Geriatric Assessment In Oncology Research Articles

Development and implementation of a geriatric oncology interprofessional case-based educational intervention for cancer care providers.

9020 Background: Geriatric assessment (GA) is recommended as part of the standard of care for older adults with cancer. However, the GA has not been fully adopted as part of routine practice in oncology in Mexico, mainly due to lack of qualified personnel and limited knowledge. We designed an interprofessional case-based educational intervention to address the main barriers for implementation of GA in oncology. Methods: We followed Kern’s six-step approach to design a continuing professional development (CPD) activity. Our targeted learners consisted of teams comprised of one oncologist and one geriatrician who practiced at the same site in Mexico. By the end of the intervention, participants would be able to perform GA in older adults with cancer, and to integrate information obtained through a GA in a cancer treatment plan through adequate interventions. We used Project ECHO’s model to create a CPD activity consisting of 12 weekly 75-minute online sessions via Zoom, with content selected from international geriatric oncology guidelines. At baseline, and at the end of the course, participants answered a 36-item multiple choice knowledge assessment (scale 0-100), a survey on self-perceived competence in GA skills (scale 0-10), and an adaptation of the Association for Community Cancer Centers Geriatric Oncology Gap Assessment Tool, which assesses subjective performance of the GA (scale 0-4). Participants also completed a satisfaction questionnaire. We compared baseline and post-intervention scores through paired t tests; results from the satisfaction questionnaire are reported descriptively. Results: We included 56 participants (28 geriatricians and 28 oncologists). Median participant attendance was 10 sessions (IQR 9-11). Thirty-eight participants completed the satisfaction questionnaire: median satisfaction was 10/10 (range 8-10). There was no difference in satisfaction scores between oncologists and geriatricians. Mean baseline knowledge score was 59.5±12.8 and mean post-intervention knowledge score was 74.4±9.7 (p<0.001, effect size 1.14). Mean baseline competence score was 6.42±2.5 and mean post-intervention competence score was 9.02±0.78 (p<0.001, effect size 1.03). Mean baseline performance score was 2.58±0.65 and mean post-intervention knowledge score was 3.29±0.5 (p<0.001, effect size 1.64). Increases in knowledge, competence, and performance scores were observed both in oncologists and in geriatricians separately. Conclusions: This interprofessional curriculum on GA in oncology was feasible and acceptable, and led to significant increases in knowledge, competence, and performance among participants. Project ECHO’s case-based learning model is adequate to provide interprofessional education, which is crucial in multidisciplinary areas such as geriatric oncology.

Reducing potentially inappropriate medication use and patient harm in a dedicated geriatric oncology clinic: a cross-sectional study

Abstract Introduction International guidance on conducting medication reviews in older adults with cancer was published in June 2022,[1] and current clinical practices have been outlined by pharmacists working in this field.[2] This process includes assessing for drug-drug interactions (DDIs), potentially inappropriate medications (PIMs), and assessing anticholinergic burden (ACB), all of which have been associated with poorer outcomes in older adults with cancer.[2] Since July 2022, the Geriatric Oncology Assessment and Liaison (GOAL) Clinic in our tertiary cancer centre has offered a comprehensive geriatric assessment (CGA) to patients ≥70 years, which includes a comprehensive geriatric pharmacological assessment (CGPA), performed by the primary author. Aim Identify pharmacist interventions that resulted in a reduction of medication use in older adults attending a geriatric oncology clinic. Methods Data were collected between July 2022 and September 2023 inclusive. Patients who attended the GOAL clinic consented and underwent a CGPA. The CGPA database was analysed to assess for recommendations that reduced medication usage via two metrics: (i) reduced doses of medications; (ii) deprescribing of medications. Descriptive statistics were used to analyse the data (Table 1). Results One hundred and seventy four patients (98%) consented to a CGPA. Interventions to reduce medication use occurred in 120 patients (69%). There were 199 total number of interventions, with some patients having more than one intervention. The nature of the interventions are described in Table 1. Conclusion A structured medication review in the form of a CGPA, alongside a multidisciplinary CGA is effective at identifying potential areas to reduce medication usage in older adults with cancer, through appropriate dose reductions and deprescribing strategies. This service is unique as the GOAL clinic is Ireland’s only dedicated geriatric oncology clinic. The utilisation of a clinical pharmacist in a geriatric oncology outpatient clinic can effectively identify opportunities to reduce inappropriate medication, with almost 70% of patients being identified as being prescribed potentially inappropriate medications. This study was limited to the outpatient setting only. Future research should consider the impact of pharmacist review of medications for older adults with cancer at transitions of care.

Examination of real-world data from geriatric assessments in a comprehensive cancer center to explore predominant and cancer-specific domains for intervention.

e24027 Background: Older adults (OA) with cancer have a higher risk of harm with cancer treatment. Geriatric Assessment (GA) based treatment modifications can help mitigate toxicity and functional impairment. The Geriatric Oncology Assessment and Plan (GOAL) Clinic was established with the aim of providing age-friendly care to OA with cancer at Huntsman Cancer Institute. This retrospective study presents the needs identified using GA in the real-world setting. Methods: Patients (pts) aged ≥65 years are referred to the GOAL clinic by their oncologists/hematologists for age-related concerns. A geriatrics nurse practitioner administers a GA upon initial visit, communicates specific age-related concerns with the referring provider, and subsequently manages any geriatric syndromes that may interfere with their treatment tolerance or outcomes. We analyzed GA data to identify the specific needs of OA with cancer referred to the GOAL clinic. Results: We evaluated 222 pts in the GOAL clinic between September 2020 and January 2023. The median age was 77 years, 52% were female. The most common cancer diagnosis was prostate, followed by breast, colorectal, pancreatic, and bladder. Of the pts assessed, the median Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) was 1, and the median body mass index (BMI) was 26.4 kg/m2. 12% of pts had a moderate to high risk for malnutrition. A Patient Health Questionnaire-9 (PHQ-9) showed minimal, mild, moderate, moderately severe, and severe depression in 35%, 20%, 14%, 7%, and 3% of pts, respectively. The Generalized Anxiety Disorder scale-7 (GAD-7) showed minimal, mild, moderate, and severe anxiety symptoms in 35%, 19%, 9%, and 7% of pts respectively. The median Mini-cog score was 4, and those who reflexed to testing with Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MOCA) had a median score of 22 out of 30 suggesting mild cognitive impairment (MCI). A greater proportion of pts with prostate cancer (PC) were overweight and had MCI by MOCA (Table 1). Multidisciplinary interventions were implemented, and GA was used to determine the appropriateness of cancer treatment. Conclusions: Cognitive dysfunction and depression were this population's most common geriatric syndromes. PC pts had a higher median BMI and greater proportion of patients with MCI than pts with other cancers. Dysmetabolic syndrome associated with elevated BMI is not a domain of GA but is pertinent to treatment toxicity in PC. MCI is not apparent on a routine oncology evaluation. Interventions are needed to prevent, screen, and treat MCI in OA with cancer, especially PC, and dysmetabolic syndrome in OA with PC.[Table: see text]

A retrospective single-centre analysis of the prevalence of statin use in geriatric oncology: Is there a role for cessation?

e24016 Background: Statins have become ubiquitous in medicine. There is a myriad of indications, and the duration of treatment required for efficacy is measured in years. There is a need for clarity on their role in geriatric oncology and when to de-prescribe. Within a sample of Irish patients in 1987, 8% would have been eligible for a statin. By 2016, this had climbed to 61%. During this time, the number needed to treat increased from 40 to 400. In terms of benefit, a meta-analysis concluded that 100 patients need treatment for 2.5 years to prevent one major adverse cardiovascular event (MACE) in the primary preventative setting. It is not clear whether this benefit is derived in later life. As a result, the United States preventive service task force concluded that evidence is insufficient to recommend initiating a statin for primary prevention in adults over 75. The aim of our study was to assess the prevalence of statin use in older adults with cancer, and the evidence for de-prescribing. Methods: Data was retrospectively collected from a prospectively maintained database of patients attending the Geriatric Oncology Assessment and Liaision (GOAL) clinic in the South East Cancer Centre, University Hospital Waterford, Ireland. Data collected includes age at cancer diagnosis, stage, co-morbidities, and medications. We determined how many patients were taking statins (or ezetimibe) prior to first oncology review, their indication and overall survival. Indications for statins were categorised using a hierarchy of indications, as described by Wallach Kildemoes et al. Results: 138 of 233 patients were taking statins at the time of their review (59%). The average age at cancer diagnosis was 78.6 years. Seventy-nine were taking statins for primary prevention (58%). 15 of 79 whom had diabetes. Stage 3 or 4 disease accounted for 78% of this group. Overall survival in this group was 1.59 years. Within the group with stage 4 disease (n = 100), 53 were taking a statin. Twenty-eight (52.8%) were for primary prevention. Within this group, 6 had diabetes. Overall survival in this group was 1.44 years. Conclusions: Overall survival of patients was short of the 2.5 years required to provide benefit. Therefore, there is evidence to stop this medication in the primary preventative group, once diagnosed with advanced cancer. The stage 4 disease group included patients undergoing secondary prevention, so treatment is more efficacious. However, with an overall survival of 1.44 years, the window for benefit is small.[Table: see text]

OA08.06 Implementation of a Nurse-led Geriatric Oncology Assessment Model in the Lung Cancer Care Pathway

The incidence of lung cancer increases with age. The comprehensive geriatric assessment (CGA) identifies patients at high risk of adverse outcomes and has shown to improve health-related outcomes, quality of life and reduction in health service use. However, the uptake is hampered by limitations in both time and resources. We evaluated the implementation of a nurse-led model of geriatric oncology assessment for elderly patients (≥ 65 years) with newly diagnosed lung cancer.

What do hematology residents know about caring for older adults with cancer? A national survey of Canadian hematology residents' knowledge and interests

IntroductionAs the Canadian population ages, older adults comprise an increasing proportion of those diagnosed and treated for hematologic malignancies. A geriatric oncology curriculum has been recognized as a top priority in the care of older patients with cancer. It is not clear, however, whether hematology trainees receive training in geriatric oncology. We sought to understand residents' views and needs for a geriatric oncology curriculum during hematology residency in Canada. Materials and MethodsWe conducted a cross-sectional needs assessment of hematology trainees enrolled in a Canadian residency or advanced fellowship training program within hematology. The survey, which was piloted with three non-hematology residents to ensure user-friendliness, used a combination of Likert scale, multiple-choice, and open-ended questions. The survey comprised three sections: (1) demographic data, (2) current state of geriatric oncology training (amount, content) and (3) attitudes towards learning about geriatric oncology and preferred curriculum components and identified needs. The survey was administered by the study team and distributed electronically to program directors in June 2020. The program directors were asked to forward the survey to trainees registered within their Division of Hematology. Data were analyzed descriptively. ResultsTwenty-nine hematology residents participated (41.4% estimated response rate). Most respondents had not received geriatric oncology teaching (58.6%, n = 17) and have never been taught about geriatric oncology assessment tools (72.4%, n = 21) during hematology residency. Most respondents felt that their program should deliver a geriatric oncology curriculum (96.6%, n = 28). Respondents were most interested in learning about use of geriatric assessment tools for pre-treatment chemotherapy decision-making (86.2%, n = 25), prediction of chemotherapy toxicity (82.8%, n = 24), and to facilitate conversations regarding treatment initiation, continuation, or termination (79.3%, n = 23). DiscussionOur study highlights the paucity of geriatric oncology training in hematology residency training programs. Our results highlight both the need and interest for a future dedicated geriatric oncology curriculum integrated into hematology training and provide guidance about which topics are most valued by trainees.

Geriatric Assessment in Oncology

Geriatric Assessment in Oncology

Old is always not gold in geriatric oncology assessment

Old is always not gold in geriatric oncology assessment

A supportive care dedicated hospitalization ward in comprehensive cancer center.

Supportive care development has created new needs in patients' care pathway. In order to anticipate, evaluate, and take care of patients' needs, a supportive care dedicated hospitalization ward was created in late 2016 in our comprehensive cancer center, including 15 beds (11 for week care and 4 for day care). We aimed to assess the activity of this supportive care ward in 2018. Data were extracted from weekly activity reports of supportive care ward and retrospectively analyzed. Those reports are automatically generated from hospitalization scheduling software. In week care ward, 627 stays were recorded. Occupancy rate was 88%. Mean stay duration was 3.01days. Main indications for week stay were pain evaluation and management (47.4%) and nutritional management (31.7%). In day care ward, 1191 stays were registered. Turnover rate was 1.18 patients/bed/day. Main indications for day stay were pain management (41.6%) and comprehensive geriatric assessment in oncology (22.8%). The 2018 supportive care ward evaluation showed its viability in comprehensive cancer center. The main activity was based on pain and nutritional management.

Geriatric Assessment in Oncology: G8 Screening Tool Validation and Reliability Study

Geriatric Assessment in Oncology: G8 Screening Tool Validation and Reliability Study

Comprehensive Geriatric Assessment in Oncology: Best Practices in Caring for Older Patients

CASE STUDY Michele Green received the results of her breast cancer biopsy last week. Before surgery for infiltrating ductal carcinoma to her left breast, Michele was advised to meet with the members of the Senior Adult Oncology Program (SAOP) at the cancer center. A phone call from a nurse explained that the 2-hour visit with the SAOP would include meetings with many providers, such as a physical therapist, a social worker, a dietitian, a pharmacist, a nurse practitioner, and an oncologist to undergo a comprehensive geriatric assessment. Driving to her appointment, Michele wondered why her visit would take so long and why she had to see so many people. At 81 years old, Michele maintains her physical fitness and has never really been sick. She continues to work each week at the university and engages in an active social life. What could a team possibly find? Walking past the many examination rooms, Michele began to feel despair that she was now a "cancer patient."

Patients’ needs and wishes regarding pharmaceutical care provided by the pharmacist for women treated with adjuvant endocrine therapy for breast cancer

The prevalence of complementary and alternative medication (CAM) use in senior adult oncology (SAO) patients is widely variable and little is known about whether polypharmacy (PP) and potentially inappropriate medication (PIM) use influences CAM use given the increased number of comorbidities and polypharmacy. One approach to optimize medication management is through utilization of pharmacists as part of a team-based, healthcare model.Prevalence of CAM and factors influencing CAM use was examined in a secondary analysis of 248 patients who received an initial comprehensive geriatric oncology assessment between January 2011 and June 2013. Data was collected from electronic medical records. CAM was defined as herbal medications, minerals, or other dietary supplements, excluding vitamins. Patient characteristics influencing CAM use (e.g. comorbidities, PP and PIM use) were analyzed.Only 234 patients (evaluated by pharmacists) were included in the final analysis. Mean age was 79.9 years [range 61–98]; 64% women, 74% Caucasian, 87% with a solid tumor, mean comorbidities, 7.69. CAM prevalence was 26.5% (n = 62) and median CAM use was 0 (range 0–10). The proportion of CAM use (1, 2, and 3) was 19.2%, 6.4%, and 0.4%, respectively. Associations with CAM use (versus no-CAM) were polypharmacy (P = 0.045), vision impairment (P = 0.048) and urologic comorbidities (P = 0.021).A pharmacist-led comprehensive medication assessment demonstrated a more precise estimation of CAM prevalence in the ambulatory SAO population. CAM use was associated with polypharmacy, ophthalmic and urologic medical conditions. Integrating pharmacists into team-based (geriatric and oncology) care models is an underutilized yet viable solution to optimize medication use.

Utilisation of geriatric assessment in oncology - a survey of Australian medical oncologists.

Geriatric assessment (GA) is a multidimensional health assessment of the older person to evaluate their physical and cognitive function, comorbidities, nutrition, medications, psychological state, and social supports. GA may help oncologists optimise care for older patients with cancer. The aim of this study was to explore the views of Australian medical oncologists regarding the incorporation of geriatric screening tools, GA and collaboration with geriatricians into routine clinical practice. Members of the Medical Oncology Group of Australia were invited to complete an online survey that evaluated respondent demographics, practice characteristics, treatment decision-making factors, use of GA, and access to geriatricians. Sixty-nine respondents identified comorbidities, polypharmacy, and poor functional status as the most frequent challenges in caring for older patients with cancer. Physical function, social supports and nutrition were the most frequent factors influencing treatment decision-making. The majority of respondents perceived value in GA and geriatrician review, although access was a barrier for referral. Such services would need to be responsive, providing reports within two weeks for the majority of respondents. Despite an emerging evidence base for the potential benefits of GA and collaboration with geriatricians, medical oncologists reported a lack of access but a desire to engage with these services.

Using a geriatric oncology assessment to link with services (GOAL).

Geriatric screening tools assess functional limitations and inform clinical decision-making for older adults with cancer. Our objective was to evaluate the feasibility and effectiveness of a screener in community-based oncology clinics. Eligible patients were from two rural, underserved community-based cancer clinics; within 12 months of a cancer diagnosis (breast, lung, colorectal, pancreas, esophageal); aged ≥60 years; and not exclusively pursuing palliative care. We used a previously validated tool that was embedded in the electronic health record (EHR). Patient-reported responses identified memory impairment, depressive symptoms, deficits in activities of daily living, poor nutrition, and polypharmacy. At the discretion of the oncologist, responses prompted service referrals. From the EHR, we extracted information about referrals and completion of planned therapy. We present descriptive statistics. Enrolled patients (n = 44) had a mean age of 71.5 years (SD = 6.9). Most were non-white (61%), women (66%), with government-sponsored health insurance (80%). The most commonly identified geriatric syndromes: polypharmacy (89%), reduced quality of life (39%), and poor nutrition (39%). The screener triggered a referral in 98% of patients. Generated referrals were for depressive symptoms (52% needed, 39% received), nutrition (43% needed, 37% received), and polypharmacy (89% needed, 26% received). Patients were referred to social work (56%), nutrition (44%), and pharmacy (25%). Many patients completed planned radiation therapy (100%), surgery (70%), and chemotherapy (60%). Use of an EHR-embedded brief geriatric oncology assessment in rural oncology clinics identified geriatric syndromes that would benefit from provision of services in nearly all enrolled patients. ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02906592.

Geriatric assessment in oncology: Moving the concept forward. The 20 years of experience of the Centre Léon Bérard geriatric oncology program.

The management of cancer in aging people remains a challenge for physicians. Specialists agree on the assistance provided by a multidimensional geriatric assessment (MGA) to guide the cancer treatment decision-making process. We aim to explore the use of MGA in treatment decision and to identify MGA parameters likely to influence the planned cancer treatment. We conducted a single-site retrospective study in patients older than 65 years suffering from various types of cancer who underwent MGA before cancer treatment decision. Logistic regression analyses were used for identification of predictive variables. In the 266 patients' population, the mean age was 75.8 ± 7.4 years and 155 (58%) patients were men. Patients had solid tumors (95.4%) or hematologic malignancies (4.6%). Most of patients were in advanced setting (57%). The MGA revealed malnutrition (47%), cognitive/mood impairment (48%), functional decline (53%), and led to adjust medical care through reinforcing health status and fostering successful completion of cancer treatment plan for 259 (97%) patients. The MGA changed cancer treatment in 47 (18%) patients. Functional and/or cognitive impairment, risk of falls, and polypharmacy were associated with treatment change in univariate analysis. No multivariate model was possible. MGA leads to modification of treatment in only few patients. However, MGA enables a better understanding of patients' strengths and weaknesses essential to improve care management. Further improvements with integration of innovative specific tools are warranted to help decision-process in the increasing complexity of treatment plans available in older adults.

Using a geriatric oncology assessment to link with services in an underserved, community oncology population.

e22024Background: By 2030, most cancer cases will be diagnosed among older adults, who are more likely to have functional limitations. Geriatric oncology assessments (GOAs) can be used to assess th...

Evolution of Geriatric Assessment in Oncology

Evolution of Geriatric Assessment in Oncology

Diagnostic performance of gait speed, G8 and G8 modified indices to screen for vulnerability in older cancer patients: the prospective PF-EC cohort study.

BackgroundThe diagnostic performance of tools used to screen vulnerability in older cancer patients varies widely. We assessed the diagnostic performance of gait speed (GS) for assessing vulnerability in such patients.MethodsAll consecutive outpatients 65 years and older were referred for geriatric oncology assessment (GA) before a therapeutic decision between November 2013 and April 2016 in a bicentric observational and prospective cohort study. Vulnerability was defined as impaired score on at least one of the 6 domains of the GA. GS and the G8 index and G8 modified index were assessed at the first geriatric oncology visit during the GA. Sensitivity, specificity, positive and negative predictive value and positive and negative likelihood ratio were estimated. The accuracy of the three tools was analysed by the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC).ResultsAmong 269 included patients (mean [SD] age, 81.3 years [5.9]; 55% women, 94.4% solid tumors; 39.4% with metastasis), 252 (93.7%) had impaired GA. With the GS threshold of 1 m/s, sensitivity was 79.4% (95% CI, 73.8-84.2), specificity 64.7% (38.3-85.8), and AUC 82.0 (74.0-90.0). The corresponding values for the G8 index were 90.1% (85.7-93.5), 35.3% (14.2-61.7), and 79.0 (70.0-88.0) and G8 modified index were 89.3% (84.8-92.8), 64.7% (38.3-85.8), and 84.0 (74.0-92.0).ConclusionsGS < 1 m/s with a single measure could be used as a new screening tool for detecting vulnerability in older cancer outpatients. This first external validation of the G8 modified index was very good.

A Comprehensive Look at Polypharmacy and Medication Screening Tools for the Older Cancer Patient.

: 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. 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.

A pharmacist-led medication assessment used to determine a more precise estimation of the prevalence of complementary and alternative medication (CAM) use among ambulatory senior adults with cancer.

The prevalence of complementary and alternative medication (CAM) use in senior adult oncology (SAO) patients is widely variable and little is known about whether polypharmacy (PP) and potentially inappropriate medication (PIM) use influences CAM use given the increased number of comorbidities and polypharmacy. One approach to optimize medication management is through utilization of pharmacists as part of a team-based, healthcare model. Prevalence of CAM and factors influencing CAM use was examined in a secondary analysis of 248 patients who received an initial comprehensive geriatric oncology assessment between January 2011 and June 2013. Data was collected from electronic medical records. CAM was defined as herbal medications, minerals, or other dietary supplements, excluding vitamins. Patient characteristics influencing CAM use (e.g. comorbidities, PP and PIM use) were analyzed. Only 234 patients (evaluated by pharmacists) were included in the final analysis. Mean age was 79.9 years [range 61-98]; 64% women, 74% Caucasian, 87% with a solid tumor, mean comorbidities, 7.69. CAM prevalence was 26.5% (n=62) and median CAM use was 0 (range 0-10). The proportion of CAM use (1, 2, and 3) was 19.2%, 6.4%, and 0.4%, respectively. Associations with CAM use (versus no-CAM) were polypharmacy (P=0.045), vision impairment (P=0.048) and urologic comorbidities (P=0.021). A pharmacist-led comprehensive medication assessment demonstrated a more precise estimation of CAM prevalence in the ambulatory SAO population. CAM use was associated with polypharmacy, ophthalmic and urologic medical conditions. Integrating pharmacists into team-based (geriatric and oncology) care models is an underutilized yet viable solution to optimize medication use.