older adults in cancer trials. The quality of the available evidence was low and, despite a literature describing multifaceted barriers, only one intervention study aimed to increase enrollment of older adults in trials. The findings starkly amplify the paucity of evidence-based, effective strategies to improve participation of this underrepresented population in cancer trials. Within these limitations, the authors provide their opinion on how the current cancer research infrastructure must be modified to accommodate the needs of older patients. Several underused solutions are offered to expand clinical trials to include older adults with cancer. However, as currently constructed, these recommendations alone will not solve the evidence gap in geriatric oncology, and efforts are needed to meet older and frail adults where they are by expanding clinical trials designed specifically for this population and leveraging real-world data. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In September 2010, the Cancer and Aging Research Group, in collaboration with the National Cancer Institute and the National Institute on Aging, conducted the first of three planned conferences to discuss research methodology to generate the highest quality research in older adults with cancer and then disseminate these findings among those working in the fields of cancer and aging. Conference speakers discussed the current level of research evidence in geriatric oncology, outlined the current knowledge gaps, and put forth principles for research designs and strategies that would address these gaps within the next 10 years. It was agreed that future oncology research trials that enroll older adults should include: (1) improved standardized geriatric assessment of older oncology patients, (2) substantially enhanced biological assessment of older oncology patients, (3) specific trials for the most vulnerable and/or those older than 75 years, and (4) research infrastructure that specifically targets older adults and substantially strengthened geriatrics and oncology research collaborations. This initial conference laid the foundation for the next two meetings, which will address the research designs and collaborations needed to enhance therapeutic and intervention trials in older adults with cancer. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Older adults with cancer heterogeneously experience health care, treatment, and symptoms. Geriatric assessment (GA) offers a comprehensive evaluation of an older individual's health status and can predict cancer-related outcomes in individuals with solid tumors and those with hematologic malignancies. In the last decade, randomized controlled trials have demonstrated the benefits of GA and GA management (GAM), which uses GA information to provide tailored intervention strategies to address GA impairments (e.g., implementing physical therapy for impaired physical function). Multiple phase 3 clinical trials in older adults with solid tumors and hematologic malignancies have demonstrated that GAM improves treatment completion, quality of life, communication, and advance care planning while reducing treatment-related toxicity, falls, and polypharmacy. Nonetheless, implementation and uptake of GAM remain challenging. Various strategies have been proposed, including the use of GA screening tools, to identify patients most likely to benefit from GAM, the systematic engagement of the oncology workforce in the delivery of GAM, and the integration of technologies like telemedicine and mobile health to enhance the availability of GA and GAM interventions. Health inequities in minoritized groups persist, and systematic GA implementation has the potential to capture social determinants of health that are relevant to equitable care. Caregivers play an important role in cancer care and experience burden themselves. GA can guide dyadic supportive care interventions, ultimately helping both patients and caregivers achieve optimal health., (© 2024 The Author(s). CA: A Cancer Journal for Clinicians published by Wiley Periodicals LLC on behalf of American Cancer Society.)

Purpose: The COVID-19 pandemic has caused great strain on older adults with cancer and their healthcare providers. This study explored healthcare providers' reported changes in cancer care, clinical barriers to care, patient questions, and the overall experiences of caring for older adults with cancer during the COVID-19 crisis., Methods: The Advocacy Committee of the Cancer and Aging Research Group and the Association of Community Cancer Centers developed a survey for healthcare providers of adults with cancer, inquiring about their experiences during the pandemic. Responses from the survey's four open-ended items were analyzed by four independent coders for identification of common themes using deductive and inductive methods., Results: Participants (n = 137) represented a variety of demographic and clinical experiences. Six overall themes emerged, including (1) telehealth use, (2) concerns for patient mental health, (3) patient physical and social isolation, (4) patient fear of contracting COVID-19, (5) continued disruptions to cancer care, and (6) patients seeking guidance, particularly regarding COVID-19 vaccination. Questions fielded by providers focused on the COVID-19 vaccination's safety and efficacy during older adults' cancer treatment., Conclusions: Additional resources (e.g., technology support, established care guidelines, and sufficient staffing) are needed to support older adults with cancer and healthcare providers during the pandemic. Future research should explore universally effective in-person and virtual treatment strategies for older adults with cancer., Implications for Cancer Survivors: Persistence of telehealth barriers, particularly a lack of infrastructure to support telehealth visits, social isolation, and restrictive visitor policies as a result of COVID-19, negatively impacted the mental health of older adults with cancer., (© 2023. The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, part of Springer Nature.)

Competing Interests: Declaration of Competing Interest NMLB and LMB reported relevant activities outside the submitted work: NMLB has served on advisory boards for Pfizer, Abbot, and Sanofi; received travel grants from Exact Sciences, Pfizer, and Lilly; and received speaker fees from Pfizer and AbbVie. LMB has served as a consultant for Pfizer, AstraZeneca, EMD Serono, and Merck.

Introduction: Approximately 25% of older cancer survivors (i.e., ≥ 65 years, with cancer history) use ≥1 mobility device, surpassing usage by other older adults. Few tools exist for older "survivors" to regain function or follow lifestyle recommendations. Our goal was to explore opportunities to leverage technology-enabled mobility devices, such as the "smart cane," to support mobility goals in these survivors. The research objective was to assess perceptions related to acceptability, usability and preferences of participants regarding technology-enabled mobility devices in everyday life., Materials and Methods: We used a convergent mixed-methods design, analyzing quantitative data followed by qualitative focus groups. A pre-survey derived from the Senior Technology Acceptance Model assessed the acceptability of technology-enabled devices among participants, who also participated in one of three focus groups delivered via Zoom. The Zoom sessions included facilitated 90-min discussions and video demonstration of the smart cane. Focus group sessions were recorded and transcribed verbatim and thematic content analysis was conducted., Results: We recruited 12 older US survivors. Participants were 58% female, aged 68-86, and 16% non-White. From a pre-survey of participants, 83% said that they liked the idea of technology-enhanced mobility device and 100% said they thought they could be skillful at using a technology-enabled device if training was provided. Though participants were enthusiastic about the smart cane overall and felt the smart cane supported independence for older adults, the themes revealed concerns about safety, accessibility and technology support, as well as the concern for negative impact on self-image due to use of a mobility device. There was a strong preference for working with clinical professionals as the most trusted sources for referrals, if a smart cane was suggested., Discussion: Older survivors in our sample found the smart cane very acceptable, and supportive of independence for older adults with cancer and other conditions. Participants also provided many insights that revealed additional research needed to support access, safety and usability for older adults, older survivors and caregivers, especially by partnering with clinical professionals., Competing Interests: Declaration of Competing Interest The authors have declared no conflicts of interest for this article., (Copyright © 2023 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Introduction: The COVID-19 pandemic has created unprecedented obstacles leading to delays in treatment for older adults with cancer. Due to limited resources at the height of the pandemic, healthcare providers were constantly faced with ethical dilemmas regarding postponing or rescheduling care for their patients., Materials and Methods: Two survey-based studies were conducted at different time-points during the pandemic looking at factors affecting oncology care providers' attitudes towards delay in treatment for older adults with cancer. Eligible participants were recruited by email sent through professional organizations' listservs, email blasts, and social media. Change in provider attitude over time was analyzed by comparing responses from the 2020 and 2021 surveys. Data analysis included descriptive statistics and chi-squares., Results: In 2020, 17.5% of respondents were strongly considering/considering postponing cancer treatment for younger patients (age 30 and below), while 46.2% were considering delaying treatment for patients aged >85. These responses were in stark contrast to the results of the 2021 survey, where only 1.4% of respondents strongly considered postponing treatment for younger patients, and 13.5% for patients aged >85., Discussion: All recommendations to postpone treatment for older adults with cancer must be made after mutual discussion with the patient. Throughout the COVID-19 pandemic, oncology care providers had to consider multiple factors while treating patients, frequently making most decisions without appropriate institutional support., Competing Interests: Declaration of Competing Interest All authors certify that they have no affiliations with or involvement in any organization or entity with any financial interest., (Copyright © 2023 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Purpose: Care for older adults with cancer became more challenging during the COVID-19 pandemic, particularly in urban hotspots. This study examined the potential differences in healthcare providers' provision of as well as barriers to cancer care for older adults with cancer between urban and suburban/rural settings., Methods: Members of the Advocacy Committee of the Cancer and Aging Research Group, with the Association of Community Cancer Centers, surveyed multidisciplinary healthcare providers responsible for the direct care of patients with cancer. Respondents were recruited through organizational listservs, email blasts, and social media messages. Descriptive statistics and chi-square tests were used., Results: Complete data was available from 271 respondents (urban (n = 144), suburban/rural (n = 127)). Most respondents were social workers (42, 44%) or medical doctors/advanced practice providers (34, 13%) in urban and suburban/rural settings, respectively. Twenty-four percent and 32.4% of urban-based providers reported "strongly considering" treatment delays among adults aged 76-85 and > 85, respectively, compared to 13% and 15.4% of suburban/rural providers (Ps = 0.048, 0.013). More urban-based providers reported they were inclined to prioritize treatment for younger adults over older adults than suburban/rural providers (10.4% vs. 3.1%, p = 0.04) during the pandemic. The top concerns reported were similar between the groups and related to patient safety, treatment delays, personal safety, and healthcare provider mental health., Conclusion: These findings demonstrate location-based differences in providers' attitudes regarding care provision for older adults with cancer during the COVID-19 pandemic., (© 2022. The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature.)

The workshop "Engaging Older Adults in Cancer Clinical Trials Conducted in the NCI Clinical Trials Network: Challenges and Opportunities" included a Patient Stakeholder Workgroup that explored the needs and concerns of older adults with cancer regarding clinical trials. To accomplish this, the workgroup conducted patient focus groups in which participants were interviewed, recorded conversations were analyzed and coded, and salient themes were identified. The focus groups identified general barriers to accrual such as complex consent forms, general communication, restrictive eligibility, nonreferrals, patient costs, cultural insensitivity, limited accessibility in community settings, and transportation issues. They also identified the influence of knowledgeable information presenters, improved care, family or caregiver support, and the desire to help others as drivers or reasons to participate in clinical trials. The workshop concluded that multi-level interventions could be used to increase the accrual of older adults to National Cancer Institute clinical trials as well as others., (© The Author(s) 2022. Published by Oxford University Press. All rights reserved. For permissions, please email: journals.permissions@oup.com.)

Purpose: Falls are a modifiable source of morbidity for older adults with cancer, yet are underassessed in oncology practice. In this secondary analysis of a nationwide cluster-randomized controlled trial, we examined characteristics associated with patient-oncologist conversations about falls, and whether oncologist knowledge of geriatric assessment (GA) resulted in more conversations., Methods: Eligible patients (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT02107443) were age ≥ 70 years, had stage III/IV solid tumor or lymphoma, were being treated with noncurative treatment intent, and ≥ 1 GA domain impairment. Patients in both arms underwent GA. At practices randomly assigned to the intervention arm, oncologists were provided a GA summary with management recommendations. In both arms, patients had one clinical encounter audio-recorded, transcribed, and coded to categorize whether a conversation about falls occurred. Generalized linear mixed models adjusted for arm, practice site, and other important covariates were used to generate proportions and odds ratios (ORs) from the full sample., Results: Of 541 patients (intervention N = 293 and usual care N = 248, mean age: 77 years, standard deviation: 5.3), 528 had evaluable audio recordings. More patients had conversations about falls in the intervention versus usual care arm (61.3% v 10.3%, P < .001). Controlling for the intervention and practice site, history of falls (OR, 2.1; 95% CI, 1.3 to 3.6; P = .005) and impaired physical performance (OR, 4.7; 95% CI, 1.7 to 12.8; P = .002) were significantly associated with patient-oncologist conversations about falls., Conclusion: GA intervention increased conversations about falls. History of falls and impaired physical performance were associated with patient-oncologist conversations about falls in community oncology practice.

Purpose: To support shared decision-making, patient-facing resources are needed to complement recently published guidelines on approaches for surveillance mammography in breast cancer survivors aged ≥ 75 or with < 10-year life expectancy. We created a patient guide to facilitate discussions about surveillance mammography in older breast cancer survivors., Methods: The "Are Mammograms Still Right for Me?" guide estimates future ipsilateral and contralateral breast (in-breast) cancer risks, general health, and the potential benefits/harms of mammography, with prompts for discussion. We conducted in-clinic acceptability testing of the guide by survivors and their clinicians at a National Cancer Institute-designated comprehensive cancer center, including two community practices. Patients and clinicians received the guide ahead of a clinic visit and surveyed patients (pre-/post-visit) and clinicians (post-visit). Acceptability was defined as ≥ 75% of patients and clinicians reporting that the guide (a) should be recommended to others, (b) is clear, (c) is helpful, and (d) contains a suitable amount of information. We also elicited feedback on usability and mammography intentions., Results: We enrolled 45 patients and their 21 clinicians. Among those responding in post-visit surveys, 33/37 (89%) patients and 15/16 (94%) clinicians would recommend the guide to others; 33/37 (89%) patients and 15/16 (94%) clinicians felt everything/most things were clear. All other pre-specified acceptability criteria were met. Most patients reported strong intentions for mammography (100% pre-visit, 98% post-visit)., Conclusion: Oncology clinicians and older breast cancer survivors found a guide to inform mammography decision-making acceptable and clear. A multisite clinical trial is needed to assess the guide's impact mammography utilization., Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov-NCT03865654, posted March 7, 2019., (© 2022. The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, part of Springer Nature.)

Chimeric antigen receptor (CAR) T cell therapy is a novel therapy for patients with relapsed or refractory hematologic malignancies. Most CAR T cell therapy recipients will experience clinical features of the immune effector cell-associated neurotoxicity syndrome (ICANS), a potentially life-threatening condition. Here we describe the clinical, biological, and radiological findings associated with ICANS in adults with hematologic malignancies treated with CAR T cell therapy, as well as the acute and long-term outcomes of ICANS. A literature search of Ovid Medline, Embase, PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science Core Collection, Cochrane Library, and Google Scholar was conducted from each database's inception through February 1, 2022, using search terms reflecting CAR T cell therapy and ICANS. We included studies that enrolled adults (age ≥18 years) who received CAR T cell therapy as management for hematologic malignancies and reported the clinical presentation, predictors, and/or acute or long-term outcomes of ICANS. Two reviewers independently extracted data following the PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis) reporting guidelines. Quality was assessed using the Joanna Briggs Institute critical appraisal tool for cohort studies. Of the 2928 studies screened, 23 observational studies (10 prospective, 11 retrospective, 1 mixed design, and 1 cross-sectional) with a total of 1666 participants met our eligibility criteria and were included in our review. The most common hematologic malignancies were diffuse large B cell lymphoma, acute lymphocytic leukemia, non-Hodgkin lymphoma, and chronic lymphocytic leukemia. ICANS onset was most often associated with the presence and severity of cytokine release syndrome, as well as with C-reactive protein and ferritin levels. Aphasia was the most common ICANS-related symptom reported, although the neurologic manifestations of ICANS were highly variable. Neuroimaging studies (magnetic resonance imaging or computed tomography) were often normal in cases of ICANS; however, electroencephalography often showed generalized background slowing, abnormal rhythmic, and periodic discharge patterns. The pooled mean (± SD) onset of ICANS was 6.4 ± 3.2 days, with a pooled mean duration of 8.3 ± 10.5 days. Two of the 23 studies (9%) reported 5 ICANS-related deaths among 233 participants. A subset of patients experienced persistent neurocognitive complaints at ≥1-year after CAR T cell therapy. The clinical presentation, onset, severity, long-term sequelae, and grading system of ICANS are variable. Future studies should consider using a consensus grading/reporting scale that would permit cross-trial comparisons of the safety profile of various CAR T cell products and enable the development of interventions to mitigate or manage these neurotoxicities. © 2022 American Society for Transplantation and Cellular Therapy. Published by Elsevier Inc. This systematic review was conducted according to a published protocol (PROSPERO CRD42020207864) and followed the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis (PRISMA) and Synthesis without Meta-Analysis (SWiM) in systematic review reporting guidelines (Supplementary Table S1) [15,16]., Competing Interests: Conflict of interest statement There are no conflicts of interest to report., (Copyright © 2022. Published by Elsevier Inc.)

The population of older adults with cancer in the United States is rapidly increasing, which will have a substantial impact on the oncology and public health workforces across the cancer continuum, from prevention to end of life. Unfortunately, inequities in existing social structures that cause increased psychosocial stressors have led to disparities in the incidence of cancer and the morbidity and mortality of cancer for individuals from marginalized backgrounds. It is imperative that older adults, especially those from historically marginalized backgrounds, be adequately represented in all stages of cancer research to address health inequities. Continued efforts and progress toward achieving social justice and health equity require a deeper commitment to and better understanding of the impact of social determinants of health within the cancer domain. Undoubtedly, a more holistic and integrated view that extends beyond the biologic and genetic factors of health must be adopted for health entities to recognize the critical role of environmental, behavioral, and social determinants in cancer health disparities. Against this backdrop, this paper uses a life course approach to present a multifactorial framework for understanding and addressing cancer disparities in an effort to advance social justice and health equity for racially and ethnically diverse older adults.

Background: Older age is associated with poorer outcomes of SARS-CoV-2 infection, although the heterogeneity of ageing results in some older adults being at greater risk than others. The objective of this study was to quantify the association of a novel geriatric risk index, comprising age, modified Charlson comorbidity index, and Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status, with COVID-19 severity and 30-day mortality among older adults with cancer., Methods: In this cohort study, we enrolled patients aged 60 years and older with a current or previous cancer diagnosis (excluding those with non-invasive cancers and premalignant or non-malignant conditions) and a current or previous laboratory-confirmed COVID-19 diagnosis who reported to the COVID-19 and Cancer Consortium (CCC19) multinational, multicentre, registry between March 17, 2020, and June 6, 2021. Patients were also excluded for unknown age, missing data resulting in unknown geriatric risk measure, inadequate data quality, or incomplete follow-up resulting in unknown COVID-19 severity. The exposure of interest was the CCC19 geriatric risk index. The primary outcome was COVID-19 severity and the secondary outcome was 30-day all-cause mortality; both were assessed in the full dataset. Adjusted odds ratios (ORs) and 95% CIs were estimated from ordinal and binary logistic regression models., Findings: 5671 patients with cancer and COVID-19 were included in the analysis. Median follow-up time was 56 days (IQR 22-120), and median age was 72 years (IQR 66-79). The CCC19 geriatric risk index identified 2365 (41·7%) patients as standard risk, 2217 (39·1%) patients as intermediate risk, and 1089 (19·2%) as high risk. 36 (0·6%) patients were excluded due to non-calculable geriatric risk index. Compared with standard-risk patients, high-risk patients had significantly higher COVID-19 severity (adjusted OR 7·24; 95% CI 6·20-8·45). 920 (16·2%) of 5671 patients died within 30 days of a COVID-19 diagnosis, including 161 (6·8%) of 2365 standard-risk patients, 409 (18·5%) of 2217 intermediate-risk patients, and 350 (32·1%) of 1089 high-risk patients. High-risk patients had higher adjusted odds of 30-day mortality (adjusted OR 10·7; 95% CI 8·54-13·5) than standard-risk patients., Interpretation: The CCC19 geriatric risk index was strongly associated with COVID-19 severity and 30-day mortality. Our CCC19 geriatric risk index, based on readily available clinical factors, might provide clinicians with an easy-to-use risk stratification method to identify older adults most at risk for severe COVID-19 as well as mortality., Funding: US National Institutes of Health National Cancer Institute Cancer Center., Competing Interests: The following authors declare competing interests not related to the current work: ZB reports grants from Genentech/imCORE, non-financial support from Bristol Myers Squibb, and personal fees from UpToDate. AE reports salary support from the Canadian Institute of Health Research, the Detweiler Travelling Fellowship (Royal College of Physicians and Surgeons of Canada), and the Henry R Shibata Fellowship (Cedar's Cancer Foundation). CRF reports grants from Merck Foundation, NCCN/Pfizer, and National Cancer Institute, and other support from National Cancer Institute and the Patient-Centered Outcomes Research Institute. PGri reports personal fees and non-financial support from AstraZeneca, personal fees from Astellas Pharma, personal fees from Bayer, grants and personal fees from Bristol Myers Squibb, grants and non-financial support from Clovis Oncology, personal fees from Dyania Health, grants and personal fees from EMD Serono, personal fees from Exelixis, personal fees from Foundation Medicine, personal fees from Genentech/Roche, personal fees from Genzyme, grants and personal fees from GlaxoSmithKline, personal fees from Guardant Health, grants and personal fees from Immunomedics/Gilead, personal fees from Infinity Pharmaceuticals, personal fees from Janssen, grants and personal fees from Merck, grants and personal fees from Mirati Therapeutics, grants and personal fees from Pfizer, grants and personal fees from QED Therapeutics, personal fees from Regeneron Pharmaceuticals, personal fees from Seattle Genetics, personal fees from 4D Pharma, personal fees from UroGen, grants from Bavarian Nordic, and grants from Debiopharm. SGup reports grants and personal fees from Bristol Myers Squibb, personal fees from Merck, Janssen, Seattle Genetis, EMD Sorono, and Pfizer, and grants from Astellas and BMS. CHw reports grants from Merck, Bayer, and AstraZeneca, and personal fees from Tempus and EMD Sorono, and other support from Johnson and Johnson. AK reports other support from TESARO, Fibrogen, Geistlich Pharma, Astellas Pharma, Rafael Pharmaceuticals, and Novocure. ARK reports other support from Merck and Sanofi, personal fees from OncLive, grants from ASCO Conquer Cancer Foundation, and grants from Bladder Cancer Advocacy Network. HK reports position on advisory board of Sanofi Genzyme NSCLC Northeast. NMK reports personal fees from BMS, Janssen, Seattle Genetics, Celldex, Sandoz, Invitae, Beyond Spring, Spectrum G1 Therapeutics, and Total Health, and grants from Amgen, Jazz Therapeutics, G1 Therapeutics, and Samsung. CL reports grants from imCORE/Genentech. RRM reports serving on advisory board or as a consultant for Astrazeneca, Aveo, Bayer, BMS, Caris, Dendreon, Exelixis, Janssen, Merck, Myovant, Novartis, Pfizer, Sanofi, Sorrento Therapeutics, and Tempus. RRM received institutional research funding from Pfizer, Bayer, Tempus. SM reports personal fees from National Geographic. OAP reports grants from National Institutes of Health (NIH) and Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality, and personal fees from International Consulting Associates. NAP reports personal fees from AstraZeneca, Merck, Pfizer, Eli Lilly, Genentech, BMS, Amgen, Inivata, G1 Therapeutics, Xencor, Mirati, Janssen, Boehringer Ingelheim, and Sanofi-Genzyme-Regeneron. RPR reports grants from BMS and Janssen, and personal fees from BMS, Janssen, Dova, and Inari. MAT reports personal fees from VIA Oncology, GSK, and Adaptive Advisory Board, other support from Syapse, UpToDate, Takeda, Celgene, Doximity, AbbVie, BMS, CRAB CTC, Denovo, Hoosier Research Network, Lilly, LynxBio, Strata Oncology, and TG Therapeutics. JLW reports personal fees from Roche, Westat, Flatiron Health, Melax Tech, and IBM Watson Health, other support from HemOnc and Janssen, and grants from AACR. TMW reports personal fees from Carevive, and personal fees from Sanofi, and Seattle Genetics. TMW-D reports grants from BMS, Merck, Janssen, and GSK/Tesaro, personal fees from Exicure, Shattuck Labs, Merck, Caris Life Science, and SITC, and other support from High Enroll. EW-B reports grants from Pfizer Global Medical Grants, personal fees from Astellas, Aveo Oncology Bristol Myers Squibb, Exelixis, and Janssen, and other support from Immunomedics and Nektar. The following authors declare competing interests during the conduct of the study: SM reports grants and other support from National Cancer Institute and from the International Association for the Study of Lung Cancer. DPS reports grants from American Cancer Society and Hope Foundation for Cancer Research and from NIH. LT reports grants from NIH. JLW reports grants from NIH. All other authors declare no competing interests., (© 2022 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier Ltd. This is an Open Access article under the CC BY-NC-ND 4.0 license.)

Importance: The functional status and physical performance of older adults with cancer are underassessed and undertreated despite the high prevalence of impaired functional status and physical performance in this population and their associations with chemotherapy-induced toxic effects and mortality., Objective: To examine the association between providing oncologists with a geriatric assessment (GA) summary with recommendations and having oncologist-patient conversations about functional and physical performance., Design, Setting, and Participants: Data for this secondary analysis were collected from October 29, 2014, to April 28, 2017, for a national cluster randomized clinical trial conducted by the University of Rochester Cancer Center National Cancer Institute Community Oncology Research Program evaluating the effect of a GA intervention on patient satisfaction with communication about aging-related concerns. There were 17 practice clusters in the intervention group and 14 in the usual care group. All 541 participants underwent a GA including standardized functional and physical performance measures and had 1 clinical encounter audio-recorded, transcribed, and blindly coded to categorize conversations by GA domain. Participants were aged 70 years or older, with a stage III or IV solid tumor or lymphoma with palliative treatment intent, and impairment in 1 or more GA domain. Statistical analysis was performed from August 18, 2020, to January 10, 2022., Interventions: Oncologist practices randomized to the intervention received a GA summary and validated recommendations for each patient prior to the audio-recorded clinical encounter., Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary analysis of this clinical trial assessed the effect of the intervention on patient satisfaction with oncologist communication about aging-related concerns. This secondary analysis assessed the post hoc hypothesis that the intervention would be associated with an increase in the proportion of patients having conversations with their oncologists and receiving oncologist recommendations specific to functional and physical performance concerns., Results: A total of 541 patients (276 men [51%]; mean [SD] age, 77.5 [5.2] years [range, 70-96 years]) were analyzed at baseline. Excluding 13 patients without audio recordings, 86% of patients (95% CI, 78%-91%) in the intervention group vs 59% of patients (95% CI, 47%-69%; P < .001) receiving usual care had conversations about functional or physical performance. Conversations were more frequently initiated by oncologists in the intervention group (84%; 95% CI, 77%-90%) than oncologists in the usual care group (58%; 95% CI, 45%-70%; P < .001). Oncologists in the intervention group were more likely to address patients' concerns (43%; 95% CI, 33%-53%) than oncologists in the usual care group (17%; 95% CI, 10%-26%; P < .001)., Conclusions and Relevance: In this secondary analysis of a cluster randomized clinical trial, providing oncologists with a GA summary was associated with an increase in the number of oncologist-patient conversations about functional and physical performance-related concerns with recommendations to address these concerns. These findings support the use of the GA summary and recommendations as important tools in caring for older adults with advanced cancer and functional or physical impairments., Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02107443.

Background: Older adults with Hodgkin Lymphoma (HL) have poorer outcomes than younger patients. There are little data about which baseline patient and disease factors inform prognosis among older patients. We sought to create a prediction model for 1-year mortality among older patients with new HL who received dose-intense chemotherapy., Methods: We included adults ≥65 years old with a new diagnosis of classical HL between 2000-2013 from the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER)-Medicare dataset who received full-regimen chemotherapy. Through a non-random 2:1 split, we created development and validation cohorts. Multiple imputation was used for missing data. Using stepwise selection and logistic regression, we identified predictive variables for 1-year mortality. The model was applied to the validation cohort. A final model was then fit in the full cohort., Results: We included 1315 patients. In the development cohort (n = 813), we identified significant predictors of 1-year mortality including age, Charlson comorbidity index (CCI), B symptoms at diagnosis, and advanced stage at diagnosis. The c-statistic was 0.70. When this model was applied to the validation cohort (n = 502), the c-statistic was 0.65. Predictors of 1-year mortality in the final model were CCI (OR = 1.41), B symptoms (OR = 1.54), advanced stage (OR = 1.44), and older age at diagnosis (OR = 1.33)., Conclusion: We present a prediction model for use among older adults with HL who receive intensive chemotherapy. We identify risk factors for death within 1 year of diagnosis. Future work will build upon prognostication and shared decision-making after diagnosis for this population., Competing Interests: Declaration of Competing Interest JF: Acerta (Data & Safety Monitoring Committee); AE: Research to Practice (Honoraria); Seattle Genetics (consultancy & honoraria); Pharmacyclics (Honoraria & DMC); Verastem (consultancy & honoraria); Bayer (consultancy & honoraria); Affimed (consultancy & honoraria); Takeda (research funding), Merck (research funding) TW: Janssen (research); Carevive (consultancy); Seattle Genetics (consultancy) SKP: Seattle Genetics (consultancy)., (Copyright © 2021 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Haematological malignancies are a heterogeneous group of diseases with diverse incidence. In Europe, the median age at diagnosis across all disease entities is 69 years. Incidence generally increases with age, reaching a maximum at 75-99 years, with the notable exceptions of Hodgkin lymphoma and acute lymphocytic leukaemia. Overall survival for patients aged 75 years and older with haematological malignancies is generally poor, particularly for acute leukaemias. Understanding the heterogeneity in outcomes for haematological malignancies, treatment challenges, and management of frailty and comorbidities among older patients could help physicians to better address the haematological cancer burden and mortality in ageing populations. The aim of this Series paper is to provide an updated overview of the knowledge accumulated over the past decade regarding treatment options and broader management considerations in older adults with haematological malignancies, focusing on the most common entities encountered across lymphoma, acute leukaemia, chronic leukaemia, and multiple myeloma disease categories. Future strategies, such as increasing enrolment rates of older adults in clinical trials and incorporating patient-reported outcome measurements in daily clinical practice, will assist in providing more individualised health care., Competing Interests: Declaration of interests RC reports being a speaker and advisory for Roche, Janssen, Abbvie, Astra Zeneca, Celgene–Bristol Myers Squibb, Kite, ADC Therapeutics, and Incyte. RC also reports research grants from Pfizer. All other authors declare no competing interests., (Copyright © 2021 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Background: Autologous stem cell transplant (ASCT) is an established treatment for patients with newly diagnosed multiple myeloma (NDMM). Understanding the symptom burden associated with ASCT may be an important consideration for patients with NDMM when selecting treatment options., Patients and Methods: We conducted a population-based study of patients who underwent an ASCT for NDMM in Ontario, Canada, between 2007 and 2018. The patient-reported outcome, Edmonton Symptom Assessment System (ESAS) score, which captures nine common cancer-associated symptoms and is routinely collected at all outpatient visits, was linked to provincial administrative healthcare data. The monthly prevalence of moderate or severe symptoms (ESAS ≥ 4) each month in the first year following ASCT was analyzed. A multivariable logistic regression model was used to identify factors associated with moderate to severe symptoms., Results: In our final cohort of 1969 patients who had undergone an ASCT, a total of 12,820 unique assessments were captured. Symptom burden was highest at 1 month post-ASCT, with moderate to severe tiredness and impaired well-being being the two most common symptoms. Symptom burden substantially improved by 3 months post-ASCT, reaching a new baseline for the year following. On multivariable analysis, female sex, increased co-morbidities, earlier year of diagnosis, and myeloma-related end-organ damage (specifically, bone and kidney disease) were associated with a higher odds of reporting moderate to severe symptoms., Conclusion: In this large population-based study using patient-reported outcomes, there was a substantial burden of symptoms noted among NDMM patients 1 month post-ASCT, which improved over time. Tailored supportive care interventions should focus on strategies to optimize management of identified symptoms., (Copyright © 2021. Published by Elsevier Inc.)

Competing Interests: Reginald D. Tucker-SeeleyLeadership: American Board of Internal Medicine FoundationNo other potential conflicts of interest were reported.

Importance: There is currently no guidance on how to approach surveillance mammography for older breast cancer survivors, particularly when life expectancy is limited., Objective: To develop expert consensus guidelines that facilitate tailored decision-making for routine surveillance mammography for breast cancer survivors 75 years or older., Evidence: After a literature review of the risk of ipsilateral and contralateral breast cancer events among breast cancer survivors and the harms and benefits associated with mammography, a multidisciplinary expert panel was convened to develop consensus guidelines on surveillance mammography for breast cancer survivors 75 years or older. Using an iterative consensus-based approach, input from clinician focus groups, and critical review by the International Society for Geriatric Oncology, the guidelines were refined and finalized., Findings: The literature review established a low risk for ipsilateral and contralateral breast cancer events in most older breast cancer survivors and summarized the benefits and harms associated with mammography. Draft mammography guidelines were iteratively evaluated by the expert panel and clinician focus groups, emphasizing a patient's risk for in-breast cancer events, age, life expectancy, and personal preferences. The final consensus guidelines recommend discontinuation of routine mammography for all breast cancer survivors when life expectancy is less than 5 years, including those with a history of high-risk cancers; consideration to discontinue mammography when life expectancy is 5 to 10 years; and continuation of mammography when life expectancy is more than 10 years. Individualized, shared decision-making is encouraged to optimally tailor recommendations after weighing the benefits and harms associated with surveillance mammography and patient preferences. The panel also recommends ongoing clinical breast examinations and diagnostic mammography to evaluate clinical findings and symptoms, with reassurance for patients that these practices will continue., Conclusions and Relevance: It is anticipated that these expert guidelines will enhance clinical practice by providing a framework for individualized discussions, facilitating shared decision-making regarding surveillance mammography for breast cancer survivors 75 years or older.

Objectives: Care for older adults with cancer became more challenging during the COVID-19 pandemic. We sought to examine healthcare providers' clinical barriers, patient questions, and overall experiences related to care delivery for these patients during the pandemic., Materials and Methods: Members of the Advocacy Committee of the Cancer and Aging Research Group along with the Association of Community Cancer Centers developed a 20-question survey for healthcare providers of older adults with cancer. Eligible participants were recruited by email sent through professional organizations' listservs, email blasts, and social media. This manuscript reports the qualitative data from the survey's three open-ended questions. Free text, open-ended survey items were analyzed by two independent coders for identification of common themes using NVivo software. Theme agreement was reached through consensus and count comparisons of participant responses were made., Results: Healthcare system organizational challenges and meeting basic needs and support were commonly reported themes among respondents (n = 274). Barriers to care delivery included organizational challenges, patients' access to resources and support, concerns for patients' mental and physical health, and telehealth challenges. Respondents reported older adults were asking about their health and cancer care as well as access to basic needs and supports. Providers described worrying about patients' mental health, fear of personal safety, frustration in multi-level institutions, as well as experiencing positive leadership and communication., Conclusion: Providers are faced with balancing their concerns for personal and patient safety. These findings demand resources and support allocation for older adults with cancer and healthcare providers during the COVID-19 pandemic., Competing Interests: Declaration of Competing Interest All authors, with the exception of KB, certify that they have no affiliations with or involvement in any organization or entity with any financial interest. KB has a financial relationship with Blue Note Technology, Inc., (Copyright © 2020 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Objectives: Care for older adults with cancer became more challenging during the COVID-19 pandemic. We sought to examine cancer care providers' attitudes toward the barriers and facilitators related to the care for these patients during the pandemic., Materials and Methods: Members of the Advocacy Committee of the Cancer and Aging Research Group, along with the Association of Community Cancer Centers, developed the survey distributed to multidisciplinary healthcare providers responsible for the direct care of patients with cancer. Participants were recruited by email sent through four professional organizations' listservs, email blasts, and messages through social media., Results: Complete data was available from 274 respondents. Only 15.4% had access to written guidelines that specifically address the management of older adults with cancer during the COVID-19 pandemic. Age was ranked fifth as the reason for postponing treatment following comorbid conditions, cancer stage, frailty, and performance status. Barriers to the transition to telehealth were found at the patient-, healthcare worker-, and institutional-levels. Providers reported increased barriers in accessing basic needs among older adults with cancer. Most respondents agreed (86.3%) that decision making about Do Not Resuscitate orders should be the result of discussion with the patient and the healthcare proxy in all situations. The top five concerns reported were related to patient safety, treatment delays, healthcare worker mental health and burnout, and personal safety for family and self., Conclusion: These findings demand resources and support allocation for older adults with cancer and healthcare providers during the COVID-19 pandemic., Competing Interests: Declaration of Competing Interest KB: Consultant for Blue Note Therapeutics, Inc. All other authors certify that they have no affiliations with or involvement in any organization or entity with any financial interest., (Copyright © 2020 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

In 2011, the International Society of Geriatric Oncology (SIOG) published the SIOG 10 Priorities Initiative, which defined top priorities for the improvement of the care of older adults with cancer worldwide. 1 Substantial scientific, clinical, and educational progress has been made in line with these priorities and international health policy developments have occurred, such as the shift of emphasis by WHO from communicable to non-communicable diseases and the adoption by the UN of its Sustainable Development Goals 2030. Therefore, SIOG has updated its priority list. The present document addresses four priority domains: education, clinical practice, research, and strengthening collaborations and partnerships. In this Policy Review, we reflect on how these priorities would apply in different economic settings, namely in high-income countries versus low-income and middle-income countries. SIOG hopes that it will offer guidance for international and national endeavours to provide adequate universal health coverage for older adults with cancer, who represent a major and rapidly growing group in global epidemiology., (Copyright © 2021 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Objectives: The Cornell Research-to-Practice (RTP) Consensus Workshop Model is a strategy for bridging the gap between aging research and practice but lacks a technique for evaluating the relative importance of ideas. This project assessed the feasibility of adding a quantitative survey to the RTP model to address this gap. Method: Older adults with cancer (OACs), OAC caregivers, researchers, clinicians, and advocacy organization representatives participated in a RTP workshop on implementing psychological interventions for OACs. Following an in-person workshop, participants completed surveys assessing the relative importance of barriers and strategies for psychological intervention implementation. Results: Seventeen of 35 participants completed the survey, the majority of which were likely clinicians. Barriers and strategies to implementation rated as having the greatest impact were associated with the care team and institutional factors. Conclusion: Quantitative ratings add novel information to the RTP model that could potentially enhance the model's impact on aging research and practice.

Purpose: Inspired by the American Society of Clinical Oncology's recommendations to strengthen the evidence base for older adults with cancer, the purpose of this systematic review is to identify the reporting of treatment efficacy and adverse events specific to older adults with cancer in Phase III chemo-therapeutic clinical trials. This review also investigates the frequency with which these data points were reported in the literature to identify gaps in reporting and opportunities to expand the knowledge base on clinical outcomes for older adults with cancer., Methods: Chemo-therapeutic clinical trial data published from July 1, 2016 to June 30, 2017 was reviewed. Manuscripts (n = 929) were identified based on keyword searches of EMBASE and PubMed. After removal of duplicates (n = 116) and articles that did not meet this study's inclusion criteria (n = 654), 159 articles were identified for review., Results: Reviewed papers were published in 36 different scientific journals and included twenty-five different cancer types. Of the 159 articles, 117 (73.6%) reported age-specific medians and 75 (47.2%) included stratifications of data by age. Treatment efficacy was reported in 96.2% of the articles with 39.9% reporting effectiveness of treatment by age. Reporting of adverse events was included in 84.9% of the articles with only 8.9% reporting these events stratified by age., Conclusion: Results suggest inadequate reporting of treatment efficacy and adverse events as well as basic descriptive statistics about the age distribution of study subjects. Conscious efforts are needed to address these deficiencies at every level of planning and conducting clinical trials as wells as reporting outcomes stratified by age. Ultimately, standardized reporting could lead to improved treatment decisions and outcomes for older adults with cancer., Competing Interests: Declaration of Competing Interest All authors certify that they have no affiliations with or involvement in any organization or entity with any financial interest., (Copyright © 2020 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Introduction: Older adults with cancer (OACs) are a large and growing population. Psychological distress is prevalent in this population yet few OACs receive evidence-based psychological care. The purpose of this project was to identify barriers and strategies for the implementation of psychological interventions to OACs from the perspective of OACs, OAC caregivers, researchers, clinicians, and advocacy organization members., Methods: The Cornell Research-to-Practice (RTP) Consensus Workshop Model was used to organize and convene a consensus conference. The one-day conference consisted of small and large group discussions regarding barriers, facilitators, and strategies for the implementation of psychological interventions targeting OACs. A half-day roundtable meeting was subsequently conducted to organize data generated at the conference. De-identified transcriptions of the small group discussions were uploaded into NVivo 11 software and qualitatively analyzed using standard methods., Results: Thirty-five participants attended the consensus conference from across stakeholder groups. Three themes related to implementation barriers were identified: lack of knowledge about psychological interventions in patients and providers; personal and social factors associated with being an OAC; and institutional-level factors. Themes related to implementation strategies focused on increasing awareness, tailoring interventions for older adults, and modifying institutional-level factors., Discussion: Effective implementation of psychological interventions to OACs is complex and barriers exist across multiple levels of care. However, this project indicates that implementation can be improved in various ways that include all members of the healthcare system. Further clarification of implementation strategies and rigorous evaluation of their effectiveness is vital to improving care and care outcomes of OACs., (Copyright © 2018.)

The concepts of quality and value have become ubiquitous in discussions about health care, including cancer care. Despite their prominence, these concepts remain difficult to encapsulate, with multiple definitions and frameworks emerging over the past few decades. Defining quality and value for the care of older adults with cancer can be particularly challenging. Older adults are heterogeneous and often excluded from clinical trials, severely limiting generalizable data for this population. Moreover, many frameworks for quality and value focus on traditional outcomes of survival and toxicity and neglect goals that may be more meaningful for older adults, such as quality of life and functional independence. A history of quality and value standards and an evaluation of some currently available standards and frameworks elucidate the potential gaps in application to older adults with cancer. However, narrowing the focus to processes of care presents several opportunities for improving the care of older adults with cancer now, even while further work is ongoing to evaluate outcomes and efficiency. New models of care, including the patient-centered medical home, as well as new associated bundled payment models, would be advantageous for older adults with cancer, facilitating collaboration, communication, and patient-centeredness and minimizing the fragmentation that impairs the current provision of cancer care. Advances in information technology support the foundation for these models of care; these technologies facilitate communication, increase available data, support shared decision making, and increase access to multidisciplinary specialty care. Further work will be needed to define and to continue to tailor processes of care to achieve relevant outcomes for older patients with cancer to fulfill the promise of quality and value of care for this vulnerable and growing population.

Older adult cancer survivors currently account for almost 60% of all cancer survivors. The number of older cancer survivors will continue to increase as the population ages and as patients' live longer after a cancer diagnosis. As part of cancer center accreditation, the American College of Surgeons Commission on Cancer® (CoC) has placed great importance on survivorship care planning. While the CoC has set standards for general survivorship care, there is sparse evidence on how to best care for older adult cancer survivors. Concern exists among the medical community that survivorship care plans could increase paperwork without improving outcomes. Given the diverse and unique needs of older adult cancer survivors, the inter-professional team provides a structure and process for survivorship care built around the particular needs of older adults. The Cancer and Aging Research Group (CARG), in partnership with the NIA/NCI, held a U13 conference in May 2015 in part to discuss survivorship care for older adults with cancer. This report discusses four themes that emerged from one section of the conference: (1) survivorship care is a process that continually evolves to meet the needs of older adults; (2) older adult cancer survivors have unique needs and care plans should be tailored to meet these needs; (3) the inter-professional team is ideally suited to structure survivorship care of older adults; (4) patient advocacy must be encouraged throughout the cancer care continuum. As evidence based survivorship practices develop, the unique needs of older adults need to be given substantial attention., (Copyright © 2016 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

This study was initiated to investigate gene expression profiles that are involved in the molecular mechanisms regulating the amelioration of age-related oxidative damages in male Fischer-344 rats (12 months) through adult-onset calorie restriction (CR) intervention for 6 months. The adult-onset CR was initiated with 10 and 25% restriction for the first and second weeks, respectively, and then maintained at 40% throughout the experiment. The adult-onset CR significantly (p < 0.05) decreased urinary 8-isoprostane and protein carbonyl in kidney for the markers of lipid peroxidation and protein oxidation, respectively, in rats from the CR group when compared with control group. Based on Yu's and Melk's methods, the age-related renal pathological changes in the kidney of rats from CR group were retarded by adult-onset CR. Such changes could result from the decrease of plasminogen activation inhibition-1 and clusterin and the increase of kallikrein mRNA expressions significantly (p < 0.05) in the kidneys of rats from the CR group. They were further confirmed by quantitative RT-PCR. Moreover, inflammatory response pathway was down-regulated significantly (p < 0.05) in rats from the CR group, while fatty acid synthesis, mitochondrial fatty acid betaoxidation, glycolysis, and gluconeogenesis were considerably up-regulated in kidney tissue of rats. In conclusion, the adult-onset CR could retard the age-related oxidative damages and renal pathological changes due to variations in gene expressions and biological pathways.

In this study, epigallocatechin-3-gallate (EGCG) was examined for the first time for its anti-aging effect on middle-aged male Fischer 344 rats as a dietary supplement at 50 (low dose) and 500 (high dose) mg/kg/day over a 6-month period. Such levels of EGCG concentration were well-tolerated by rats without causing tissue damage or dysfunction in the liver and kidney, as evaluated by histopathological and biochemical observations. Compared to the rats in the low-dose and control groups, rats fed with high-dose EGCG showed a significant decline in the concentration of 8-hydroxy-2'-deoxyguanosine in the plasma while maintaining a better mitochondrial potential in the peripheral lymphocytes and preventing the deletion of ND4 region from mitochondrial DNA in the liver. The protective effects of high-dose EGCG against oxidative stress were comparable with the effects of caloric restriction, a well-established dietary intervention that retards aging. However, the supplementation of EGCG influenced merely the antioxidative enzyme activities and their gene expressions in rats, suggesting that EGCG may either function as an antioxidant itself or regulate other bioprocesses, including energy metabolism, biosynthesis, and stress response, as shown in the gene profiling analysis of microarray data. Thus, the present study provides preliminary information on the anti-aging property of EGCG in male Fischer 344 rats.

Mitochondrial integrity and antioxidative enzyme activity are two of the determinants of intracellular reactive oxygen species (ROS) accumulation probably underlying the aging mechanism. In this study, epigallocatechin-3-gallate (EGCG) was examined for its antiaging effect on human diploid fibroblasts (HDF). EGCG was evaluated for its cytotoxicity, and LC50 values were 78.0 and 84.4 microM for young and old HDF, respectively. HDF treated with EGCG at 25 and 50 microM for 24 h considerably increased catalase, superoxide dismutase (SOD)1, SOD2, and glutathione peroxidase gene expressions and their enzyme activities, thus protecting HDF against H2O2-induced oxidative damage, accompanied with decreased intracellular ROS accumulation and well-maintained mitochondrial potential. Moreover, HDF treated with EGCG at 12.5 microM for long term showed less intracellular ROS with higher mitochondrial potential, more intact mitochondrial DNA, much elevated antioxidative enzyme efficiency, and more juvenile cell status compared to those of the untreated group. Taken together, in this study we investigated the effects of EGCG in the regulation of mitochondrial integrity and antioxidative enzyme activity of HDF, suggesting that EGCG can be considered one of the possible antiaging reagents in the future.

We have previously reported the changes of mitochondrial function and/or antioxidative enzyme efficiency in a few organs of rats as a result of aging. However, there is a further need to reach a conclusion about their interactions in biological functions based on other evaluation tips like the usage of advanced methods and the exploring of crucial biochemical parameters. Therefore, we investigated the mitochondrial inner membrane functional integrity by the analysis of respiration control ratio and membrane potential in the liver and brain of young (8 months) and old (26 months) Fischer 344 rats. The disintegration of mitochondrial membrane integrity was determined higher in the liver of old rats than that of young rats. This was well correlated with the decrease of total superoxide dismutase (SOD), Cu/Zn-SOD, Mn-SOD and glutathione peroxidase activities in most of the organs, except for the increase of catalase activity in heart of old rats. Similarly, the protein expressions of these enzymes were down regulated in the liver and kidney of old rats. Taken together, we suggest that the mitochondrial malfunction in old rats is associated with the decrease of antioxidative enzyme efficiency. And the data are also discussed with changes in the results from inter-laboratories.

We demonstrate in this study that the n-3 polyunsaturated fatty acids derived from fish oil, namely, eicosapentanoic acid (EPA) and docosahexaenoic acid (DHA), can increase levels of tissue inhibitors of metalloproteinase-1 (TIMP-1) in the renal cell carcinoma cell line caki-1 by 26% and 17.42% respectively. The result of this elevation in TIMP-1 levels is a reduction of 48.48% in caki-1 invasion through the basement membrane component matrigel when cells are treated with DHA. By inhibition of 2-series prostaglandin production, a similar increase in TIMP-1 was observed in caki-1 cells. We conclude that the polyunstaurated fatty acid DHA, a component of fish oil, is capable of significantly reducing the invasive profile of renal cell carcinoma, and that this reduction is regulated by levels of 2-series prostaglandin production.