Search

Purpose Polypharmacy is prevalent in older adults starting cancer treatment and associated with potentially inappropriate medications (PIM), potential drug-drug interactions (DDI), and drug-cancer treatment interactions (DCI). For a large cohort of vulnerable older adults with advanced cancer starting treatment, we describe patterns of prescription and nonprescription medication usage, the prevalence of PIM, and the prevalence, severity, and type of DDI/DCI. Methods This secondary analysis used baseline data from a randomized study enrolling patients aged ≥70 years with advanced cancer starting a new systemic cancer treatment (University of Rochester Cancer Center [URCC] 13059; PI: Mohile). PIM were categorized using 2019 Beers criteria and Screening Tool of Older Persons’ Prescriptions. Potential DDI/DCI were evaluated using Lexi-Interact Online. Medication classification followed the World Health Organization Anatomical Therapeutic Chemical system. Bivariate associations were evaluated between sociodemographic and geriatric assessment (GA) measures and medication measures. Chord diagrams and network analysis were used to understand and describe DDI/DCI. Results Among 718 patients (mean age 77.6 years), polypharmacy (≥5 medications), excessive polypharmacy (≥10 medications), and ≥1 PIM were identified in 61.3%,14.5%, and 67.1%, respectively. Cardiovascular medications were the most prevalent (47%), and nonprescription medications accounted for 26% of total medications and 40% of PIM. One-quarter of patients had ≥1 potential major DDI not involving cancer treatment, and 5.4% had ≥1 potential major DCI. Each additional medication increased the odds of a potential major DDI and DCI by 39% and 12%, respectively. Polypharmacy and PIM are associated with multiple GA domains. Conclusion In a cohort of vulnerable older adults with advanced cancer starting treatment, polypharmacy, PIM, and potential DDI/DCI are very common. Nonprescription medications are frequently PIMs and/or involved in potential DDI/DCI.

Introduction Treatment toxicities are common in older adults with cancer and consequently, treatment modifications are sometimes considered. We evaluated the prevalence and factors associated with treatment modifications at the first cycle in older patients receiving palliative systemic treatment. Methods Patients (n = 369) from the GAP 70+ Trial ( NCT02054741 ; PI: Mohile) usual care arm were included. Enrolled patients were aged 70+ with advanced cancer and ≥ 1 Geriatric Assessment (GA) domain impairment. Treatment modification was defined as any change from National Comprehensive Cancer Network guidelines or published clinical trials. Baseline variables included: 1) sociodemographic factors; 2) clinical variables; 3) GA domains; and 4) physician beliefs about life expectancy. Bivariate analyses and multivariable cluster-weighted generalized estimating equation model were conducted to assess the association of baseline variables with cycle 1 treatment modifications. Results Mean age was 77.2 years (range: 70–94); 62% had lung or gastrointestinal cancers, and 35% had treatment modifications at cycle 1. Increasing age by one year (odds ratio (OR) 1.1, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.0–1.2), receipt of ≥second line of chemotherapy (OR 1.8, CI 1.1–3.0), functional impairment (OR 1.6, CI 1.1–2.3) and income ≤$50,000 (OR 1.7, CI 1.1–2.4) were independently associated with a higher likelihood of cycle 1 treatment modification. Conclusion Treatment modifications occurred in 35% of older adults with advanced cancer at cycle 1. Increasing age, receipt of ≥second line of chemotherapy, functional impairment, and lower income were independently associated with treatment modifications. These findings emphasize the need for evidence-based regimens in older adults with cancer and GA impairments.

PURPOSE Providing a geriatric assessment (GA) summary with management recommendations to oncologists reduces clinician-rated toxicity in older patients with advanced cancer receiving treatment. This secondary analysis of a national cluster randomized clinical trial (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT02054741 ) aims to assess the effects of a GA intervention on symptomatic toxicity measured by Patient-Reported Outcomes Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (PRO-CTCAE). METHODS From 2014 to 2019, the study enrolled patients age ≥ 70 years, with advanced solid tumors or lymphoma and ≥ 1 GA domain impairment, who were initiating a regimen with high prevalence of toxicity. Patients completed PRO-CTCAEs, including the severity of 24 symptoms (11 classified as core symptoms) at enrollment, 4-6 weeks, 3 months, and 6 months. Symptoms were scored as grade ≥ 2 (at least moderate) and grade ≥ 3 (severe/very severe). Symptomatic toxicity was determined by an increase in severity during treatment. A generalized estimating equation model was used to assess the effects of the GA intervention on symptomatic toxicity. RESULTS Mean age was 77 years (range, 70-96 years), 43% were female, and 88% were White, 59% had GI or lung cancers, and 27% received prior chemotherapy. In 706 patients who provided PRO-CTCAEs at baseline, 86.1% reported at least one moderate symptom and 49.7% reported severe/very severe symptoms at regimen initiation. In 623 patients with follow-up PRO-CTCAE data, compared with usual care, fewer patients in the GA intervention arm reported grade ≥ 2 symptomatic toxicity (overall: 88.9% v 94.8%, P = .035; core symptoms: 83.4% v 91.7%, P = .001). The results for grade ≥ 3 toxicity were comparable but not significant ( P > .05). CONCLUSION In the presence of a high baseline symptom burden, a GA intervention for older patients with advanced cancer reduces patient-reported symptomatic toxicity.

For patients with polypharmacy or potentially inappropriate medication (PIM) use identified on geriatric assessment, a medication review is recommended. The medication review aims to ensure that the potential benefits of medication outweigh any potential harms and ensures the patient is receiving medication to effectively treat their medical conditions while minimizing risk of toxicity. The medication review encompasses: (1) collecting information to identify medication indications, efficacy and side effects, (2) evaluating adherence, (3) identifying PIMs, (4) identifying drug interactions, and (5) deprescribing. This paper provides the “how-to” guide to conduct a high-quality medication review by the cancer care multidisciplinary team.

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.

Background: Polypharmacy and potentially inappropriate medications (PIMs) are prevalent in older adults with cancer, but their associations with physical function are not often studied. This study examined the associations of polypharmacy and PIMs with physical function in older adults with cancer, and determined the optimal cutoff value for the number of medications most strongly associated with physical functional impairment. Methods: This cross-sectional analysis used baseline data from a randomized study enrolling patients aged ≥70 years with advanced cancer starting a new systemic cancer treatment. We categorized PIM using 2015 American Geriatrics Society Beers Criteria. Three validated physical function measures were used to assess patient-reported impairments: activities of daily living (ADL) scale, instrumental activities of daily living (IADL) scale, and the Older Americans Resources and Services Physical Health (OARS PH) survey. Optimal cutoff value for number of medications was determined by the Youden index. Separate multivariate logistic regressions were then performed to examine associations of polypharmacy and PIMs with physical function measures. Results: Among 439 patients (mean age, 76.9 years), the Youden index identified ≥8 medications as the optimal cutoff value for polypharmacy; 43% were taking ≥8 medications and 62% were taking ≥1 PIMs. On multivariate analysis, taking ≥8 medications was associated with impairment in ADL (adjusted odds ratio [aOR], 1.64; 95% CI, 1.01–2.58) and OARS PH (aOR, 1.73; 95% CI, 1.01–2.98). PIMs were associated with impairments in IADL (aOR, 1.72; 95% CI, 1.09–2.73) and OARS PH (aOR, 1.97; 95% CI, 1.15–3.37). A cutoff of 5 medications was not associated with any of the physical function measures. Conclusions: Physical function, an important component of outcomes for older adults with cancer, is cross-sectionally associated with polypharmacy (defined as ≥8 medications) and with PIMs. Future studies should evaluate the association of polypharmacy with functional outcomes in this population in a longitudinal fashion.

Despite substantial improvements in the outcomes of patients with cancer over the past two decades, older adults (aged ≥65 years) with cancer are a rapidly increasing population and continue to have worse outcomes than their younger counterparts. Managing cancer in this population can be challenging because of competing health-related and ageing-related conditions that can influence treatment decision-making and affect outcomes. Geriatric screening tools and comprehensive geriatric assessment can help to identify patients who are most at risk of poor outcomes from cancer treatment and to better allocate treatment for these patients. The use of evidence-based management strategies to optimize geriatric conditions can improve communication and satisfaction between physicians, patients and caregivers as well as clinical outcomes in this population. Clinical trials are currently underway to further determine the effect of geriatric assessment combined with management interventions on cancer outcomes, as well as the predictive value of geriatric assessment in context of treatment with contemporary systemic therapies, such as immunotherapies and targeted therapies. In this Review, we summarize the unique challenges of treating older adults with cancer and describe current guidelines as well as investigational studies underway to improve the outcomes of these patients.

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.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.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.Oncologist practices randomized to the intervention received a GA summary and validated recommendations for each patient prior to the audio-recorded clinical encounter.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.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).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.ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02107443.

Patient age is associated with poorer rectal cancer treatment compliance. However, it is unknown whether left-digit bias (disproportionate influence of leftmost age digit) influences this association.The patients diagnosed with stage I-III rectal cancer between 2006 to 2017 in the National Cancer Database were identified. The association between age and receipt of guideline-adherent care was assessed using mixed-effects multivariable analyses.Among 97,960 patients, 46.2% received guideline-adherent overall treatment and 73.3% underwent guideline-adherent surgical resection. Of those who underwent guideline-adherent surgery, 86.4% received guideline-adherent radiotherapy and 56.6% received guideline-adherent chemotherapy. After risk-adjustment, each decade increase in age was associated with 36% decreased odds of guideline-adherent therapy (odds ratio = 0.64, 95% confidence interval = 0.63-0.65). Patients aged 58 to 59 (odds ratio = 1.15, 95% confidence interval = 1.02-1.27) and 78 to 79 (odds ratio = 1.28, 95% confidence interval = 1.08-1.51) had higher odds of guideline-adherent overall treatment compared with patients aged 60 and 80, respectively. However, there were no significant differences in the receipt of guideline-adherent treatment between patients aged 60 vs 61-62 and 80 vs 81-82.Older patients with rectal cancer are less likely to receive guideline-adherent care, and a left-digit bias is present. Geriatric assessment-guided treatment decisions could help mitigate this bias.

Polypharmacy is common in home health care (HHC). This study examined the prevalence of medications associated with geriatric syndromes (MAGS), its predictors, and association with subsequent hospitalization in HHC.Analysis of HHC electronic medical records, the Outcome and Assessment Information Set (OASIS), and Medicare HHC claims.A total of 6882 adults ≥65 years old receiving HHC in 2019 from a large, not-for-profit home health agency serving multiple counties in New York State.MAGS use was identified from active medications reconciled during HHC visits (HHC electronic medical records). MAGS use was operationalized as count and in quartiles. Hospitalization during the HHC episode was operationalized as a time-to-event variable (ie, number of days from HHC admission to hospitalization). We used regression analyses to identify predictors of MAGS use, and survival analyses to examine the association between MAGS and hospitalization.Nearly all (98%) of the HHC patients used at least 1 MAGS and 41% of all active medications used by the sample were MAGS. More MAGS use was found in HHC patients who were community-referred, taking more medications, and having more diagnoses, depressive symptoms, and functional limitations. Adjusted for covariates, higher MAGS quartiles were not independently associated with the risk of hospitalization, but higher MAGS quartiles combined with multimorbidity (ie, having ≥10 diagnoses) were associated with a 2.3-fold increase in hospitalization risk (hazard ratio 2.24; 95% confidence interval: 1.61-3.13; P.001), relative to the lowest quartile of MAGS use and having10 diagnoses.More than 40% of medications taken by HHC patients are MAGS. Multimorbidity and MAGS use collectively increased the risk of hospitalization by up to 2.3 times. HHC clinicians should carefully review patients' medications and use information about MAGS to facilitate discussion about deprescribing with patients and their prescribers.

ImportanceOlder adults with advanced cancer who have high pretreatment symptom severity often experience adverse events during cancer treatments. Unsupervised machine learning may help stratify patients into different risk groups.ObjectiveTo evaluate whether clusters identified from baseline patient-reported symptom severity were associated with adverse outcomes.Design, Setting, and ParticipantsThis secondary analysis of the Geriatric Assessment Intervention for Reducing Toxicity in Older Patients With Advanced Cancer (GAP70+) Trial (2014-2019) included patients who completed the National Cancer Institute Patient-Reported Outcomes version of the Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (PRO-CTCAE) before starting a new cancer treatment regimen and received care at community oncology sites across the United States. An unsupervised machine learning algorithm (k-means with Euclidean distance) clustered patients based on similarities of baseline symptom severities. Clustering variables included severity items of 24 PRO-CTCAE symptoms (range, 0-4; corresponding to none, mild, moderate, severe, and very severe). Total severity score was calculated as the sum of 24 items (range, 0-96). Whether the clusters were associated with unplanned hospitalization, death, and toxic effects was then examined. Analyses were conducted in January and February 2022.ExposuresSymptom severity.Main Outcomes and MeasuresUnplanned hospitalization over 3 months (primary), all-cause mortality over 1 year, and any clinician-rated grade 3 to 5 toxic effect over 3 months.ResultsOf 718 enrolled patients, 706 completed baseline PRO-CTCAE and were included (mean [SD] age, 77.2 [5.5] years, 401 [56.8%] male patients; 51 [7.2%] Black and 619 [87.8%] non-Hispanic White patients; 245 [34.7%] with gastrointestinal cancer; 175 [24.8%] with lung cancer; mean [SD] impaired Geriatric Assessment domains, 4.5 [1.6]). The algorithm classified 310 (43.9%), 295 (41.8%), and 101 (14.3%) into low-, medium-, and high-severity clusters (within-cluster mean [SD] severity scores: low, 6.3 [3.4]; moderate, 16.6 [4.3]; high, 29.8 [7.8]; P P = .046). Moderate- and high-severity clusters were associated with a higher risk of death (moderate: hazard ratio, 1.31; 95% CI, 1.01-1.69; P = .04; high: hazard ratio, 2.00; 95% CI, 1.43-2.78; P Conclusions and RelevanceIn this study, unsupervised machine learning partitioned patients into distinct symptom severity clusters; patients with higher pretreatment severity were more likely to experience hospitalization and death.Trial RegistrationClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02054741

BACKGROUND A geriatric assessment (GA) intervention improves communication about aging-related concerns, but its effect on communication in patients with various levels of frailty is unknown. METHODS This was a secondary analysis of a nationwide trial of patients aged ≥70 years with incurable cancer and impairment on 1 or more GA domains (ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier NCT02107443; principal investigator Supriya G. Mohile). Practice sites were randomized to either the GA-intervention or usual care. Frailty was assessed with a deficit accumulation index (range, 0-1), and patients were stratified as robust (0 to

The 4Ms – Medication, Mentation, Mobility, and What Matters - represent the key components in the Age-Friendly Health Systems initiative and provide a conceptual framework for research in the older adult population. Over 40% of older adults experience polypharmacy, which can be addressed by deprescribing unnecessary medications. This review aimed to assess the degree to which the 4Ms were considered in intervention design, sample selection, and outcome assessment in deprescribing trials by keyword search in six databases and snowballing. Thirty-seven of the 564 trials identified met the review eligibility criteria. Imbalanced consideration of 4Ms in the deprescribing trials was observed. Intervention design: “Medication” was considered in all trials; “Mentation” was considered in 8 trials; “Mobility” (n=2) and “What Matters” (n=6) was less often considered. By targeting providers, most of the trials lacked consideration of patient-centeredness - aligning what matters most to older adults and their families with deprescribing decision making and implementation. Sample selection: “Medication” was considered in 15 trials (e.g., samples including patients taking ≥ 5 medications or specific types of medications), whereas “Mentation” (n=6), “Mobility” (n=6) and “What Matters” (n=0) were less often considered. Outcome assessment: “Medication” was the most commonly assessed outcomes (n=33), followed by “Mobility” (n=13) and “Mentation” (n=10) outcomes, with no study examining “What Matters” outcomes. 4Ms were not purposefully considered in the intervention design, sample selection, and outcome measurement of existing deprescribing trials. Future deprescribing trials need a more balanced and complete consideration of the 4Ms in the trial design and implementation.

Key Objective: What do we know about cancer treatment tolerability in older adults and where are the gaps? Knowledge generated: While there is strong evidence that geriatric assessment findings can be helpful in predicting treatment tolerability in older adults with cancer, more research is needed on treatment tolerability assessment, monitoring, and mitigation efforts for older adults during and after completion of treatment. A model is proposed to guide research efforts and clinical care that incorporates multiple tolerability aspects and highlights the patient’s experience and functional status as important endpoints. Relevance: Incorporating patient reported outcomes, functional evaluation, as well as adverse event data provides a more comprehensive and accurate understanding of treatment tolerability in older adults.

Older adults with advanced cancer are at a high risk for treatment toxic effects. Geriatric assessment evaluates ageing-related domains and guides management. We examined whether a geriatric assessment intervention can reduce serious toxic effects in older patients with advanced cancer who are receiving high risk treatment (eg, chemotherapy).In this cluster-randomised trial, we enrolled patients aged 70 years and older with incurable solid tumours or lymphoma and at least one impaired geriatric assessment domain who were starting a new treatment regimen. 40 community oncology practice clusters across the USA were randomly assigned (1:1) to the intervention (oncologists received a tailored geriatric assessment summary and management recommendations) or usual care (no geriatric assessment summary or management recommendations were provided to oncologists) by means of a computer-generated randomisation table. The primary outcome was the proportion of patients who had any grade 3-5 toxic effect (based on National Cancer Institute Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events version 4) over 3 months. Practice staff prospectively captured toxic effects. Masked oncology clinicians reviewed medical records to verify. The study was registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02054741.Between July 29, 2014, and March 13, 2019, we enrolled 718 patients. Patients had a mean age of 77·2 years (SD 5·4) and 311 (43%) of 718 participants were female. The mean number of geriatric assessment domain impairments was 4·5 (SD 1·6) and was not significantly different between the study groups. More patients in intervention group compared with the usual care group were Black versus other races (40 [11%] of 349 patients vs 12 [3%] of 369 patients; p0·0001) and had previous chemotherapy (104 [30%] of 349 patients vs 81 [22%] of 369 patients; p=0·016). A lower proportion of patients in the intervention group had grade 3-5 toxic effects (177 [51%] of 349 patients) compared with the usual care group (263 [71%] of 369 patients; relative risk [RR] 0·74 (95% CI 0·64-0·86; p=0·0001). Patients in the intervention group had fewer falls over 3 months (35 [12%] of 298 patients vs 68 [21%] of 329 patients; adjusted RR 0·58, 95% CI 0·40-0·84; p=0·0035) and had more medications discontinued (mean adjusted difference 0·14, 95% CI 0·03-0·25; p=0·015).A geriatric assessment intervention for older patients with advanced cancer reduced serious toxic effects from cancer treatment. Geriatric assessment with management should be integrated into the clinical care of older patients with advanced cancer and ageing-related conditions.National Cancer Institute.

Polypharmacy poses a significant public health problem that disproportionately affects older adults (≥65 years) since this population represents the largest consumers of medications. Clinicians caring for older adults with cancer must rely on evidence to understand polypharmacy and its implications, not only to communicate with patients and other healthcare providers, but also because of the significant interplay between polypharmacy, cancer, cancer-related treatment, and clinical outcomes. Interest in polypharmacy is rising because of its prevalence, the origins and facilitating factors behind it, and the direct and indirect clinical outcomes associated with it. The growing body of publications focused on polypharmacy in older adults with cancer demonstrates that this is a significant area of research; however, limited evidence exists to guide medication use (e.g., prescribing, administration) in this population. Currently, research priorities aimed at polypharmacy in the field of geriatric oncology lack clarity. We identified current gaps in the literature in order to establish research priorities for polypharmacy in older adults with cancer. The five research priorities—Polypharmacy Methodology and Definitions, Suboptimal Medication Use, Comorbidities and Geriatric Syndromes, Underrepresented Groups, and Polypharmacy Interventions—highlight critical areas for future research to improve outcomes for older adults with cancer.

Objectives Polypharmacy (PP) and potentially inappropriate medications (PIM) are common in older adults with cancer, increasing the risk of adverse outcomes. Approaches to identifying and addressing PP/PIM are needed. Materials and Methods Patients ≥70 years with advanced cancer were enrolled in this cluster-randomized study. All underwent geriatric assessment (GA), and oncologists randomized to the intervention arm received GA-driven recommendations; no information was provided to oncologists at usual care sites. For patients with PP (≥5 medications or ≥1 high-risk medication), clinic visits with treating oncologists were audiorecorded and transcribed, and discussions regarding PP/PIM identified. Quality of provider response was coded as dismissed, mentioned, acknowledged, or addressed. Results Forty patient transcripts were analyzed (20 per arm). More discussions occurred in the intervention group (n = 81) versus the usual care group (n = 51). More concerns per patient were brought up in the intervention group (4.1 vs. 2.6, p = 0.07). Physician-initiated discussions were higher in the intervention group (73% vs. 49%, p = 0.006). More PP concerns were “addressed” in the intervention group (59% vs. 45%, p = 0.1). Oncology supportive care medication concerns were more often addressed in the usual care group (58% vs. 18%, p = 0.008), but medication management concerns were addressed more commonly in the intervention group (38% vs. 79%, p = 0.003). Conclusion In this secondary analysis, a GA-driven intervention increased PP discussions, particularly about total number of medications and medication management. PP/PIM concerns were more commonly addressed in the intervention group, except for the subset of conversations about supportive care medications.

12010 Background: Despite high prevalence of functional status (FS) and physical performance (PP) impairments among older adults with cancer, standardized assessments and interventions are not routinely used in oncology care. This study characterized how oncologist knowledge of Geriatric Assessment (GA) results influenced conversations and GA-guided recommendations addressing FS and PP concerns. Methods: Data were from a NCORP funded (UG1CA189961) nationwide cluster randomized controlled trial (ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT02107443; PI: Mohile), with inclusion criteria: age ≥70, stage III/IV solid tumor or lymphoma with palliative treatment intent, and ≥1 GA domain impairment. All subjects underwent baseline GA including standardized FS ([instrumental] activities of daily living) and PP (Timed Up and Go, Short Physical Performance Battery, Older Americans Resources and Services Physical Health scale, falls in past 6 months) measures. Oncologists in Intervention arm practices received full GA results and validated recommendations for each patient, while those in the usual care (UC) arm were only notified of depression or severe cognitive impairment. One clinical encounter per patient within 4 weeks of GA was audio-recorded, transcribed and blind coded using a priori content-analysis scheme to categorize conversations and oncologist response (dismissed, acknowledged, or addressed with recommendation) by GA domain. Frequencies, raw and adjusted (for site using generalized linear mixed models) proportions were compared using the Chi square test. Results: 541 patients (mean age: 77, range 70-96) were included. More FS and PP conversations occurred in Intervention (PP=532, FS=164) than UC (PP=183, FS=87) arm (p

UNLABELLED : Inappropriate medication use and polypharmacy are extremely common among older adults. Numerous studies have discussed the importance of a comprehensive medication assessment in the general geriatric population. However, only a handful of studies have evaluated inappropriate medication use in the geriatric oncology patient. Almost a dozen medication screening tools exist for the older adult. Each available tool has the potential to improve aspects of the care of older cancer patients, but no single tool has been developed for this population. We extensively reviewed the literature (MEDLINE, PubMed) to evaluate and summarize the most relevant medication screening tools for older patients with cancer. Findings of this review support the use of several screening tools concurrently for the elderly patient with cancer. A deprescribing tool should be developed and included in a comprehensive geriatric oncology assessment. Finally, prospective studies are needed to evaluate such a tool to determine its feasibility and impact in older patients with cancer. IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE The prevalence of polypharmacy increases with advancing age. Older adults are more susceptible to adverse effects of medications. "Prescribing cascades" are common, whereas "deprescribing" remains uncommon; thus, older patients tend to accumulate medications over time. Older patients with cancer are at high risk for adverse drug events, in part because of the complexity and intensity of cancer treatment. Additionally, a cancer diagnosis often alters assessments of life expectancy, clinical status, and competing risk. Screening for polypharmacy and potentially inappropriate medications could reduce the risk for adverse drug events, enhance quality of life, and reduce health care spending for older cancer patients.

138 Background: GA evaluates aging-related domains (e.g., function) known to be associated with cancer treatment toxicity. We found that providing a GA summary with management recommendations to oncologists reduces clinician-rated toxicity in older patients with advanced cancer receiving high risk treatment (presented at ASCO2020). Herein, we report on the effects of the GA intervention on symptomatic toxicities measured by Patient-Reported Outcomes Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events [PRO-CTCAE]. Methods: In the national cluster randomized clinical trial eligible patients (n=718) had age>70, advanced solid tumors or lymphoma, 1+ GA impairment, and were initiating a new treatment regimen with high risk of toxicity. Severity grade of 24 PRO-CTCAE items was collected on a 0-4 scale at enrollment, 4-6 weeks, 3, and 6 months. Of 24 items, 11 (e.g. fatigue, dyspnea) were classified as core (Reeve 2014). Baseline adjusted method (Basch 2016) was used to determine symptomatic toxicities: if the severity of any item increased after baseline to grade 2 or higher, the patient was classified as experiencing grade ≥2 event (similarly for grade ≥ 3 events). The effects of GA intervention on symptomatic toxicities were assessed using generalized linear mixed model (GLMM) with random effect for the practice cluster. Results: Mean age was 77 years (range 70-96); 43% female, 87% white; 34% had gastrointestinal and 25% had lung cancer; 27% received prior chemotherapy. 710 patients provided PRO-CTCAE data (366 usual care, 344 intervention), 85.6% reported grade ≥2 and 49.4% grade ≥3 events at baseline. After baseline, compared to usual care, patients in the GA intervention arm reported fewer grade ≥2 overall symptomatic toxicities (76.5% vs. 84.7%) and fewer core symptomatic toxicities (grade ≥2: 71.8% vs. 82.0%; grade ≥3: 46.2% vs. 53.6%). Specifically, less dyspnea and less fatigue was reported in GA-arm (Table). Conclusions: GA intervention resulted in fewer symptomatic toxicities as evaluated by PRO-CTCAE. Clinical trial information: NCT02054741 . [Table: see text]

33 Background: GA evaluates aging-related domains (e.g., function) known to be associated with cancer treatment toxicity. We found that providing a GA summary with management recommendations to oncologists reduces clinician-rated toxicity in older patients (pts) with advanced cancer receiving high risk treatment (presented @ASCO2020). Herein, we report secondary outcomes on the effects of the GA intervention on aging-related outcomes. Methods: Pts aged ≥ 70 with incurable solid tumors or lymphoma and ≥ 1 impaired GA domain starting a new treatment regimen were enrolled. Community oncology practices were randomized to intervention (oncologists received GA summary/recommendations) or usual care (none given). Secondary analyses examined effects of the intervention on functional outcomes (patient-reported falls, instrumental activities of daily living (IADL), short physical performance battery (SPPB), geriatric depression scale (GDS), and medications [total and prescription]). Outcomes were analyzed using linear mixed effects model, logistic or Poisson regression adjusted for baseline values, time, and site effects as appropriate. Results: From 2013-19, 718 pts were enrolled from 41 practices. Age (mean 77 yrs), sex (43% women), number of impaired GA domains (median 4/8), and treatment type (chemotherapy 88%) were not different by arm. More pts in intervention were black (12% vs 3%, p

12009 Background: GA evaluates aging-related domains (e.g., function) known to be associated with cancer treatment toxicity. In this CRCT, we evaluated if providing a GA summary with management recommendations to oncologists can reduce toxicity in older patients (pts) with advanced cancer receiving chemotherapy and/or other agents with a high reported prevalence of grade 3-5 toxicity. Methods: Pts aged > 70 with incurable solid tumors or lymphoma and > 1 impaired GA domain starting a new treatment regimen were enrolled. Community oncology practices were randomized to intervention (oncologists received GA summary/recommendations for impairments) or usual care (none given). The primary outcome was proportion of pts who experienced any grade 3-5 toxicity (CTCAE v.4) within 3 months. Practice staff prospectively captured toxicities; blinded oncology clinicians reviewed medical records to verify. Secondary outcomes included 6 month overall survival (OS) and treatment intensity (standard vs reduced). Outcomes were analyzed using generalized linear mixed/Cox models with Arm as a fixed effect, controlling for practice. Results: From 2013-19, 718 pts were enrolled from 41 practices. Age (mean 77 yrs), sex (43% women), number of impaired GA domains (median 4/8), and treatment type (chemotherapy 88%) were not different by Arm. More pts in intervention were Black (12% vs 3%, p

OBJECTIVES To evaluate the independent association between symptom burden and physical function impairment in older adults with cancer. DESIGN Cross-sectional. SETTING Two university-based geriatric oncology clinics. PARTICIPANTS Patients with cancer aged 65 years or older who underwent evaluation with geriatric assessment (GA). MEASUREMENTS Symptom burden was measured as a summary score of severity ratings (range = 0-10) of 10 commonly reported symptoms using a Clinical Symptom Inventory (CSI). Functional impairment was defined as the presence of one or more impairments of instrumental activities of daily living (IADLs), any significant physical activity limitation on the Medical Outcomes Survey (MOS), one or more recent falls in the previous 6 months, or a Short Physical Performance Battery (SPPB) score of 9 or less. Multivariate analysis evaluated the association between symptom burden and physical function impairment, adjusting for other clinical and sociodemographic variables. RESULTS From 2011 to 2015, 359 patients with cancer and a median age of 81 years (range = 65-95 y) consented. The mean CSI score was 23.2 ± 20.5 with an observed range of 0 to 90. Patients in the highest quartile of symptom burden (N = 91; CSI score 52 ± 13) had a higher prevalence of IADL impairment (91% vs 51%), physical activity limitation (93% vs 65%), falls (55% vs 21%), and SPPB score of 9 or less (92% vs 69%) (all P values

Objectives Cancer cachexia, characterized by weight loss and sarcopenia, leads to a decline in physical function and is associated with poorer survival. Cancer cachexia remains poorly described in older adults with cancer. This study aims to characterize cancer cachexia in older adults by assessing its prevalence utilizing standard definitions and evaluating associations with components of the geriatric assessment (GA) and survival. Materials and Methods Patients with cancer older than 65 years of age who underwent a GA and had baseline CT imaging were eligible in this cross-sectional study. Cancer cachexia was defined by the international consensus definition reported in 2011. Sarcopenia was measured using cross-sectional imaging and utilizing sex-specific cut-offs. Associations between cachexia, sarcopenia, and weight loss with survival and GA domains were explored. Results Mean age of 100 subjects was 79.9 years (66–95) and 65% met criteria for cancer cachexia. Cachexia was associated with impairment in instrumental activities of daily living (IADL) ( p = .017); no significant association was found between sarcopenia or weight loss and IADL impairment. Cachexia was significantly associated with poorer survival (median 1.0 vs 2.1 years, p = .011). Conclusions Cancer cachexia as defined by the international consensus definition is prevalent in older adults with cancer and is associated with functional impairment and decreased survival. Larger prospective studies are needed to further describe cancer cachexia in this population.

BACKGROUND Older patients with cancer are at an increased risk of adverse outcomes. A geriatric assessment (GA) is a compilation of reliable and validated tools to assess domains that are predictors of morbidity and mortality, and it can be used to guide interventions. However, the implementation of GA and GA-driven interventions is low due to resource and time limitations. GA-driven interventions delivered through a mobile app may support the complex needs of older patients with cancer and their caregivers. OBJECTIVE We aimed to evaluate the feasibility and usability of a novel app (TouchStream) and to identify barriers to its use. As an exploratory aim, we gathered preliminary data on symptom burden, health care utilization, and satisfaction. METHODS In a single-site pilot study, we included patients aged ≥65 years undergoing treatment for systemic cancer and their caregivers. TouchStream consists of a mobile app and a Web portal. Patients underwent a GA at baseline with the study team (on paper), and the results were used to guide interventions delivered through the app. A tablet preloaded with the app was provided for use at home for 4 weeks. Feasibility metrics included usability (system usability scale of >68 is considered above average), recruitment, retention (number of subjects consented who completed postintervention assessments), and percentage of days subjects used the app. For the last 8 patients, we assessed their symptom burden (severity and interference with 17-items scored from 0-10 where a higher score indicates worse symptoms) using a clinical symptom inventory, health care utilization from the electronic medical records, and satisfaction (6 items scored on a 5-point Likert Scale for both patients and caregivers where a higher score indicates higher satisfaction) using a modified satisfaction survey. Barriers to use were elicited through interviews. RESULTS A total of 18 patients (mean age 76.8, range 68-87) and 13 caregivers (mean age 69.8, range 38-81) completed the baseline assessment. Recruitment and retention rates were 67% and 80%, respectively. The mean SUS score was 74.0 for patients and 72.2 for caregivers. Mean percentage of days the TouchStream app was used was 78.7%. Mean symptom severity and interference scores were 1.6 and 2.8 at preintervention, and 0.9 and 1.5 at postintervention, respectively. There was a total of 27 clinic calls during the intervention period and 15 during the postintervention period (week 5-8). One patient was hospitalized during the intervention period (week 1-4) and two patients during the postintervention period (week 5-8). Mean satisfaction scores of patients and caregivers with the mobile app were 20.4 and 23.4, respectively. Barriers fell into 3 themes: general experience, design, and functionality. CONCLUSIONS TouchStream is feasible and usable for older patients on cancer treatment and their caregivers. Future studies should evaluate the effects of the TouchStream on symptoms and health care utilization in a randomized fashion.

Older adults with cancer have complex medical needs and often experience higher rates of treatment-related toxicities compared to their younger counterparts. The advent of health information technologies can address multiple gaps in the care of this population. We review the role of existing and emerging technologies in facilitating the use of comprehensive geriatric assessment (CGA) in routine clinics, promoting symptom reporting, and monitoring medication adherence. Increasingly, studies demonstrate the feasibility of implementing electronic CGA in routine oncology practices. Evidence also suggests that electronic symptom reporting can improve outcomes in patients with cancer. In addition, technology devices can be used to promote adherence to cancer therapy. There are many opportunities for information technology to be integrated into the management and treatment of older adults with cancer. However, further evaluation of these technologies is needed to ensure that they meet the needs of the targeted end users.

The aims of this study were to compare the application of three geriatric medication screening tools to the Beers Criteria alone for potentially inappropriate medication quantification and to determine feasibility of a pharmacist-led polypharmacy assessment in a geriatric oncology clinic. Adult patients with cancer aged 65 and older underwent a comprehensive geriatric assessment. A polypharmacy assessment was completed by a pharmacist and included a review of all drug therapies. Potentially inappropriate medications were screened using the Beers Criteria, Screening Tool to Alert doctors to Right Treatment/Screening Tool of Older Persons’ Prescriptions, and the Medication Appropriateness Index. Deprescribing occurred after discussion with the pharmacist, geriatric oncologist, patient, and caregiver. Data were collected for 26 patients. The mean number of medications was 12. The Beers Criteria alone identified 38 potentially inappropriate medications compared to 119 potentially inappropriate medications with the three-tool assessment; a mean of 5 potentially inappropriate medications were identified per patient. After the application of the three-tool assessment, 73% of potentially inappropriate medications identified were deprescribed, resulting in a mean of 3 medications deprescribed per patient. Approximately two thirds of patients reported a reduction in symptoms after the deprescribing intervention. Healthcare expenditures of $4282.27 per patient were potentially avoided as a result of deprescribing. Our three-tool assessment identified three times more potentially inappropriate medications than the Beers Criteria alone. Pharmacist-led deprescribing interventions are feasible and may lead to improved patient outcomes and cost savings. This three-tool assessment process should be incorporated into interdisciplinary assessments of older patients with cancer and validated in future studies.

Incarcerated persons have a constitutionally protected right to adequate health care. However, there is a growing epidemic of inadequate health care in U.S. prisons. The authors discuss the medical...

The majority of new colorectal cancer diagnoses occur in adults 65 and older a rapidly growing segment of the U.S. population. Older adults are a markedly heterogeneous group, and although recent clinical trials in locally advanced colorectal cancer have incorporated limited numbers of older patients, the data can not be generalized to most older patients. In particular, patients who are not “fit”—those with poor functional reserve, major comorbidities, or who otherwise meet criteria for frailty or “prefrailty”—are poorly represented in published trials. Population-based data demonstrate that older adults are much less likely to be treated in the adjuvant or neoadjuvant settings for stage II/III colorectal cancer, but it is unclear what the basis should be for withholding potentially curative therapy. Age and Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) performance status (PS) are frequently used to determine eligibility for treatment, but data increasingly suggest these are inadequate; the emerging definition of a spectrum of “fit” to “frail” older patients may provide additional guidance. Available data suggest that fit older patients may benefit as much from curative-intent therapy as younger patients. For frail or vulnerable (prefrail) patients, on the other hand, the benefit must be carefully weighed against the risk of toxicity and competing risks from their comorbidities. Life expectancy and patient preferences should always be elucidated. Geriatrician comanagement may be helpful in determining priorities, providing a comprehensive assessment, and modifying competing risk factors. Even many vulnerable or frail patients can successfully complete (and derive benefit from) carefully considered treatment regimens.

Older adults with chronic diseases are often excluded from study populations, so EBM guidelines often do not apply to them.

We investigated a recent (January 1999 to December 2009) cohort of 95 elderly Hodgkin lymphoma subjects. At diagnosis, median age was 67 years (range, 60-89 years), whereas 61% had significant comorbidity, 26% were unfit, 17% had a geriatric syndrome, and 13% had loss of activities of daily living. Overall response rate to therapy was 85%, whereas incidence of bleomycin lung toxicity was 32% (with associated mortality rate, 25%). With 66-month median follow-up, 2-year and 5-year overall survival were 73% and 58%, respectively (advanced-stage, 63% and 46%, respectively). Most International Prognostic Score factors were not prognostic on univariate analyses, whereas Cox multivariate regression identified 2 risk factors associated with inferior overall survival: (1) age more than 70 years (2.24; 95% CI, 1.16-4.33, P = .02) and (2) loss of activities of daily living (2.71; 95% CI, 1.07-6.84, P = .04). Furthermore, a novel survival model based on number of these risk factors (0, 1, or 2) showed differential 2-year OS of 83%, 70%, and 13%, respectively (P < .0001) and 5-year OS of 73%, 51%, and 0%, respectively (P < .0001).

Summary Data on outcome, prognostic factors, and treatment for very elderly nonHodgkin lymphomas (NHL) is sparse. We conducted a multicentre retrospective analysis of NHL patients ‡80 years (at diagnosis) treated between 1999 and 2009. Detailed characteristics were obtained including geriatric syndromes, activities of daily living (ADLs), and co-morbidities using the Cumulative Illness Rating Scale-Geriatrics (CIRS-G). We identified 303 patients: 170 aggressive NHL (84% B cell/16% T cell) and 133 indolent NHL (82% B cell/18% T cell). Median age was 84 years (80‐95). A geriatric syndrome was present in 26% of patients, 18% had ‡1 grade 4 CIRS-G, and 14% had loss of ADLs. At 49-month median follow-up, 4-year progressionfree (PFS) and overall survival (OS) for aggressive NHLs were 31% and 44% respectively (stage I/II: PFS 53% and OS 66%; stage III/IV: PFS 20% and OS 32%; P

Lymphoma comprises two groups of diseases: Hodgkin lymphoma (HL) and non-Hodgkin lymphoma (NHL). Within both subsets are numerous variations with distinct biologic, molecular, and cytogenetic characteristics. The World Health Organization (WHO) classification of NHL, for example, now identifies several dozen broad entities and nearly 60 unique clinicopathologic subtypes. In addition to pathologic heterogeneity, there is clinical diversity within lymphomas, with some patients achieving cure, others having prolonged disease stabilization, and still others experiencing a rapidly fulminant decline and death. It is increasingly appreciated that both clinical and biological features strongly influence outcome. Practical implementation of a personalized approach to treatment is urgently needed, but efforts thus far have focused primarily on prognostication, with much less emphasis on determining therapeutic options. Nevertheless, better prognostic tools will facilitate the design of "risk-stratified" trials that will ultimately benefit patients. Thus far, the development of personalized treatment in lymphomas clusters into several broad approaches: refinement of clinical prognostic models for better risk stratification, use of high-throughput technology to identify biologic subtypes within pathologically similar diseases, "response-adapted" changes in therapy via imaging with [(18)F]fluoro-2-deoxy-d-glucose positron emission tomography (FDG-PET), and anti-idiotype vaccines. An important unmet need is the implementation of these tools into treatment choices for individual patients, and this is the focus of intense ongoing research.

Effective collaboration among healthcare providers is an essential component of high-quality patient care. Interprofessional education is foundational to ensuring that students are prepared to engage in optimal collaboration once they enter clinical practice particularly in the care of complex geriatric patients undergoing surgery.To enhance interprofessional education between nursing students and medical students in a clinical environment, we modeled the desired behavior and skills needed for interprofessional preoperative geriatric assessment for students, then provided an opportunity for students to practice skills in nurse/physician pairs on standardized patients. This experience culminated with students performing skills independently in a clinic setting.Nine nursing students and six medical students completed the pilot project. At baseline and after the final clinic visit we administered a ten question geriatric assessment test. Post-test scores (M=90.33, SD=11.09) were significantly higher than pre-test scores (M=72.33, SD=12.66, t(14)=-4.50, p0.001. Nursing student post-test scores improved a mean of 22.0 points and medical students a mean of 11.7 points over pre-test scores. Analysis of observational notes provided evidence of interprofessional education skills in the themes of shared problem solving, conflict resolution, recognition of patient needs, shared decision making, knowledge and development of one's professional role, communication, transfer of interprofessional learning, and identification of learning needs.Having nursing and medical students "learn about, from and with each other" while conducting a preoperative geriatric assessment offered a unique collaborative educational experience for students that better prepares them to integrate into interdisciplinary clinic teams.

Anthracycline-based chemotherapy (ABC) is the most effective therapy for diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL). The addition of rituximab to ABC in controlled trials has demonstrated superior survival, yet ABC is inconsistently utilized in elderly patients, and little is known about the penetrance or impact of rituximab with other treatments. We analyzed the treatment and survival patterns of 7559 patients with DLBCL over age 66 diagnosed from 1992 to 2002 using a linked Surveillance, Epidemiology and End Results (SEER)–Medicare database. Rituximab use was first detected in 1999 and by 2002 was incorporated in 79% of ABC-treated patients and 71% of patients treated with non-anthracycline chemotherapy, but only 12% of patients not receiving cytotoxic chemotherapy. ABC rates remained constant across time as did rates of no therapy, which were highest among the very old. Rituximab-associated survival improvements were seen among elderly treated with or without anthracyclines. Patients treated with rituximab but not anthracyclines had comparable survival to those treated with anthracycline but not rituximab.

Data on outcome, prognostic factors, and treatment for very elderly non-Hodgkin lymphomas (NHL) is sparse. We conducted a multicentre retrospective analysis of NHL patients ≥80 years (at diagnosis) treated between 1999 and 2009. Detailed characteristics were obtained including geriatric syndromes, activities of daily living (ADLs), and co-morbidities using the Cumulative Illness Rating Scale-Geriatrics (CIRS-G). We identified 303 patients: 170 aggressive NHL (84% B cell/16% T cell) and 133 indolent NHL (82% B cell/18% T cell). Median age was 84 years (80-95). A geriatric syndrome was present in 26% of patients, 18% had ≥1 grade 4 CIRS-G, and 14% had loss of ADLs. At 49-month median follow-up, 4-year progression-free (PFS) and overall survival (OS) for aggressive NHLs were 31% and 44% respectively (stage I/II: PFS 53% and OS 66%; stage III/IV: PFS 20% and OS 32%; P 0·0001 and 0·0002, respectively). Four-year PFS and OS for indolent NHL were 44% and 66% respectively, regardless of stage. Multivariate regression analysis identified two key factors that predicted inferior PFS and OS for both NHL groups: lack of CR and loss of ADLs. Prospective studies for very elderly NHL that incorporate geriatric tools, especially ADLs, are warranted.

The study analyzed outcomes of a consecutive case series of 37 patients with peripheral T-cell non-Hodgkin lymphoma, from related and unrelated donors, using allogeneic hematopoietic cell transplantation (allo-HCT), between the years 2000 and 2007. All patients were pretreated; the majority had either relapsed or progressive disease (n=25, 68%), 13 had cutaneous histologies (CTCL), and all were ineligible for autologous transplant. Fully ablative conditioning regimens were used in 13 patients while 24 patients underwent reduced intensity conditioning (RIC). At five years the overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS) probabilities were 52.2% and 46.5%, respectively. At the time of analysis, 9 (24.3%) patients had either relapsed (n=6) or progressed (n=3) post allo-HCT. The cumulative incidences of relapse/progression and non-relapse mortality at 5 years were 24.3% and 28.9%. No statistically significant variables for survival or relapse were discovered by univariate Cox-regression analysis of disease and patient characteristics; differences between CTCL and other histologies were not significant. The median follow-up of 64.0 months (range: 16.4–100.4) indicates a mature data-set with probable cure in the survivors. The relapse/progression curves reached and maintained plateaus after 1 year post-transplant, demonstrating that long-term disease control is possible after allo-HCT in PTCL patients with advanced disease.