An interprofessionally developed geriatric oncology curriculum for hematology-oncology fellows

Geriatric Oncology as an Unmet Workforce Training Need in the United Kingdom-A Narrative Review by the British Oncology Network for Undergraduate Societies (BONUS) and the International Society of Geriatric Oncology (SIOG) UK Country Group

Cancer is a disease associated with ageing. Managing cancer in older adults may prove challenging owing to pre-existing frailty, comorbidity, and wider holistic needs, as well as the unclear benefits and harms of standard treatment options. With the ongoing advances in oncology and the increasing complexity of treating older adults with cancer, the geriatric oncology field must be a priority for healthcare systems in education, research, and clinical practice. However, geriatric oncology is currently not formally taught in undergraduate education or postgraduate training programmes in the United Kingdom (UK). In this commentary, we outline the landscape of geriatric oncology undergraduate education and postgraduate training for UK doctors. We highlight current challenges and opportunities and provide practical recommendations for better preparing the medical workforce to meet the needs of the growing population of older adults with cancer. This includes key outcomes to be considered for inclusion within undergraduate and postgraduate curricula.

Pitfalls in Oncogeriatrics

An oncogeriatric interdisciplinary activity exists only in a minority of high-income countries, and it is almost absent in those with lower incomes. Considering topics, sessions, and tracks in the main meetings and conferences of the major Oncological Societies in Europe and worldwide, the USA excluded, little attention has thus far been paid to the problem of cancer in the elderly. Again, with the exception of the USA, the major cooperative groups, for example, the EORTC in Europe, have only dedicated marginal attention to the research of cancer in the elderly. Despite major shortcomings, professionals interested in geriatric oncology have taken a number of important initiatives to highlight the benefits of this particular activity, including the organization of an international society (Société Internationale de Oncogeriatrie, or SIOG). In spite of these efforts, the authors believe that the management of cancer in the older population is still encountering several important and generalized pitfalls. The main obstacle is the grossly inadequate number of geriatricians and clinical oncologists necessary to an integrated care of the ever-expanding aging population, but other hurdles have been reported. Additionally, the prejudice of ageism can lead to missing potential resources for the development of a generalized oncogeriatric approach.

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

INTRODUCTION

As 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 METHODS

We 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.

RESULTS

Twenty-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).

DISCUSSION

Our 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.

Satisfaction of General Versus Specialized Continuity Clinic in Hematology Oncology Fellowship Training: A Survey

BACKGROUND

At the University of Florida (UF), hematology-oncology (HO) fellows participate in 2 general types of continuity clinic as part of their fellowship training. One clinic, at the Veterans Hospital (VA), allows fellows to care for patients with a variety of hematology oncology diagnoses in a general clinic setting. The other clinic, located at the university site, is disease or system specific (such as breast or GI clinic). Considerable research supports the value of continuity clinic in residency and fellowship training, but the differences in having a general versus specialized clinic for HO fellows have not been explored. The purpose of this study was to investigate the perceived differences of general versus specialized continuity clinics by recent HO graduates from UF. Specifically, we were interested in learning which features of a continuity clinic they felt were most impactful for their current clinical practice.

METHODS

An anonymous survey was sent to the last 6 graduating classes of HO fellows at UF, between years of 2013 and 2018. The survey contained short demographic questions, followed by 5 open ended questions pertaining to the differing continuity clinic experiences. Graduates were asked about their opinions of both the general and specialized clinics during their training at UF. Survey responses were reviewed and coded for common themes by the authors.

RESULTS

Of 28 graduating fellows surveyed, 13 responded to the survey (response rate 46%). In thematic review of survey responses, the most common themes that emerged concerned autonomy, level of supervision, and the diversity of the patient population. A majority of respondents felt they had more autonomy and personal responsibility at the VA general clinic, but less direct supervision than at the specialized clinics. They also believed they got a broader exposure to different disease types at the VA general clinic. Surveyed participants also commented on the quality of educational seminars and activities, preceptor expertise and teaching, and ability to observe cutting edge practice and clinical trials.

CONCLUSIONS

Graduated oncology fellows from UF believe that there is a balance that exists between having autonomy and ownership of their patients versus having adequate supervision. Many believe that having "controlled autonomy" and "as much independence as is safe for patients" is key to a meaningful continuity clinic experience during oncology fellowship training.

Educating healthcare providers in geriatric oncology - A call to accelerate progress through identifying the gaps in knowledge

The majority of patients with cancer are over the age of 65. This patient population often has unique care needs. Thus, clinicians require additional competencies and skills to care for this population. Most clinicians, however, receive little to no training in geriatrics. There has been increasing recognition of the importance of learning about geriatric oncology. However, teaching of geriatric oncology principles is not standard or widespread. Here we highlight educational work and scholarship accomplished thus far in the field of geriatric oncology and identify gaps in knowledge that need to be addressed in order to help accelerate the development, implementation, integration, and dissemination of geriatric oncology curricula. These, in turn, will hopefully help improve the knowledge and skills of clinicians caring for older adults with cancer globally.

Caring for older cancer patients: A scoping review

There is a growing recognition among oncologists that older patients differ from other cancer patients. Older patients present age-specific issues affecting the prevention and management of their cancer. Over the years, this has led to the development of the discipline of geriatric oncology, which is the set of practices elaborated to evaluate, treat, follow-up and rehabilitate the population of older cancer patients. Geriatric oncology is still struggling to establish itself in healthcare settings managing older cancer patients. Efforts are currently being made to make it a recognized medical specialty. Health policy makers have to have a grasp of the evolution of this discipline because it concerns a fast growing segment of the cancer patient population. To shed light on the literature about this field, we undertook a scoping review in which we identified relevant studies; charted the data from the selected studies, collated, summarized and reported the results. From 2043 references initially identified, we included 92 articles in our scoping review and extracted data from 88 articles. The included articles were classified into three major categories, namely Advancing the discipline, Organization of care and Nursing and support services for patient and their caregivers. This review affords researchers and policy makers a foundation to help conduct many other conversations on each theme and sub-theme.

Preventing Treatment-Related Functional Decline: Strategies to Maximize Resilience

The majority of patients with cancer are older adults. A comprehensive geriatric assessment (CGA) will help the clinical team identify underlying medical and functional status issues that can affect cancer treatment delivery, cancer prognosis, and treatment tolerability. The CGA, as well as more abbreviated assessments and geriatric screening tools, can aid in the treatment decision-making process through improved individualized prediction of mortality, toxicity of cancer therapy, and postoperative complications and can also help clinicians develop an integrated care plan for the older adult with cancer. In this article, we will review the latest evidence with regard to the use of CGA in oncology. In addition, we will describe the benefits of conducting a CGA and the types of interventions that can be taken by the interprofessional team to improve the treatment outcomes and well-being of older adults.

Geriatrics fellowship training and the role of geriatricians in older adult cancer care: A survey of geriatrics fellowship directors

The number of older adults with cancer is growing, necessitating more collaborative training in geriatric principles and cancer care. The authors administered a web-based survey to U.S. geriatrics program directors (PDs) addressing cancer-specific training and perspectives on optimal training content and roles for geriatricians in cancer care. Of 140 PDs contacted, 67 (48%) responded. Topics considered very important in training included cancer screening (79%) and cancer-related pain management (70%). Respondents strongly agreed that some of the geriatrician's roles in cancer care included assessing functional status (64%) and assessing physical/cognitive function for goals of care (64%). About one half (54%) agreed that having a standardized geriatric oncology curriculum overall was important. The presence of a geriatric oncologist, requiring cancer-based rotations, being affiliated with a cancer center, or being internal versus family medicine-based did not affect this response. Despite this high level of support, cancer-related skills and knowledge warrant better definition and integration into current geriatrics training. This survey establishes potential areas for future educational collaborations between geriatrics and oncology training programs.

Hematology-Oncology Fellows’ Training in Geriatrics and Geriatric Oncology: Findings From an American Society of Clinical Oncology–Sponsored National Survey

Purpose:

Older adults compose the majority of patients with cancer in the United States; however, it is unclear how well geriatrics or geriatric oncology training is being incorporated into hematology-oncology (hem-onc) fellowships.

Methods:

A convenience sample of hem-onc fellows completed a (written or electronic) survey assessing their education, clinical experiences, and perceived proficiency in geriatric oncology during training; knowledge base in geriatric oncology; confidence in managing older adults with cancer; and general attitudes toward geriatric oncology principles.

Results:

Forty-five percent of respondents (N = 138) were female, 67% were based in the United States, and most (60%) were past their first year of training. Most fellows rated geriatric oncology as important or very important (84%); however, only 25% reported having access to a geriatric oncology clinic and more than one half (53%) reported no lectures in geriatric oncology. Fellows reported fewer educational experiences in geriatric oncology than in nongeriatric oncology. For example, among procedure-based activities, 12% learned how to perform a geriatric assessment but 78% learned how to perform a bone marrow biopsy ( P < .05). Of those completing the knowledge-based items, 41% were able to identify correctly the predictors of chemotherapy toxicity in older adults with cancer.

Conclusion:

Despite the prevalence of cancer in older adults, hem-onc fellows report limited education in or exposure to geriatric oncology. The high value fellows place on geriatric oncology suggests that they would be receptive to additional training in this area.

Educational initiatives in geriatric oncology - Who, why, and how?

The population is aging accounting for a large increase in anticipated cancer cases. Specialty training for trainees interested in geriatric oncology have been established in many countries and is growing globally. However, the number of clinicians with a particular interest in geriatric oncology and who complete training in both specialties is low. There are insufficient geriatric oncologists and geriatricians to address the unique needs of this population of patients. The majority of older adults with cancer are, and will continue to be, treated by oncologists. Currently clinicians caring for patients with cancer receive little to no formal training in caring for older adults, resulting in gaps in knowledge as well as a lack of confidence when treating older adults with cancers. Key strategies to accelerate the uptake and impact of educational initiatives to address this gap include the use of effective educational strategies, broad dissemination of educational material that is freely available, and the integration of geriatric oncology topics into teaching, curriculum, assessments and exams.