Detection of frailty in elderly cancer patients: Improvement of the G8 screening test

The significance of G8 and other geriatric assessments in urologic cancer management: A comprehensive review

In urologic oncology, which often involves older patients, it is important to consider how to manage their care appropriately. Geriatric assessment (GA) is a method that can address the specific needs of older cancer patients. The GA encompasses various assessment domains, but these domains exhibit variations across the literature. Some of the common items include functional ability, nutrition, comorbidities, cognitive ability, psychosocial disorders, polypharmacy, social and financial support, falls/imbalance, and vision/hearing. Despite the diversity of domains, there is limited consensus on reliable measurement methods. This review discusses the role of GA in managing urologic cancer in unique scenarios, such as those necessitating temporary or permanent urinary catheters or stomas due to urinary diversion. A comprehensive GA is time and human-resource-intensive in real-world clinical practice. Hence, simpler tools such as the Geriatric-8 (G8), capable of identifying high-risk patients requiring a detailed GA, are also under investigation in various contexts. Therefore, we conducted a systematic literature review on the G8. Our findings indicate that patients with low G8 scores encounter difficulties with stoma self-care after urinary diversion and have higher risks of urinary tract infections and ileus after radical cystectomy. The utilization of G8 as a screening tool for urologic cancer patients may facilitate the delivery of appropriate and personalized treatment and care.

Physical performance tests have excellent reliability in frail and non-frail patients with prostate cancer

PURPOSE

Our aim was to investigate the test-retest reliability of the 2-min walk test (2MWT), timed up and go test (TUG), and five times sit-to-stand test (FTSST) in prostate cancer (PC) patients.

METHODS

This study was conducted with 73 patients who were classified into two groups as frail and non-frail determined by the Geriatric-8 questionnaire. Patients performed the 2MWT, TUG, and FTSST tests for two times. The test-retest reliability of the 2MWT, TUG, and FTSST was assessed by calculating the intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC). The standard error of measurement (SEM95) and minimal detectable change (MDC95) values were calculated.

RESULTS

All tests showed excellent test-retest reliability for both groups (ICC(2.1) > 0.90). The SEM95 and MDC95 values of 2MWT were 3.09, 8.57, and 3.15 m, 8.73 m for frail and non-frail groups. The SEM95 and MDC95 values of TUG for the frail group were 0.6 and 1.66 and 0.43 and 1.19 for the non-frail group, respectively. The SEM95 and MDC95 values of FTST for the frail group were 0.68 and 1.88 and for the non-frail group 0.86 and 2.38.

CONCLUSIONS

The 2MWT, TUG, and FTSST showed excellent reliability in frail and non-frail older adults with PC which can be used to assess physical performance.

Validity of a self-administered G8 screening test for older patients with cancer

INTRODUCTION

The Geriatric 8 (G8) is a brief cancer-specific tool which screens for patients who require a comprehensive geriatric assessment (CGA). The G8 test assesses patients on eight domains such as mobility, polypharmacy, age, and self-rated health. However, the current G8 requires a healthcare professional (nurse or physician) present to conduct the test, which limits its usefulness. The Self-G8 questionnaire (S-G8) is an adaptation of the original G8 test, assessing all the same domains, with questions modified to be appropriate for patients to self-complete. Our objective was to evaluate the performance of S-G8 compared to the G8 and CGA.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

The initial S-G8 was designed by our team through review of the literature and questionnaire design principles, and was optimized through feedback from patients over the age of 70. The questionnaire subsequently underwent further refinement after undergoing pilot testing (N = 14). The diagnostic accuracy of the final iteration of the S-G8 was evaluated along with the standard G8 in a prospective cohort study (N = 52) in an academic geriatric oncology clinic at the Princess Margaret Cancer Centre, Toronto, Canada. Psychometric characteristics were evaluated including internal consistency, sensitivity, and specificity compared to the G8 and to the CGA.

RESULTS

There was strong correlation between the G8 and S-G8 scores, with a Spearman correlation co-efficient of 0.76 (p < 0.001). Internal consistency was acceptable at 0.60. The frequency of abnormality (<14 score) for the G8 and S-G8 was 82.7% and 61.5%, respectively. The mean score for the original G8 and S-G8 was 11.9 and 13.5, respectively. The cut-off of 14 for the S-G8 yielded the best combination of sensitivity of 0.70 ± 0.07 and specificity of 0.78 ± 0.14 when compared to the G8. When compared to two or more abnormal domains on the CGA, the S-G8 performed at least as well as the G8 with a sensitivity of 0.77, specificity of 0.85, and a Youden's index of 0.62.

DISCUSSION

The S-G8 questionnaire appears to be an acceptable alternative to the original G8 in identifying older adults with cancer who will benefit from a CGA. Large scale testing is warranted.

Long-term health-care utilisation in older patients with cancer and the association with the Geriatric 8 screening tool: a retrospective analysis using linked clinical and population-based data in Belgium

BACKGROUND

Little evidence is available on the long-term health-care utilisation of older patients with cancer and whether this is associated with geriatric screening results. We aimed to evaluate long-term health-care utilisation among older patients after cancer diagnosis and the association with baseline Geriatric 8 (G8) screening results.

METHODS

For this retrospective analysis, we included data from three cohort studies for patients (aged ≥70 years) with a new cancer diagnosis who underwent G8 screening between Oct 19, 2009 and Feb 27, 2015, and who survived more than 3 months after G8 screening. The clinical data were linked to cancer registry and health-care reimbursement data for long-term follow-up. The occurrence of outcomes (inpatient hospital admissions, emergency department visits, use of intensive care, contacts with general practitioner [GP], contacts with a specialist, use of home care, and nursing home admissions) was assessed in the 3 years after G8 screening. We assessed the association between outcomes and baseline G8 score (normal score [>14] or abnormal [≤14]) using adjusted rate ratios (aRRs) calculated from Poisson regression and using cumulative incidence calculated as a time-to-event analysis with the Kaplan-Meier method.

FINDINGS

7556 patients had a new cancer diagnosis, of whom 6391 patients (median age 77 years [IQR 74-82]) met inclusion criteria and were included. 4110 (64·3%) of 6391 patients had an abnormal baseline G8 score (≤14 of 17 points). In the first 3 months after G8 screening, health-care utilisation peaked and then decreased over time, with the exception of GP contacts and home care days, which remained high throughout the 3-year follow-up period. Compared with patients with a normal baseline G8 score, patients with an abnormal baseline G8 score had more hospital admissions (aRR 1·20 [95% CI 1·15-1·25]; p<0·0001), hospital days (1·66 [1·64-1·68]; p<0·0001), emergency department visits (1·42 [1·34-1·52]; p<0·0001), intensive care days (1·49 [1·39-1·60]; p<0·0001), general practitioner contacts (1·19 [1·17-1·20]; p<0·0001), home care days (1·59 [1·58-1·60]; p<0·0001), and nursing home admissions (16·7% vs 3·1%; p<0·0001) in the 3-year follow-up period. At 3 years, of the 2281 patients with a normal baseline G8 score, 1421 (62·3%) continued to live at home independently and 503 (22·0%) had died. Of the 4110 patients with an abnormal baseline G8 score, 1057 (25·7%) continued to live at home independently and 2191 (53·3%) had died.

INTERPRETATION

An abnormal G8 score at cancer diagnosis was associated with increased health-care utilisation in the subsequent 3 years among patients who survived longer than 3 months.

FUNDING

Stand up to Cancer, the Flemish Cancer Society.

Comparison of two frailty screening tools in older patients with colorectal cancer

INTRODUCTION

Geriatric assessment (GA) is widely used to detect vulnerability in older patients. As this process is time-consuming, prescreening tools have been developed to identify patients at risk for frailty. We aimed to assess whether the Geriatric 8 (G8) or the Korean Cancer Study Group Geriatric Score (KG-7) shows better performance in identifying patients who are in need of full GA.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A consecutive series of patients aged ≥ 60 years with colorectal cancer were included. The sensitivity, specificity, predictive value, and 95% confidence intervals (95% CI) were calculated for the G8 and the KG-7 using the results of GA as the reference standard. ROC(Receiver Operating Characteristic) was used to evaluate the accuracy of the G8 and the KG-7.

RESULTS

One hundred four patients were enrolled. A total of 40.4% of patients were frail according to GA, and 42.3% and 50.0% of patients were frail based on the G8 and the KG-7, respectively. The sensitivity and specificity of the G8 were 90.5% (95% CI: 77.4-97.3%) and 90.3% (95% CI: 80.1-96.4%), respectively. For the KG-7, the sensitivity and specificity were 83.3% (95% CI: 68.6-93.0%) and 72.6% (95% CI: 59.8-83.1%), respectively. Compared to the KG-7, the G8 had a higher predictive accuracy (AUC: (95% CI): 0.90 (0.83-0.95) vs. 0.78 (0.69-0.85); p < 0.01). By applying the G8 and the KG-7, 60 and 52 patients would not need a GA assessment, respectively.

CONCLUSION

Both the G8 and the KG-7 showed a great ability to detect frailty in older patients with colorectal cancer. In this population, compared to the KG-7, the G8 had a better performance in identifying those in need of a full Geriatric Assessment.

Developing Sustainable Cancer and Aging Programs

Geriatric assessment (GA) has been shown to decrease toxicity from systemic therapy, improve completion of chemotherapy, and reduce hospitalizations in older adults with cancer. Given the aging of the cancer population, this has the potential to have a positive impact on the care of a large swath of patients seen. Despite endorsement by several international societies, including the American Society of Clinical Oncology, uptake of GA has been low. Lack of knowledge, time, and resources has been cited as reasons for this. Although challenges to developing and implementing a cancer and aging program vary depending on the health care context, GA is adaptable to every health care context from low- to high-resource settings, as well as those in which geriatric oncology is a well-established or just emerging field. We provide an approach for clinicians and administrators to develop, implement, and sustain aging and cancer programs in a doable and sustainable way.

Rapid geriatric screening tools predict inability to manage stoma by oneself after urinary diversion: G8 and IADL-modified G8

INTRODUCTION

This study aimed to evaluate whether functional screening, as assessed by the Geriatric-8 (G8) and the instrumental activities of daily living (IADL)-modified G8, are associated with the inability to manage a stoma by themselves in patients with bladder cancer who underwent robot-assisted radical cystectomy.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We analyzed a total of 110 consecutive patients with bladder cancer who underwent robot-assisted radical cystectomy and were screened preoperatively using the G8 and the IADL-modified G8 at our institution between January 2020 and December 2022. Patients who could not undergo geriatric screening at the preoperative clinic before surgery and patients who underwent orthotopic neobladder construction were excluded. We evaluated the association between clinical factors, including scores of G8 and IADL-modified G8, and the inability to manage a stoma by oneself. For both G8 and IADL-modified G8, a cutoff value of ≤14 was set.

RESULTS

Of the 110 patients, the median age was 77 years, 92 (84%) patients were male and 47 (43%) patients were unable to manage a stoma by themselves. The geriatric assessment indicated that 64 patients (58%) were classified in the low G8 (≤14) group and 66 patients (60%) were classified in the low IADL-modified G8 (≤14) group. The values of area under the receiver operating characteristic curve for predicting inability to manage stoma by oneself were 0.725 for the G8 and 0.734 for the IADL-modified G8, respectively. Multivariate analysis including the G8 revealed that age ≥ 80, Charlson comorbidity index of ≥3, and G8 ≤ 14 (odds ratio [OR] = 4.9; 95% confidence interval [CI] = 1.8-13.0; P = 0.002) were independent risk factors for inability to manage a stoma by oneself. Likewise, multivariate analysis including the IADL-modified G8 revealed that age ≥ 80, Charlson comorbidity index of ≥3, and IADL-modified G8 ≤ 14 (OR = 5.4; 95% CI = 1.9-14.0; P = 0.001) were independent risk factors for inability to manage a stoma by oneself.

DISCUSSION

Screening using G8 and IADL-modified G8 may predict patients who have difficulty self-managing their stomas.

Predictive value of the G8 and the IADL-modified G8 screening tools for postoperative delirium following major urological cancer surgery

INTRODUCTION

The purpose of this study was to evaluate whether the Geriatric-8 (G8) and the instrumental activities of daily living (IADL)-modified G8 are associated with the occurrence of postoperative delirium after major urological cancer surgery.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We retrospectively analyzed a total of 415 consecutive patients who underwent major urologic cancer surgery and were screened preoperatively using the G8 and the IADL-modified G8 at our institution between January 2020 and July 2021. For both the G8 and the IADL-modified G8, a cut-off value of 14 was used. All patients underwent perioperative management according to the Enhanced Recovery After Surgery protocol formulated at our institution. Delirium was diagnosed using the Confusion Assessment Method. The relationship between these screening tests and clinical variables was examined. Predictive accuracy was evaluated by the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC). To determine the risk factors for the occurrence of postoperative delirium, univariate and multivariate analyses were performed.

RESULTS

Of the 415 patients, 160 (39%) were assigned to the low G8 (score ≤ 14) group and 166 (40%) to the low IADL-modified G8 (score ≤ 14) group. The median age of the patients was 72 years. Postoperative delirium occurred in 31 patients (7%). The AUC values for predicting postoperative delirium were 0.69 for the G8 and 0.71 for the IADL-modified G8. Multivariate analysis for the G8 showed that G8 ≤ 14 (odds ratio [OR] = 2.6; 95% confidence interval [CI] = 1.2-6.0; P = 0.02), preoperative use of benzodiazepine (OR = 3.8; 95% CI = 1.6-8.6; P = 0.002), and operative time ≥ 237 min (OR = 3.3; 95% CI = 1.5-7.1; P = 0.003) were independent risk factors for postoperative delirium. Similarly, for the IADL-modified G8, IADL-modified G8 ≤ 14 (OR = 2.6; 95% CI = 1.1-5.8; P = 0.02), preoperative use of benzodiazepine (OR = 3.9; 95% CI = 1.7-8.8; P = 0.001), and operative time ≥ 237 min (OR = 3.3; 95% CI = 1.5-7.2; P = 0.003) were independent risk factors for postoperative delirium.

DISCUSSION

The G8 and the IADL-modified G8 screening may allow for better identification of patients at risk of postoperative delirium.

Frailty and its association with health-related quality of life among older cancer patients: an evidence-based study from China

Background

There is limited information about the population characteristics and adverse health outcomes of older cancer patients in China. This study aimed to describe the prevalence of frailty and examine the association between frailty and health-related quality of life (HRQoL) among older cancer patients.

Methods

This was a cross-sectional study involving older patients diagnosed with cancer in two tertiary hospitals in Shandong Province, China. Frailty was assessed using Geriatric 8 (G-8). HRQoL was measured using the five-level EuroQol-5-dimension (EQ-5D-5L) questionnaire. The Tobit regression model and logistic regression model was used to identify the relationship between frailty and HRQoL.

Results

Of the 229 older patients, 175 (76.4%) were frail. Frail patients had lower EQ-5D-5L utility scores than those who were non-frail (0.830 vs. 0.889; P = 0.004). After adjustments for sociodemographic and cancer-related variables, frailty was statistically associated with worse health-related quality of life (OR = 6.024; P = 0.001).

Conclusion

Frailty was associated with deteriorated HRQoL in older patients with cancer. Early frailty screening and preventive interventions are essential for improving quality of life through decision-making or pretreatment optimization in geriatric oncology.

The majority of cancer cases and cancer mortality occur in older adults. Aging is a heterogenic process, which results in great diversity in older cancer patients concerning physical, psychological, and social status. There is limited information about the population characteristics and adverse health outcomes of older cancer patients in China, and the magnitude of this problem is unclear, creating challenges in understanding health disparities in geriatric cancer care. In this study, we have described the prevalence of frailty and explored the relationship between frailty and health-related quality of life (HRQoL). This study demonstrated that frailty, not being currently married, advanced cancer stage, and cancer site were significant factors influencing the lower HRQoL. Furthermore, frail individuals had a higher probability belonging to the lowest HRQoL quartile group. This study is considered as the first step in highlighting the importance of staging the aging and assessing quality of life among older cancer patients in China.

Characteristics and Assessment of Frailty as Risk Factor of Therapy-Related Acute Toxicities and Delayed Overall Treatment Time in Elderly Patients Treating with External Beam Radiation Therapy at Indonesia Top Referral Hospital

BACKGROUND: Older patients are at a higher risk of being frail. Frailty implies that even a minor stressor can have major negative implications on physical, psychological domains. Geriatric-8 (G-8) screening tool shows good screening properties for identifying vulnerable elderly patients with cancer. AIM: We, therefore, decided to investigate the utility of G-8 associated with acute toxicity and prolonged overall treatment time (OTT) in elderly cancer patients treated with radiotherapy (RT). MATERIALS AND METHODS: A prospective observational cohort study is performed. Eligible subjects are patients aged ≥60 years and were referred for curative or palliative RT. We use the G-8 questionnaire for consecutive patients before starting RT. We recorded acute toxicity and OTT and identified potential predictors. RESULTS: A total of 52 consecutive geriatric patients were included with an average age of 67 years. Of all those subjects, 21% had head-and-neck cancers, 29% gynecology cancers, 23% breast cancers, and 27% other cancers. According to the G-8, 65% of the patients were potentially frail. Toxicity Grade ≥3 was observed among 32% of subjects who were potentially frail according to the G-8 and 0% of the subject who was fit (p = 0.007). Prolonged OTT was observed in 61.8% of potentially frail and 27.8% of the subjects who were fit (p = 0.020). On multivariate analysis, only chemoradiation was strongly associated with acute toxicity Grade ≥3 odds ratio 11.1 (95% confidence interval 1.4–83.6; p = 0.019). CONCLUSION: The utility of G-8 in daily practice seems to be limited. Only concurrent chemoradiation was associated with acute toxicity. Future prospective studies should investigate whether the G-8 is a good predictor for other relevant clinical outcomes and survival in our local settings.

Reliable Prediction of Post-Operative Complications' Rate Using the G8 Screening Tool: A Prospective Study on Elderly Patients Undergoing Surgery for Kidney Cancer

In the last years the incidence of renal neoplasms has been steadily increasing, along with the average age of patients at the time of diagnosis. Surgical management for localized disease is becoming more challenging because of patients’ frailty. We conducted a multi-center prospective study to evaluate the role of the G8 as a screening tool in the assessment of intra and post-operative complications of elderly patients (≥70 y.o.) undergoing surgery for kidney cancer. A total of 162 patients were prospectively enrolled between January 2015 to January 2019 and divided into two study groups (frail vs. not-frail) according to their geriatric risk profile based on G8 score. Several factors (i.e., age, CCI, ASA score, preoperative anemia, RENAL score, surgical procedures, and techniques) were analyzed to identify whether any of them would configure as a statistically significant predictor of surgical complications. According to the G8 Score, 90 patients were included in the frail group. A total of 52 frail patients vs. 4 non-frail patients developed a postoperative complication of any kind (p < 0.001). Of these, 11 were major complications and all occurred in the frail group. Our results suggest that the G8 screening tool is an effective and useful instrument to predict the risk of overall complications in elderly patients prior to renal surgery.

Impact of Limited E-Health Literacy on the Overall Survival of Patients With Cancer

PURPOSE

Digitalization of the health care system is transforming cancer patient care. Although many studies have investigated the determinants of a limited digital health literacy, the association between frailty factors and overall survival (OS) of these patients has never been assessed.

METHODS

A retrospective noninterventional study included 15,244 adult patients with cancer diagnosed between January 1, 2015, and December 31, 2017, and treated at the Centre Léon Bérard. Limited e-health literacy was defined as the absence of an e-mail address in the electronic patient record. An Inverse Probability of Treatment-Weighted Kaplan-Meier estimate and a multivariate Cox proportional hazards model including interaction terms were used to adjust for confounding on measured covariates.

RESULTS

In total, 15,244 adults with cancer were included: 55% women, with a median age of 62 years (19-103), and 35.5% had a metastatic disease. More than half (n = 8,771, 57.5%) had entered their e-mail address in their electronic patient record, and 4,020 (26.4%) opened their own patient portal. The median follow-up was 3.6 years (range: 0-6.8). Inverse Probability of Treatment-weighted Kaplan-Meier estimates showed a significantly better OS for patients with an e-mail address (P < .001). In multivariate analysis integrating interaction terms, male gender (hazard ratio [HR] = 1.27; 95% CI, 1.15 to 1.41; P < .001), older age (HR = 1.02; 95% CI, 1.02 to 1.03; P < .001), de novo metastatic setting (HR = 2.63; 95% CI, 2.47 to 2.79; P < .001), and no e-mail address (HR = 1.63; 95% CI, 1.33 to 2.00; P < .001) were significantly associated with worse OS.

CONCLUSION

Our results support a strong association between the limited level of literacy and OS. A more in-depth study integrating variables such as socioeconomic level and location of residence would enrich these results.

Evolving Therapeutic Approaches for Older Patients with Acute Myeloid Leukemia in 2021

Simple Summary

The better understanding of disease biology, the availability of new effective drugs and the increased awareness of patients’ heterogeneity in terms of fitness and personal expectations has made the current treatment paradigm of AML in the elderly very challenging. Here, we discuss the evolving criteria used to define eligibility for induction chemotherapy and transplantation, the introduction of new agents in the treatment of patients with very different clinical conditions, the implications of precision medicine and the importance of quality of life and supportive care, proposing a simplified algorithm that we follow in 2021.

Abstract

Acute myeloid leukemia (AML) in older patients is characterized by unfavorable prognosis due to adverse disease features and a high rate of treatment-related complications. Classical therapeutic options range from intensive chemotherapy in fit patients, potentially followed by allogeneic hematopoietic cell transplantation (allo-HCT), to hypomethylating agents or palliative care alone for unfit/frail ones. In the era of precision medicine, the treatment paradigm of AML is rapidly changing. On the one hand, a plethora of new targeted drugs with good tolerability profiles are becoming available, offering the possibility to achieve a prolonged remission to many patients not otherwise eligible for more intensive therapies. On the other hand, better tools to assess patients’ fitness and improvements in the selection and management of those undergoing allo-HCT will hopefully reduce treatment-related mortality and complications. Importantly, a detailed genetic characterization of AML has become of paramount importance to choose the best therapeutic option in both intensively treated and unfit patients. Finally, improving supportive care and quality of life is of major importance in this age group, especially for the minority of patients that are still candidates for palliative care because of very poor clinical conditions or unwillingness to receive active treatments. In the present review, we discuss the evolving approaches in the treatment of older AML patients, which is becoming increasingly challenging following the advent of new effective drugs for a very heterogeneous and complex population.

European Cancer Organisation Essential Requirements for Quality Cancer Care (ERQCC): Pancreatic Cancer

European Cancer Organisation Essential Requirements for Quality Cancer Care (ERQCC) are written by experts representing all disciplines involved in cancer care in Europe. They give patients, health professionals, managers and policymakers a guide to essential care throughout the patient journey. Pancreatic cancer is an increasing cause of cancer mortality and has wide variation in treatment and care in Europe. It is a major healthcare burden and has complex diagnosis and treatment challenges. Care must be carried out only in pancreatic cancer units or centres that have a core multidisciplinary team (MDT) and an extended team of health professionals detailed here. Such units are far from universal in European countries. To meet European aspirations for comprehensive cancer control, healthcare organisations must consider the requirements in this paper, paying particular attention to multidisciplinarity and patient-centred pathways from diagnosis, to treatment, to survivorship.

Methods for frailty screening and geriatric assessment in older adults with cancer

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

This review highlights the latest development in the use of geriatric assessment(GA) and frailty assessment for older adults with cancer.

RECENT FINDINGS

From 2019, there were six large randomized controlled trials (RCTs) completed of GA for older adults with cancer, as well as several studies of frailty screening tools.

SUMMARY

The findings in this review highlight the benefits of implementing GA, followed by interventions to address the identified issues (GA -guided interventions). Four of six RCTs that implemented GA for older adults with cancer showed positive impact on various outcomes, including treatment toxicity and quality of life. GA implementation varied significantly between studies, from oncologist acting on GA summary, geriatrician comanagement, to full GA by a multidisciplinary team. However, there were several barriers reported to implementing GA for all older adults with cancer, such as access to geriatrics and resource issues. Future research needs to elucidate how to best operationalize GA in various cancer settings. The authors also reviewed frailty screening tools and latest evidence on their use and impact.

Subcutaneous Rituximab-MiniCHOP Compared With Subcutaneous Rituximab-MiniCHOP Plus Lenalidomide in Diffuse Large B-Cell Lymphoma for Patients Age 80 Years or Older

PURPOSE

The prognosis of elderly patients with diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL) is worse than that of young patients. An attenuated dose of chemotherapy-cyclophosphamide, doxorubicin, vincristine, and prednisone plus rituximab (R-miniCHOP)-is a good compromise between efficacy and safety in very elderly patients. In combination with R-CHOP (R2-CHOP), lenalidomide has an acceptable level of toxicity and may mitigate the negative prognosis of the non-germinal center B-cell-like phenotype. The Lymphoma Study association conducted a multicentric, phase III, open-label, randomized trial to compare R-miniCHOP and R2-miniCHOP.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Patients of age 80 years or older with untreated DLBCL were randomly assigned into the R-miniCHOP21 group or the R2-miniCHOP21 group for six cycles and stratified according to CD10 expression and age. The first cycle of rituximab was delivered by IV on D1 after a prephase and then delivered subcutaneously on D1 of cycles 2-6. Lenalidomide was delivered at a dose of 10 mg once daily on D1-D14 of each cycle. The primary end point was overall survival (OS).

RESULTS

A total of 249 patients with new DLBCL were randomly assigned (127 R-miniCHOP and 122 R2-miniCHOP). The median age was 83 years (range, 80-96), and 55% of the patients were classified as non-GCB. The delivered dose for each R-miniCHOP compound was similar in both arms. Over a median follow-up of 25.1 months, the intention-to-treat analysis revealed that R2-miniCHOP did not improve OS (2-year OS 66% in R-miniCHOP and 65.7% in R2-miniCHOP arm, P = .98) in the overall population or in the non-GCB population. Grade 3-4 adverse events occurred in 53% of patients with R-miniCHOP and in 81% of patients with R2-miniCHOP.

CONCLUSION

The addition of lenalidomide to R-miniCHOP does not improve OS. Rituximab delivered subcutaneously was safe in this population.

Comprehensive geriatric assessment in older adults with cancer: Recommendations by the Italian Society of Geriatrics and Gerontology (SIGG)

INTRODUCTION

Optimizing the approach to older adults with cancer is now a priority given the increasing frequency of new cancer diagnoses that are made in the older population. The comprehensive geriatric assessment (CGA) represents the gold-standard for (1) defining prognosis and ability to withstand cancer treatments, (2) exploring the multiple aspects that define the complexity of frail older persons, and (3) designing person-tailored interventions.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

In this document, based on a comprehensive revision of the literature, the Italian Society for Geriatrics and Gerontology proposes a CGA model (ONCOGER CGA) to be adopted by oncology centers for their routine approach to older patients with cancer.

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

A widespread use of this standardized CGA format will facilitate comparisons across institutions, promote studies based on a multidimensional patient assessment, and foster the inclusion of geriatric endpoints in oncological clinical trials. Furthermore, we predict that the use of a standardized CGA approach will increase the integration of geriatricians into oncology care teams with the final result of improving therapeutic choices and clinical outcomes.

Switch maintenance chemotherapy versus observation after carboplatin and weekly paclitaxel doublet chemotherapy in elderly patients with advanced non-small cell lung cancer: IFCT-1201 MODEL trial

PURPOSE

Maintenance chemotherapy is a reasonable choice for patients with metastatic non-small cell lung carcinoma (NSCLC) not progressing after induction therapy with a platinum-based doublet. Nevertheless, there have been no studies dedicated to elderly patients.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

We conducted a randomised trial in patients aged 70-89 years, with advanced NSCLC (with neither EGFR mutation nor ALK rearrangement), who had not progressed after four cycles of monthly carboplatin and weekly paclitaxel in order to compare maintenance with either pemetrexed (500 mg/m² d1, 22) in patients with non-squamous cell carcinoma or gemcitabine (1,150 mg/m² d1, 8, 22) in squamous cell carcinoma to simple observation. The patients were required to have a performance status (PS) 0-2, mini-mental score >23, and creatinine clearance ≥45 mL/min. The primary end-point was overall survival (OS).

RESULTS

632 patients were enrolled from May 2013 to October 2016. Of the 328 (52.3%) patients randomised after induction therapy, 166 patients were assigned to the observation arm, versus 162 to the switch maintenance arm, 119 of whom received pemetrexed and 43 gemcitabine. The median OS from randomisation was 14.1 months (95% confidence interval [CI]: 12.0-17.0) in the observation arm and 14 months (95% CI: 10.9-16.9) in the maintenance arm (p = 0.72). The median progression-free survival (PFS) from randomisation was 2.7 months (95% CI: 2.6-3.1) in the observation arm versus 5.7 months (95% CI: 4.8-7.1) in the maintenance arm (p < 0.001).

CONCLUSION

Switch maintenance therapy significantly prolonged PFS but not OS and, thus, should not be proposed to elderly patients with advanced NSCLC.

European Cancer Organisation Essential Requirements for Quality Cancer Care (ERQCC): Lung cancer

European Cancer Organisation Essential Requirements for Quality Cancer Care (ERQCC) are written by experts representing all disciplines involved in cancer care in Europe. They give patients, health professionals, managers and policymakers a guide to essential care throughout the patient journey. Lung cancer is the leading cause of cancer mortality and has a wide variation in treatment and outcomes in Europe. It is a major healthcare burden and has complex diagnosis and treatment challenges. Care must only be carried out in lung cancer units or centres that have a core multidisciplinary team (MDT) and an extended team of health professionals detailed here. Such units are far from universal in European countries. To meet European aspirations for comprehensive cancer control, healthcare organisations must consider the requirements in this paper, paying particular attention to multidisciplinarity and patient-centred pathways from diagnosis, to treatment, to survivorship.

Geriatric Assessment, Not ASA Physical Status, Is Associated With 6-Month Postoperative Survival in Patients With Cancer Aged ≥75 Years

BACKGROUND

The American Society of Anesthesiologists physical status (ASA PS) classification system is the most common method of assessing preoperative functional status. Comprehensive geriatric assessment (CGA) has been proposed as a supplementary tool for preoperative assessment of older adults. The goal of this study was to assess the correlation between ASA classification and CGA deficits among oncogeriatric patients and to determine the association of each with 6-month survival.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Oncogeriatric patients (aged ≥75 years) who underwent preoperative CGA in an outpatient geriatric clinic at a single tertiary comprehensive cancer center were identified. All patients underwent surgery, with a hospital length of stay (LOS) ≥1 day and at least 6 months of follow-up. ASA classifications were obtained from preoperative anesthesiology notes. Preoperative CGA scores ranged from 0 to 13. Six-month survival was assessed using the Social Security Death Index.

RESULTS

In total, 81 of the 980 patients (8.3%) included in the study cohort died within 6 months of surgery. Most patients were classified as ASA PS III (85.4%). The mean number of CGA deficits for patients with PS II was 4.03, PS III was 5.15, and PS IV was 6.95 (P<.001). ASA classification was significantly associated with age, preoperative albumin level, hospital LOS, and 30-day intensive care unit (ICU) admissions. On multivariable analysis, 6-month mortality was associated with number of CGA deficits (odds ratio [OR], 1.14 per each unit increase in CGA score; P=.01), 30-day ICU admissions (OR, 2.77; P=.003), hospital LOS (OR, 1.03; P=.02), and preoperative albumin level (OR, 0.36; P=.004). ASA classification was not associated with 6-month mortality.

CONCLUSIONS

Number of CGA deficits was strongly associated with 6-month mortality; ASA classification was not. Preoperative CGA elicits critical information that can be used to enhance the prediction of postoperative outcomes among older patients with cancer.

Frailty screening in dermato-oncology practice: a modified Delphi study and a systematic review of the literature

Background

Appropriate management and prevention of both under‐ and overtreatment in older skin cancer patients can be challenging. It could be helpful to incorporate frailty screening in dermato‐oncology care, since frailty is associated with adverse health outcomes.

Objectives

This study aimed to identify and prioritize the requirements a frailty screening tool (FST) should fulfil in dermato‐oncology practice and to select the best existing FST(s) for this purpose.

Methods

A modified two‐round Delphi procedure was performed among 50 Italian and Dutch specialists and patients to review and prioritize a list of potential FST requirements, using a 5‐point Likert scale. Consensus was defined as a mean score of ≥4.0. A systematic literature search was performed to identify existing multidomain FSTs, which were then assessed on the requirements resulting from the modified Delphi procedure.

Results

Consensus was achieved on evaluation of comorbidities (4.3 ± 0.7), polypharmacy (4.0 ± 0.9) and cognition (4.1 ± 0.8). The FST should have appropriate measurement properties (4.0 ± 1.0), be quickly executed (4.2 ± 0.7), clinically relevant (4.3 ± 0.7), and both easily understandable (4.1 ± 1.2) and interpretable (4.3 ± 0.7). Of the 26 identified FSTs, four evaluated the content‐related domains: the Geriatric‐8 (G8), the modified Geriatric‐8 (mG8), the Groningen Frailty Indicator (GFI) and the Senior Adult Oncology Program 2 (SAOP2) screening tool. Of these, the G8 was the most extensively studied FST, with the best psychometric properties and execution within 5 min.

Conclusions

The G8 appears the most suitable FST for assessing frailty in older adults with skin cancer, although clinical studies assessing its use in a dermato‐oncology population are needed to further assess whether or not frailty in this particular patient group is associated with relevant outcomes (e.g. complications and mortality), as seen in previous studies in other medical fields.

Anti-cancer therapy and clinical trial considerations for gynecologic oncology patients during the COVID-19 pandemic crisis

OBJECTIVES

The COVID-19 pandemic has consumed considerable resources and has impacted the delivery of cancer care. Patients with cancer may have factors which place them at high risk for COVID 19 morbidity or mortality. Highly immunosuppressive chemotherapy regimens and possible exposure to COVID-19 during treatment may put patients at additional risk. The Society of Gynecologic Oncology convened an expert panel to address recommendations for best practices during this crisis to minimize risk to patients from deviations in cancer care and from COVID-19 morbidity.

METHODS

An expert panel convened to develop initial consensus guidelines regarding anti-neoplastic therapy during the COVID-19 pandemic with respect to gynecologic cancer care and clinical trials.

RESULTS

COVID-19 poses special risks to patients who are older, have medical co-morbidities, and cancer. In addition, this pandemic will likely strain resources, making delivery of cancer care or conduct of clinical trials unpredictable. Recommendations are to limit visits and contact with health care facilities by using telemedicine when appropriate, and choosing regimens which require less frequent visits and which are less immunosuppressive. Deviations will occur in clinical trials as a result of limited resources, and it is important to understand regulatory obligations to trial sponsors as well as to the IRB to ensure that clinical trial and patient safety oversight are maintained.

CONCLUSIONS

The ongoing crisis will strain resources needed to deliver cancer care. When alterations to the delivery of care are mandated, efforts should be taken to minimize risks and maximize safety while approximating standard practice.

The requirements of a specialist breast centre

This article is an update of the requirements of a specialist breast centre, produced by EUSOMA and endorsed by ECCO as part of Essential Requirements for Quality Cancer Care (ERQCC) programme, and ESMO. To meet aspirations for comprehensive cancer control, healthcare organisations must consider the requirements in this article, paying particular attention to multidisciplinarity and patient-centred pathways from diagnosis, to treatment, to survivorship.

ECCO Essential Requirements for Quality Cancer Care: Prostate cancer

BACKGROUND

ECCO Essential Requirements for Quality Cancer Care (ERQCC) are written by experts representing all disciplines involved in cancer care in Europe. They give oncology teams, patients, policymakers and managers an overview of essential care throughout the patient journey.

PROSTATE CANCER

Prostate cancer is the second most common male cancer and has a wide variation in outcomes in Europe. It has complex diagnosis and treatment challenges, and is a major healthcare burden. Care must only be a carried out in prostate/urology cancer units or centres that have a core multidisciplinary team (MDT) and an extended team of health professionals. Such units are far from universal in European countries. To meet European aspirations for comprehensive cancer control, healthcare organisations must consider the requirements in this paper, paying particular attention to multidisciplinarity and patient-centred pathways from diagnosis, to treatment, to survivorship.

ECCO Essential Requirements for Quality Cancer Care: Primary care

BACKGROUND

ECCO Essential Requirements for Quality Cancer Care (ERQCC) are checklists and explanations of organisation and actions that are necessary to give high-quality care to cancer patients. They are written by European experts representing all disciplines involved in cancer care. This paper concerns the integration of primary care into care for all cancers in Europe. Primary care integration.

Prospective Validation of The Korean Cancer Study Group Geriatric Score (KG)-7, a Novel Geriatric Screening Tool, in Older Patients with Advanced Cancer Undergoing First-line Palliative Chemotherapy

Purpose

The purpose of this study was to prospectively validate the Korean Cancer Study Group Geriatric Score (KG)-7, a novel geriatric screening tool, in older patients with advanced cancer planned to undergo first-line palliative chemotherapy.

Materials and Methods

Participants answered the KG-7 questionnaire before undergoing geriatric assessment (GA) and first-line palliative chemotherapy. The performance of KG-7 was evaluated by calculating the sensitivity (SE), specificity (SP), positive and negative predictive value (PPV and NPV), balanced accuracy (BA), and area under the curve (AUC).

Results

The baseline GA and KG-7 results were collected from 301 patients. The median age was 75 years (range, 70 to 93 years). Abnormal GA was documented in 222 patients (73.8%). Based on the ≤ 5 cut-off value of KG-7 for abnormal GA, abnormal KG-7 score was shown in 200 patients (66.4%). KG-7 showed SE, SP, PPV, NPV, and BA of 75.7%, 59.7%, 84.4%, 46.0%, and 67.7%, respectively; AUC was 0.745 (95% confidence interval, 0.687 to 0.803). Furthermore, patients with higher KG-7 scores showed significantly longer survival (p=0.006).

Conclusion

KG-7 appears to be adequate in identifying patients with abnormal GA prospectively. Hence, KG-7 can be a useful screening tool for Asian countries with limited resources and high patient volume.

Predictive values of two frailty screening tools in older patients with solid cancer: a comparison of SAOP2 and G8

Objectives

Comprehensive Geriatric Assessment (CGA), the gold standard for detecting frailty in elderly cancer patients, is time-consuming and hard to apply in routine clinical practice. Here we compared the performance of two screening tools for frailty, G8 and SAOP2 for their accuracy in identifying vulnerable patients.

Material and Methods

We tested G8 and SAOP2 in 282 patients aged 65 or older with a diagnosis of solid cancer and candidate to undergo surgical, medical and/or radiotherapy treatment. CGA, including functional and cognitive status, depression, nutrition, comorbidity, social status and quality of life was used as reference. ROC curves were used to compare two screening tools.

Results

Mean patient age was 79 years and 54% were female. Colorectal and breast cancer were the most common types cancer (49% and 24%). Impaired CGA, G8, and SAOP2 were found in 62%, 89%, and 94% of the patients, respectively. SAOP2 had a better sensitivity (AUC 0.85, p<0.032) than G8 (AUC 0.79), with higher performance in breast cancer patients (AUC 0.93) and in patients aged 70-80 years (AUC 0.87).

Conclusions

G8 and SAOP2 both showed good screening capacity for frailty in the cancer patient population we examined with SAOP2 showing a slightly better performance than G8.

ECCO essential requirements for quality cancer care: Oesophageal and gastric cancer

BACKGROUND

ECCO essential requirements for quality cancer care (ERQCC) are checklists and explanations of organisation and actions that are necessary to give high-quality care to patients who have a specific type of cancer. They are written by European experts representing all disciplines involved in cancer care. ERQCC papers give oncology teams, patients, policymakers and managers an overview of the elements needed in any healthcare system to provide high quality of care throughout the patient journey. References are made to clinical guidelines and other resources where appropriate, and the focus is on care in Europe.

OESOPHAGEAL AND GASTRIC

ESSENTIAL REQUIREMENTS FOR QUALITY CARE: CONCLUSION: Taken together, the information presented in this paper provides a comprehensive description of the essential requirements for establishing a high-quality OG cancer service. The ERQCC expert group is aware that it is not possible to propose a 'one size fits all' system for all countries, but urges that access to multidisciplinary units or centres must be guaranteed for all those with OG cancer.

[Geriatric assessment and prognostic scores in older cancer patient: Additional support to the therapeutic decision?]

Cancer is a disease of the elderly as demonstrated by the epidemiological evolution of Western countries. Indeed, two third of cancers newly diagnosed occur over 65 years. However, older cancer patients have been often excluded from clinical trials in oncology and the extrapolation of cancer treatments in this population remains difficult in practice. Scientific societies recommend that a comprehensive geriatric assessment (CGA) be performed in patients aged 70 and over and selected using screening tools for frailty such as the G8 index. The CGA allows to detect aging-related vulnerabilities in various domains (comorbidities, polypharmacy, autonomy, nutrition, mobility, cognition, mood, social) and associated with adverse outcomes during cancer treatment (reduced overall survival, perioperative complications, toxicity-related chemotherapy). The CGA is allow to elaborate a personalized treatment plan in geriatric oncology. However, to date, no algorithms based on CGA is validated to guide therapeutic decision in geriatric oncology. The collaboration between geriatrician and oncologist remains essential to elaborate an appropriate therapeutic strategy and limit the situations of over- and under-treatment. This article presents the set of tools and scores used in geriatric oncology to guide the therapeutic decision.

Advances in geriatric oncology: a multidisciplinary perspective

A growing majority of people with cancer is composed of older patients. For many such patients, independence and quality of life are as important as prolongation of survival, emphasizing the need for treatments that are not only effective but also well-tolerated. Given age-related decline in organ function and the prevalence of comorbidities and polypharmacy, optimum management is complex and requires collaboration between oncologists and geriatricians. Advances in surgery now include preoperative assessment and, when indicated, prehabilitation of the patient, as well as the enhanced recovery after surgery approach. Medical treatment is benefiting from the advent of highly effective novel immunomodulatory agents that join the tumor-targeted small molecule tyrosine kinase inhibitors and monoclonal antibodies in modifying the tolerability of therapy. Improved tolerability is evident with radiotherapy (RT). The adoption of stereotactic body RT in community oncology practice is increasing the proportion of elderly patients with comorbidities who can receive curative treatment. A further aspect of precision medicine as it relates to the older cancer patient is the tailoring of intervention to the robustness or frailty and life expectancy of the individual. Quantitative and validated tools for comprehensive geriatric assessment are playing an important role in this process.

The Older Adult With Locoregionally Advanced Head and Neck Squamous Cell Carcinoma: Knowledge Gaps and Future Direction in Assessment and Treatment

Older adults with head and neck squamous cell carcinoma (HNSCC) pose unique treatment and supportive care challenges to oncologists and other cancer care providers. The majority of patients with HNSCC present with locoregionally advanced disease, for which combined-modality treatment integrating chemotherapy and radiation therapy is often necessary to maximize tumor control. However, applying these approaches to an older population with concomitant comorbidities and a higher risk of functional impairments remains challenging and is exacerbated by the paucity of studies involving older adults. The purpose of this article is to identify knowledge gaps in the evaluation and management of older adults with HNSCC-particularly those undergoing concurrent chemoradiation therapy-and their caregivers through a review of the literature conducted by clinicians, researchers, and patient advocates. The findings highlight the importance of a geriatric assessment and the therapeutic paradigms and challenges relevant to this population. Furthermore, we identify the need for additional research and interventions related to key supportive care issues that arise during and after treatment in older adults with locoregionally advanced HNSCC. On the basis of our findings, we prioritize these issues to guide future patient-oriented research endeavors to address these knowledge gaps and thus better serve this growing patient population.

Prognostic Value of Geriatric 8 and Identification of Seniors at Risk for Hospitalized Patients Screening Tools for Patients With Lung Cancer

BACKGROUND

Because of the time-consuming aspect of geriatric assessments, cancer specialists are seeking shorter screening tools to distinguish fit and frail patients. We analyzed the predictive value of the Geriatric 8 (G8) and Identification of Seniors at Risk for Hospitalized Patients (ISAR-HP) in elderly patients with lung cancer.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

From January 2014 to April 2016, the data from patients with lung cancer aged > 70 years at 2 teaching hospitals in the Netherlands were included in a database. The patients were classified as potentially frail if they had a G8 of ≤ 14 or ISAR-HP of ≥ 2.

RESULTS

Of the 142 included patients (median age, 77 years; interquartile range, 73-82 years), 108 (76%) were potentially frail. After correction for possible confounders, the potentially frail patients had a significantly greater risk of 1-year mortality (hazard ratio [HR], 4.08; 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.67-9.99; P = .02). Higher disease stage (HR, 1.72; 95% CI, 1.40-2.12; P < .001) was also a significant predictor of mortality; however, initial treatment (standard or otherwise) and age were not. When using both screening instruments separately, an impaired score on the G8 and higher disease stage were the variables remaining in the regression analyses (HR for impaired G8, 3.01; 95% CI, 1.35-6.72; P < .001). Patients with impaired scores on the ISAR-HP and G8 had more geriatric impairments than did patients with only an impaired G8 score.

CONCLUSION

G8 screening is useful for the prognostication of elderly patients with lung cancer and could be used in combination with ISAR-HP to increase specificity at the cost of sensitivity. Using the ISAR-HP as the only screening tool would be insufficient.

Use of palliative chemotherapy in patients aged 80 years and over with incurable cancer: experience at three Sydney cancer centres

BACKGROUND

Octogenarians represent a growing population reviewed in medical oncology clinics, yet there is a paucity of data on how chemotherapy is tolerated in this age group.

AIM

To describe the use of palliative first-line chemotherapy in patients 80 years and over and factors associated with its use.

METHODS

We identified all new patients aged 80 years or older diagnosed with incurable advanced solid organ cancer and seen in one of three Sydney medical oncology outpatient clinics between January 2009 and December 2013. Patient, disease and treatment details were summarised and factors associated with chemotherapy use explored.

RESULTS

Of 420 eligible patients, 100 (24%) started first-line chemotherapy. Younger age at diagnosis was the only factor associated with receiving chemotherapy (median 82.9 vs 84.1 years, P = 0.002). A total of 78% of patients had single-agent chemotherapy, and 41% received a full dose for the first cycle. During treatment, 54% experienced toxicity, necessitating dose reduction, delay or omission, and 32% were hospitalised. These events were associated with receipt of combination chemotherapy (OR 5.1; P = 0.04) and full-dose chemotherapy for cycle 1 (OR 3.5; P = 0.02). Radiological disease control was achieved in 60%. Chemotherapy was stopped because of progressive disease (48%), toxicity (37%) or completion of planned course (17%).

CONCLUSION

A quarter of patients 80 years and older received first-line palliative chemotherapy. Despite most receiving a modified dose, one third were hospitalised during treatment. These findings highlight the need for careful clinical assessment and selection of older cancer patients for chemotherapy.