Delphi consensus of an expert committee in oncogeriatrics regarding comprehensive geriatric assessment in seniors with cancer in Spain

Risk stratification model for the pharmaceutical care of oncology patients with solid or hematologic neoplasms

OBJECTIVE

We aimed to develop of a risk stratification model for the pharmaceutical care (PC) of patients with solid or hematologic neoplasms who required antineoplastic agents or supportive treatments.

METHOD

The risk stratification model was collaboratively developed by oncology pharmacists from the Spanish Society of Hospital Pharmacy (SEFH). It underwent refinement through three workshops and a pilot study. Variables were defined, grouped into four dimensions, and assigned relative weights. The pilot study collected and analyzed data from participating centers to determine priority levels and evaluate variable contributions. The study followed the Kaiser Permanente pyramid model, categorizing patients into three priority levels: Priority 1 (intensive PC, 90th percentile), Priority 2 (60th-90th percentiles), and Priority 3 (60th percentile). Cut-off points were determined based on this stratification. Participating centers recorded variables in an Excel sheet, calculating mean weight scores for each priority level and the total risk score.

RESULTS

The participants agreed to complete a questionnaire that comprised 22 variables grouped into 4 dimensions: demographic (maximum score =11); social and health variables and cognitive and functional status (maximum = 19); clinical and health services utilization (maximum = 25); and treatment-related (maximum = 41). From the results of applying the model to the 199 patients enrolled, the cutoff points for categorization were 28 or more points for priority 1, 16 to 27 points for priority 2 and less than 16 for priority 3; more than 80% of the total score was based on the dimensions of 'clinical and health services utilization' and 'treatment-related'. Interventions based on the pharmaceutical care model were recommended for patients with solid or hematological neoplasms, according to their prioritization level.

CONCLUSION

This stratification model enables the identification of cancer patients requiring a higher level of pharmaceutical care and facilitates the adjustment of care capacity. Validation of the model in a representative population is necessary to establish its effectiveness.

Risk stratification model for the pharmaceutical care of oncology patients with solid or hematologic neoplasms

OBJECTIVE

We aimed to develop of a risk stratification model for the pharmaceutical care of patients with solid or hematologic neoplasms who required antineoplastic agents or supportive treatments.

METHOD

The risk stratification model was collaboratively developed by oncology pharmacists from the Spanish Society of Hospital Pharmacy (SEFH). It underwent refinement through 3 workshops and a pilot study. Variables were defined, grouped into 4 dimensions, and assigned relative weights. The pilot study collected and analyzed data from participating centers to determine priority levels and evaluate variable contributions. The study followed the Kaiser Permanente pyramid model, categorizing patients into 3 priority levels: Priority 1 (intensive PC, 90th percentile), Priority 2 (60th-90th percentiles), and Priority 3 (60th percentile). Cut-off points were determined based on this stratification. Participating centers recorded variables in an Excel sheet, calculating mean weight scores for each priority level and the total risk score.

RESULTS

The participants agreed to complete a questionnaire that comprised 22 variables grouped into 4 dimensions: demographic (maximum score=11); social and health variables and cognitive and functional status (maximum=19); clinical and health services utilization (maximum=25); and treatment-related (maximum=41). From the results of applying the model to the 199 patients enrolled, the cut-off points for categorization were 28 or more points for priority 1, 16-27 points for priority 2, and less than 16 for priority 3; more than 80% of the total score was based on the dimensions of "clinical and health services utilization" and "treatment-related." Interventions based on the pharmaceutical care model were recommended for patients with solid or hematological neoplasms, according to their prioritization level.

CONCLUSION

This stratification model enables the identification of cancer patients requiring a higher level of pharmaceutical care and facilitates the adjustment of care capacity. Validation of the model in a representative population is necessary to establish its effectiveness.

Expert consensus to optimize the management of older adult patients with advanced EGFR-mutated non-small cell lung cancer

Lung cancer (LC) is associated with ageing, with the average age of affected individuals being approximately 70 years. However, despite a higher incidence and prevalence among older people, the older adult population is underrepresented in clinical trials. For LC with Epidermal Growth Factor Receptor (EGFR) mutations, there is no clear association of this mutation with age. Geriatric assessments (GAs) and a multidisciplinary approach are essential for defining the optimal treatment. In this consensus, a group of experts selected from the Oncogeriatrics Section of the Spanish Society of Medical Oncology (Sección de Oncogeriatría de la Sociedad Española de Oncología Médica-SEOM), the Spanish Lung Cancer Group (Grupo Español de Cáncer de Pulmón-GECP) and the Association for Research on Lung Cancer in Women (Asociación para la Investigación del Cáncer de Pulmón en Mujeres-ICAPEM) evaluate the scientific evidence currently available and propose a series of recommendations to optimize the management of older adult patients with advanced LC with EGFR mutations.

Understanding how comprehensive geriatric assessment works: the importance of varied methodological approaches

Comprehensive geriatric assessment (CGA) is the gold standard model of care for older adults with frailty. However, despite a large number of published clinical trials, there remain many unanswered questions about how CGA works in different circumstances. This uncertainty stems from CGA being a deeply complex intervention that is heavily modified by context. This review describes recent and novel methodological approaches that explore the active ingredients of CGA and their interaction with context. Future research should continue to embrace broad methodologies that can help us better understand this intervention, in such a way that it can be implemented with fidelity and associated with positive outcomes for older adults.

Reliability of Frail and Barthel Tests for Detecting Frailty in Palliative Oncological Patients in a Home Hospitalization Unit: A Comparative Study

Cancer is a condition that can increase the risk of frailty. In addition, palliative oncological patients in home hospitalization can find their activities of daily living affected. The main objective was to measure the degree of frailty in the oncological population in home hospitalization comparing Barthel and Frail-VIG Indexes. This is a descriptive cross-sectional study. A sample of oncological patients in home hospitalization (n = 50) that included 27 men and 23 women were recruited, and disability due to frailty was measured using the VIG frailty index and the Barthel scale for Activities of Daily Living (ADLs). Spearman's correlation coefficients were categorized as weak (rs ≤ 0.40), moderate (0.41 ≤ rs ≥ 0.69) or robust (0.70 ≤ rs ≥ 1.00), with a strong indirect correlation between the domains using the toilet, transferring and wandering on the Frail-VIG scale with an r (s) value -0.810 (p < 0.001), -0.831 (p < 0.001) and -0.805 (p < 0.001), respectively, and a moderate indirect correlation for the domains of eating -0.718 (p < 0.001), dressing -0.770 (p < 0.001) and urination -0.704 (<0.001). The Frail-VIG index above 0.35 points, that is, from moderate to severe, does not affect ADLs except in the nutritional dimension in a palliative oncological population in home hospitalization. The preliminary outcomes obtained should be considered to determine the impact of nutritional status with regard to ADLs in palliative oncological patients in a home hospitalization unit.

Comprehensive geriatric assessment among elderly people in a convalescence unit: a best practice implementation project

AIM

The aim of this project was to audit the usual assessment practices employed when admitting patients to a convalescence unit on the outskirts of Barcelona, Spain. The project implemented strategies to improve evidence-based practice using the Joanna Briggs Institute methodology. The specific objectives of this project were (1) to improve completion of the comprehensive geriatric assessment (CGA) record, (2) to improve professionals' CGA knowledge, (3) to promote interdisciplinary work, (4) to improve tailored therapeutic plan generation by implementing evidence-based practice criteria within the instrument, and (5) to evaluate the records and action plans derived from the CGA.

METHODS

Pre-/post-implementation audit methodology was used the Practical Application of Clinical Evidence System and Getting Research into Practice, and was developed in multiple phases. The implementation phase took 6 months. A sample of 34 consecutive admissions had their CGA patient records evaluated. Descriptive statistics were calculated.

RESULTS

A total of 64 records (34 pre/30 post) were reviewed to assess CGA completion. The baseline audit results showed that only two audit criteria were higher than 50%, indicating poor knowledge about the concept of CGA and poor compliance with the current program. Following the implementation of the strategies, which included education and the development of a checklist, there was an improvement in all the criteria audited: the record was correctly completed in 67% of cases, and 80% of team members were knowledgeable and competent in CGA.

CONCLUSION

Several barriers were identified at baseline, and various strategies were implemented to improve CGA compliance. The results show that the project increased awareness of the importance of a comprehensive assessment of the care that patients receive, resulting in better CGA completion.

Analysis of first-line treatment in older patients with metastasic colorectal cancer

OBJECTIVE

The purpose of this study was to analyse the effectiveness and safety of first-line treatment of metastatic colorectal cancer (CRCm) in older patients treated in a tertiary hospital.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

This was an observational and retrospective study, including patients aged 75 years or older, with CRCm, who received chemotherapy treatment in 2017. The main variables studied were type of treatment, Progression-Free Survival (PFS), Overall Survival (OS), dose reductions, and treatment delays due to adverse events.

RESULTS

A total of 59 patients (71.2% men) with a median age of 76 years were enrolled in this study. About 70% presented colon cancer, with the left colon being the most frequent location. They were treated with 9 different schemes, in most cases using polychemotherapy and biological agents. The median PFS and OS was 12 and 30 months, respectively. A total of 23/59 of patients started treatment at doses lower than recommended in the clinical practice guidelines. In terms of safety, 34/59 of patients had at least one dose reduction, and 30/59 suffered one treatment delay. The most frequent adverse reactions were asthenia, peripheral neuropathy, diarrhoea, and palmoplantar erythrodysesthesia.

CONCLUSION

Our patients presented baseline clinical characteristics similar to the general adult population, with no tumour characteristics associated with advanced age. The efficacy and toxicity were similar to those in the clinical trials, although our patients had more dose reductions. Considering the heterogeneity of patients and in the absence of clinical trials in the older population, real-life studies can be very useful.

Nutritional Assessment in Older Adults : MNA® 25 years of a Screening Tool and a Reference Standard for Care and Research; What Next?

A tool to assess nutritional status in older persons was really needed. It took 5 years to design the MNA® (Mini Nutrition Assessment) tool, complete the first validations studies both in Europe and in the U.S. and to publish it. After the full MNA®, the MNA® short form and the self-MNA® have been validated. As well as Chinese and other national MNA® forms. Now more than 2000 clinical research have used the MNA® all over the world from community care to hospital. At least 22 Expert groups included the MNA® in new clinical practice guidelines, national or international registries. The MNA® is presently included in almost all geriatric and nutrition textbook and part of the teaching program for medicine and other health care professional worldwide. The urgent need is to target the frail older adults more likely to have weight loss and poor appetite and to prevent frailty and weight loss in the robust. We present in this paper the review of 25 years of clinical research and practice using the MNA® worldwide.

[Cross-speciality geriatrics: A health-care challenge for the 21st century]

Increasing numbers of older persons are being treated by specialties other than Geriatric Medicine. Specialists turn to Geriatric Teams when they need to accurately stratify their patients' risk and prognosis, predict the potential impact of their, often, invasive interventions, optimise their clinical status, and contribute to discharge planning. Oncology and Haematology, Cardiology, General Surgery, and other surgical departments are examples where such collaborative working is already established, to a varying extent. The use of the term "Cross-speciality Geriatrics" is suggested when geriatric care is provided in clinical areas traditionally outside the reach of Geriatric Teams. The core principles of Geriatric Medicine (comprehensive geriatric assessment, patient-centred multidisciplinary targeted interventions, and input at point-of-care) are adapted to the specifics of each specialty and applied to frail older patients in order to deliver a holistic assessment/treatment, better patient/carer experience, and improved clinical outcomes. Using Comprehensive Geriatric Assessment methodology and Frailty scoring in such patients provides invaluable prognostic information, helps in decision making, and enables personalised treatment strategies. There is evidence that such an approach improves the efficiency of health care systems and patient outcomes. This article includes a review of these concepts, describes existing models of care, presents the most commonly used clinical tools, and offers examples of excellence in this new era of geriatric care. In an ever ageing population it is likely that teams will be asked to provide Cross-specialty Geriatrics across different Health Care systems. The fundamentals for its implementation are in place, but further evidence is required to guide future development and consolidation, making it one of the most important challenges for Geriatrics in the coming years.

[Integral approach to the older patient with cancer]

Introduction

The world population, as well as the number of elderly people, grow exponentially. Elderly individuals are at a higher risk of developing an oncological disease, especially because they are subject to a longer period of exposure to carcinogens, and a worse capacity for regeneration of their deoxyribonucleic acid (DNA) (1). Cancer in elderly individuals represents 80% of the annual deaths secondary to this pathology (2). The older patient with cancer presents many differences with respect to the rest of elderly individuals. On the one hand, functional limitation and geriatric syndromes are more prevalent (3), as well as the presence of frailty (4). In addition, they habitually have a worse perception of their health status (4). For all these reasons, the attention to oncological older patients must be specialized and, in their evaluation, the use of a fundamental tool is required, the Comprehensive Geriatric Assessment (CGA). As its name indicates, its application requires collaboration between different specialties (5,6). This multidisciplinary work will improve the baseline situation of the patient, in those cases in which it is possible, and will facilitate the subsequent therapeutic management (7). Finally, the existence of concrete organizational models, such as the Oncogeriatrics Units, or the Cancer Consultations in the Elderly, can facilitate and favor this integral approach (5). In this article a review of all these concepts is carried out.

Willingness to bear adversity and beliefs about the curability of advanced cancer in older adults

BACKGROUND

Older patients with advanced cancer who are 100% certain they will be cured pose unique challenges for clinical decision making, but to the authors' knowledge, the prevalence and correlates of absolute certainty about curability (ACC) are unknown.

METHODS

Cross-sectional data were collected in a geriatric assessment trial. ACC was assessed by asking patients, "What do you believe are the chances that your cancer will go away and never come back with treatment?" Response options were 100% (coded as ACC), >50%, 50/50, <50%, 0%, and uncertain. The willingness to bear adversity in exchange for longevity was assessed by asking patients to consider trade-offs between survival and 2 clinical outcomes that varied in abstractness: 1) maintaining quality of life (QOL; an abstract outcome); and 2) specific treatment-related toxicities (eg, nausea/vomiting, worsening memory). Logistic regression was used to assess the independent associations between willingness to bear adversity and ACC.

RESULTS

Of the 524 patients aged 70 to 96 years, approximately 5.3% reported that there was a 100% chance that their cancer would be cured (ACC). ACC was not found to be significantly associated with willingness to bear treatment-related toxicities, but was more common among patients who were willing to trade QOL for survival (adjusted odds ratio, 4.08; 95% CI, 1.17-14.26).

CONCLUSIONS

Patients who were more willing to bear adversity in the form of an abstract state, namely decreased QOL, were more likely to demonstrate ACC. Although conversations regarding prognosis should be conducted with all patients, those who are willing to trade QOL for survival may especially benefit from conversations that focus on values and emotions.

SEOM clinical guidelines for the treatment of non-small cell lung cancer (2018)

Non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) accounts for up to 85% of all lung cancers. The last few years have seen the development of a new staging system, diagnostic procedures such as liquid biopsy, treatments like immunotherapy, as well as deeper molecular knowledge; so, more options can be offered to patients with driver mutations. Groups with specific treatments account for around 25% and demonstrate significant increases in overall survival, and in some subgroups, it is important to evaluate each treatment alternative in accordance with scientific evidence, and even more so with immunotherapy. New treatments similarly mean that we must reconsider what should be done in oligometastatic disease where local treatment attains greater value.

Geriatric assessment in clinical practice for patients with stage IV non-small-cell lung cancer: The Grup de Investigació I Divulgació Oncològica experience

Therapeutic decision-making for older patients with stage IV non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) with no identifiable activating mutation is complex. In this prospective study, we evaluated the usefulness of geriatric assessment (GA) in identifying frail patients. Stage IV NSCLC patients ≥70 years of age were evaluated with GA and classified according to this evaluation into three different groups: fit, vulnerable and frail. Classifications based on GA, treatment decision, toxicity and overall survival were analysed. In total, 93 patients were included. Median age was 76 (70-92) years and 90% were men. Most patients had performance status (PS) 0 or 1 (82%), unrelated to their GA (p = 0.006). GA groups were associated with overall survival (p = 0.000), treatment decision (p = 0.0001), and toxicity (p = 0.0001). Chemotherapy was delivered to 100% of fit patients, to 48% of vulnerable patients, and to only 8% of frail patients (p = 0.000). Toxicity was higher in vulnerable patients than in fit individuals (p = 0.000). Multivariable analysis showed PS (p = 0.001), active treatment (p < 0.001) and GA group (p = 0.001) to be prognostic factors related to survival. Our results suggest that GA identified patients with poor natural prognosis.

General recommendations paper on the management of older patients with cancer: the SEOM geriatric oncology task force's position statement

Population aging is associated with greater numbers of older people with cancer. Thanks to treatment advances, not only are more seniors diagnosed with cancer, but there are also more and more older cancer survivors. This upward trend will continue. Given the heterogeneity of aging, managing older patients with cancer poses a significant challenge for Medical Oncology. In Spain, a Geriatric Oncology Task Force has been set up within the framework of the Spanish Society for Medical Oncology (SEOM). With the aim of generating evidence and raising awareness, as well as helping medical oncologists in their training with respect to seniors with cancer, we have put together a series of basic management recommendations for this population. Many of the patients who are assessed in routine clinical practice in Oncology are older. CGA is the basic tool by means of which to evaluate older people with cancer and to understand their needs. Training and the correct use of recommendations regarding treatment for comorbidities and geriatric syndromes, support care, and drug–drug interactions and toxicities, including those of antineoplastic agents, as detailed in this article, will ensure that this population is properly managed.