Survivorship Care of Older Adults With Cancer: Priority Areas for Clinical Practice, Training, Research, and Policy

Five-Year Follow-Up of Standard-of-Care Axicabtagene Ciloleucel for Large B-Cell Lymphoma: Results From the US Lymphoma CAR T Consortium

PURPOSE

Axicabtagene ciloleucel (axi-cel) is an autologous CD19 chimeric antigen receptor (CAR) T-cell therapy that is approved for the treatment of relapsed or refractory large B-cell lymphoma. Little is known about the long-term survivorship after CAR T-cell therapy.

METHODS

We previously reported the results of 298 patients who were leukapheresed with the intent to receive standard-of-care axi-cel (n = 275 infused) after two or more previous lines of therapy at a median follow-up of 12.9 months. Here, we report extended follow-up of this cohort to a median of 58 months, with a focus on late survivorship events.

RESULTS

Among axi-cel-infused patients, progression-free survival at 5 years was 29% and overall survival (OS) at 5 years was 40%. The 5-year lymphoma-specific survival was 53% with infrequent late relapses. However, the 5-year nonrelapse mortality (NRM) was 16.2%, with over half of NRM events occurring beyond 2 years. Patients who were 60 years and older had a lower risk of relapse (P = .02), but a higher risk of NRM compared with patients younger than 60 years (NRM odds ratio, 4.5 [95% CI, 2.1 to 10.8]; P < .001). Late NRM was mainly due to infections and subsequent malignant neoplasms (SMNs). In total, SMNs occurred in 24 patients (9%), including therapy-related myeloid neoplasms (n = 15), solid tumors (n = 7), and unrelated lymphoid malignancies (n = 2).

CONCLUSION

In the standard-of-care setting, axi-cel exhibits outcomes consistent with those reported in clinical trials, with sustained, durable responses observed at the 5-year time point. However, late infections and the development of SMN are key survivorship issues that reduce long-term survival after CAR T-cell therapy, particularly in the elderly.

Primary Care Use and 90-Day Mortality Among Older Adults Undergoing Cancer Surgery

Importance

Multimorbidity and postoperative clinical decompensation are common among older surgical patients with cancer, highlighting the importance of primary care to optimize survival. Little is known about the association between primary care use and survivorship among older adults (aged ≥65 years) undergoing cancer surgery.

Objective

To examine primary care use among older surgical patients with cancer and its association with mortality.

Design, Setting, and Participants

In this retrospective cohort study, data were abstracted from the electronic health record of a single health care system for older adults undergoing cancer surgery between January 1, 2017, and December 31, 2019. There were 3 tiers of stratification: (1) patients who had a primary care practitioner (PCP) (physician, nurse practitioner, or physician assistant) vs no PCP, (2) those who had a PCP and underwent surgery in the same health system (unfragmented care) vs not (fragmented care), and (3) those who had a primary care visit within 90 postoperative days vs not. Data were analyzed between August 2023 and January 2024.

Exposure

Primary care use after surgery for colorectal, head and neck, prostate, ovarian, pancreatic, breast, liver, renal cell, non-small cell lung, endometrial, gastric, or esophageal cancer.

Main Outcomes and Measures

Postoperative 90-day mortality was analyzed using inverse propensity weighted Kaplan-Meier curves, with log-rank tests adjusted for propensity scores.

Results

The study included 2566 older adults (mean [SEM] age, 72.9 [0.1] years; 1321 men [51.5%]). Although 2404 patients (93.7%) had health insurance coverage, 743 (28.9%) had no PCP at the time of surgery. Compared with the PCP group, the no-PCP group had a higher 90-day postoperative mortality rate (2.0% vs 3.6%, respectively; adjusted P = .03). For the 823 patients with unfragmented care, 400 (48.6%) had a primary care visit within 90 postoperative days (median time to visit, 34 days; IQR, 20-57 days). Patients who had a postoperative primary care visit were more likely to be older, have a higher comorbidity burden, have an emergency department visit, and be readmitted. However, they had a significantly lower 90-day postoperative mortality rate than those who did not have a primary care visit (0.3% vs 3.3%, respectively; adjusted P = .001).

Conclusions and Relevance

These findings suggest that follow-up with primary care within 90 days after cancer surgery is associated with improved survivorship among older adults.

Excess Body Weight and the Risk of Second Primary Cancers Among Cancer Survivors

Importance

Little is known about the causes of second primary cancers among individuals with a history of cancer. Descriptive studies have suggested that lifestyle factors, including excess body weight, may be important.

Objective

To investigate whether excess body weight is associated with the risk of a second primary malignant neoplasm among cancer survivors.

Design, Setting, and Participants

This cohort study of adults in 21 states in the US used data from the Cancer Prevention Study II Nutrition cohort, a large prospective study that invited participants to respond to a survey in 1992 and biennial surveys starting in 1997, and who were followed-up through 2017. Eligible participants included those who received a diagnosis of a first primary nonmetastatic invasive cancer between 1992 and 2015. Data analysis occurred from September 2023 to March 2024.

Exposure

Body mass index (BMI), computed from self-reported height and weight at the time of the first primary cancer diagnosis (mean [SD] years to diagnosis, 1.7 [1.5] years).

Main Outcome and Measures

Main outcomes included a second primary cancer or an obesity-related second cancer. Cancer diagnoses were reported on biennial surveys and verified through medical record abstraction or linkage with state cancer registries.

Results

This cohort included 26 894 participants who received a diagnosis of a first nonmetastatic primary cancer (mean [SD] age at first cancer diagnosis, 72.2 [6.5] years; 15 920 male [59.2%]). At the time of first diagnosis, 11 497 participants (42.8%) had overweight and 4684 (17.2%) had obesity. During a median (IQR) follow-up time of 7.9 (3.4-13.6) years, 3749 (13.9%) participants received a diagnosis of a second primary cancer, of which 1243 (33.2%) were obesity-related second primary cancers. Compared with cancer survivors whose BMI was in the normal range (18.5 to <25), there was 15% increased risk of any second primary cancer for those who had overweight (25 to <30; adjusted hazard ratio [aHR], 1.15; 95% CI, 1.07-1.25) and a 34% increased risk for those who had obesity (BMI ≥30; aHR, 1.34; 95% CI, 1.21-1.48), with greater risk for obesity-related second primary cancers, including a 40% increased risk for those with overweight (aHR, 1.40; 95% CI, 1.22,-1.61) and a 78% increased risk for those with obesity (aHR, 1.78; 95% CI, 1.51-2.11).

Conclusions and Relevance

In this cohort study of older survivors of nonmetastatic cancer, those who had overweight or obesity at the time of their first cancer diagnosis were at higher risk of developing a second cancer, especially an obesity-related second cancer. Given the high prevalence of overweight and obesity among cancer survivors, it is important to promote survivorship care guidelines recommending weight management and increase awareness of second cancers among physicians and cancer survivors.

Supportive care interventions in metastatic bone disease: scoping review

BACKGROUND

Patients with secondary metastatic involvement of the musculoskeletal system due to primary cancers are a rapidly growing population with significant risks for health-related end-of-life morbidities. In particular, bone metastases or metastatic bone disease (MBD) imparts significant adversity to remaining quality of life. No rigorous review of clinical trials on the use of supportive care interventions for MBD has been conducted. The objective of this review was to examine the characteristics of supportive care interventions for MBD and critically appraise study designs, key findings, and quality of evidence of the research.

METHODS

We searched for published clinical trials, systematic reviews and meta-analyses in PubMED, CINAHL and Google Scholar for articles published between September 2017 and September 2022. Some examples of Medical Subject Headings terms were: 'secondary neoplasm', 'metastatic bone disease', 'palliative care' and 'supportive care intervention'. Quality of published evidence was evaluated based on treatment types and study design.

RESULTS

After reviewing 572 publications, 13 articles were included in the final review and evaluation including seven clinical trials, two trial protocols and four systematic reviews. Feasible interventions included enhanced palliative care consultation, palliative radiotherapy and alternative medicines. Interventions addressed primary endpoints of fatigue (N=4, 31%), pain (N=3, 23%) or cancer-related symptoms (N=3, 23%) with patient-reported outcome instruments. No interventions reported on fracture complications or endpoints, specifically. The quality of most studies was moderate to strong.

CONCLUSION

Supportive care interventions for MBD are feasible and the impact is measurable via patient-reported outcome measures. While the evidence for interventions was moderate to strong, there are very few specific controlled trials for skeletal-related events and impacts of social determinants of health. Further clinical trials are needed to define supportive care interventions for MBD that demonstrate reduced risk of fracture and that mitigate the reduced quality of life when negative musculoskeletal outcomes arise.

Spanish Society of Medical Oncology recommendations for comprehensive assessment and care of cancer survivors' needs

This article reviews the contemporary and inclusive definition of cancer survivorship, including patients with and without disease who have completed or continue to undergo treatment. The Spanish Society of Medical Oncology (SEOM) describes in this article the needs of these patients and outlines a care model based on an estimation of cancer incidence and identification of patient needs, to enable the provision of practical actions to achieve effective care. The objectives of this review are to identify the main effects of cancer on survivors and to establish appropriate ways of measuring these effects, as well as discussing the management of physical, psychological and social, occupational, financial, and other health-related needs. We suggest a multidisciplinary care model and training programs for the different professionals involved in care, and highlight challenges and the future role of the SEOM and health-care policy in ensuring optimum care of cancer survivors.

Health Care Contact Days Among Older Cancer Survivors

PURPOSE

Health care contact days-days spent receiving health care outside the home-represent an intuitive, practical, and person-centered measure of time consumed by health care.

METHODS

We linked 2019 Medicare Current Beneficiary Survey and traditional Medicare claims data for community-dwelling older adults with a history of cancer. We identified contact days (ie, spent in a hospital, emergency department, skilled nursing facility, or inpatient hospice or receiving ambulatory care including an office visit, procedure, treatment, imaging, or test) and described patterns of total and ambulatory contact days. Using weighted Poisson regression models, we identified factors associated with contact days.

RESULTS

We included 1,168 older adults representing 4.51 million cancer survivors (median age, 76.4 years, 52.8% women). The median (IQR) time from cancer diagnosis was 65 (27-126) months. In 2019, these adults had mean (standard deviation) total contact days of 28.4 (27.6) and ambulatory contact days of 24.2 (23.6). These included days for tests (8.0 [8.8]), imaging (3.6 [4.1]), visits with any clinicians (12.4 [11.5]), and visits with primary care clinicians (4.4 [4.7]), and nononcology specialists (7.1 [9.4]) specifically. Sixty-four percent of days with a nonvisit ambulatory service (eg, a test) were not on the same day as a clinician visit. Factors associated with more total contact days included younger age, lower income, more chronic conditions, poor self-rated health, and tendency to "go to doctor as soon as feel bad."

CONCLUSION

Older adult cancer survivors spent nearly 1 month of the year receiving health care outside the home. This care was largely ambulatory, often delivered by nononcologists, and varied by factors beyond clinical characteristics. These results highlight the need to recognize patient burdens and improve survivorship care delivery, including through care coordination.

Hospital use and cancer treatment by age and socioeconomic status in the last year of life: A Norwegian population-based study of patients dying of cancer

INTRODUCTION

Cancer is the leading cause of death in Norway. In this nationwide study we describe the number and causes of hospital admissions and treatment in the final year of life for patients who died of cancer, as well as the associations to age and socioeconomic status (SES).

MATERIALS AND METHODS

From nationwide registries covering 2010-2014, we identified all patients who were diagnosed with cancer 12-60 months before death and had cancer as their reported cause of death. We examined the number of overnight hospital stays, causes of admission, and treatment (chemotherapy, radiotherapy, surgical procedures) offered during the last year of life by individual (age, sex, comorbidity), cancer (type, stage, months since diagnosis), and socioeconomic variables (co-residential status, income, education).

RESULTS

The analytical sample included 17,669 patients; 8,247 (47%) were female, mean age was 71.7 years (standard deviation 13.7). At diagnosis, 31% had metastatic disease, while 29% had an intermediate or high comorbidity burden. Altogether, 94% were hospitalized during their final year, 82% at least twice, and 33% six times or more. Patients spent a median of 23 days in hospital (interquartile range 11-41), and altogether 38% died there. Younger age, bladder and ovarian cancer, not living alone, and higher income were associated with having ≥6 hospitalizations. Cancer-related diagnoses were the main causes of hospitalizations (65%), followed by infections (11%). Around 51% had ≥1 chemotherapy episode, with large variations according to patient age and SES; patients who were younger, did not live alone, had high education, and high income received more chemotherapy. Radiotherapy was received by 15% and declined with age, and the variation according to SES characteristics was minor. Of the 12,940 patients with a cancer type where surgery is a main treatment modality, only 835 (6%) underwent surgical procedures for their primary tumor in the last year of life.

DISCUSSION

Most patients who die of cancer are hospitalized multiple times during the last year of life. Hospitalizations and treatment decline with advancing age. Living alone and having low income is associated with fewer hospitalizations and less chemotherapy treatment. Whether this indicates over- or undertreatment across various groups warrants further exploration.

Health system and patient-level factors associated with multidisciplinary care and patient education among hospitalized, older cancer survivors

Objective

The purpose of this study was to examine system- and patient-level factors associated with the number of healthcare disciplines involved in delivery of patient education among hospitalized older cancer survivors.

Methods

We used electronic health record (EHR) data from a single institution documenting patient education among hospitalized older patients (≥65 years) with a history of cancer between 9/1/2018 and 10/1/2019. We used parametric ordinal logistic regression to assess the number of healthcare disciplines involved in documented education activities.

Results

The sample (n = 446) was predominantly male, White, and on average 74 years old. Adjusting for patient and system-level variables, men and larger department units had higher odds of receiving education from fewer healthcare disciplines. Patients with a history of breast or prostate cancer and longer lenths of stay had lower odds of receiving patient education from fewer healthcare disciplines.

Conclusion

Hospital size, severity of illness, and cancer type are associated with delivery of multidisciplinary education in this sample.

Innovation

EHR provides an opportunity to identify patterns in patient education among cancer survivors. Future research should investigate provider perspectives of the findings to inform provider- and system-level strategies to improve patient education.

The what matters most survey: A measurement evaluation of a self-reported patient values elicitation tool among cancer survivors

OBJECTIVES

Patients with multiple chronic conditions, especially cancer survivors, face challenges in medical decision making. Previous research demonstrates how patient values can guide medical decisions, however facilitating patient values elicitation remains a challenge. This study aims to evaluate the psychometric properties of and refine the What Matters Most (WMM) Survey, a self-reported values elicitation tool, in a cohort of older veteran cancer survivors.

METHODS

An observational cohort study was conducted to evaluate the psychometric properties of the WMM Survey in older, multimorbid cancer survivors. 262 patients were administered the assessment at two timepoints, between 14 and 30 days apart.

RESULTS

Exploratory factor analyses revealed four factors for assessing healthcare values among older adults with good internal consistency for all factors: Functioning (Cronbach's alpha coefficient, α = 0.88), Enjoying Life (α = 0.79), Connecting (α = 0.84), and Managing Health (α = 0.88). Demographic and clinical characteristics were not uniformly associated with specific healthcare values.

CONCLUSIONS

Future studies are required to refine the proposed assessment and to evaluate its application in a general patient population.

PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS

The WMM Survey is an innovative resource in health values elicitation, allowing for facilitation of patient-clinician communication for whole-person medical approaches and measurement of health values for research.

Risk of All-Cause Dementia, Alzheimer Disease, and Vascular Dementia in Breast Cancer Survivors: A Longitudinal Register-Based Study

Background and Objectives

Now more than two-thirds of cancer survivors are aged 65 years or older, but evidence about their long-term health is thin. Cancer and its treatments have been linked to accelerated aging, so there is a concern that aging cancer survivors have an increased risk of age-related diseases, including dementia.

Methods

We examined the risk of dementia among 5-year breast cancer survivors using a matched cohort study design. We included breast cancer survivors aged 50 years and older at diagnosis (n = 26,741) and cancer-free comparison participants (n = 249,540). Women eligible for inclusion in the study were those born 1935-1975 and registered in the Swedish Total Population Register between January 1, 1991, and December 31, 2015. We defined breast cancer survivors as women with an initial breast cancer diagnosis between 1991 and 2005 who survived 5 or more years after their first diagnosis. We assessed all-cause dementia, Alzheimer disease (AD), and vascular dementia (VaD) using International Classification of Diseases codes. Survival analyses were conducted using age-adjusted subdistribution hazard models accounting for competing risk of death.

Results

We did not observe an association between breast cancer survivorship and risk of all-cause dementia, AD, or VaD. However, in models stratified by age at cancer diagnosis, women diagnosed with cancer after age 65 years had a higher risk of all-cause dementia (subdistribution hazard ratio [SHR] = 1.30, 95% CI 1.07-1.58), AD (SHR = 1.35, 95% CI 1.05-1.75), and VaD (SHR = 1.64, 95% CI 1.11-2.43) in models adjusted for age, education, and country of origin.

Discussion

Older breast cancer survivors who survive cancer have a higher risk for dementia than their peers without a cancer diagnosis, in contrast to earlier studies showing that prevalent or incident cancer is associated with a lower risk of dementia. With the older adult population growing rapidly and because cancer and dementia are 2 of the most common and debilitating diseases among older adults, it is critical that we understand the link between the 2.

Inequities Among Cancer Caregivers with Diverse Identities: A Review of the Literature and Future Directions

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

The number of older adults with cancer relying on support from caregivers continues to increase. Health disparities in older adults with cancer often extend to their caregivers. This review aims to assess the state of cancer caregiving research in historically underrepresented diverse populations and provide recommendations for future research and policy.

RECENT FINDINGS

Research on caregivers of older adults with cancer from diverse backgrounds has primarily been descriptive. Health disparities for historically underrepresented caregivers (LGBTQ + , BIPOC, rural, young adults, youth) exist across several dimensions (e.g., financial, mental, and physical health, and access to caregiver support). Few published studies have closely examined the unique experiences of these caregivers nor provided culturally appropriate tailored interventions. Health equity research within caregiving populations is in its infancy. Priorities for future work should focus on identifying modifiable targets for intervention, changing systems-level processes in acknowledging and supporting caregivers, and creating policies that reduce financial inequities of caregiving.

New horizons in managing older cancer survivors: complexities and opportunities

Older adults represent a growing population amongst cancer survivors who require specific consideration given the complex and largely unknown interactions between cancer-related concerns and age-related conditions. The increasing use of geriatric assessment (GA) has enabled oncologists to appropriately assess older patients' overall health status, personalise anti-cancer treatment and improve survival. However, whilst current research and practice focus on improving the management of older adults with cancer in the acute setting, the progress in the field of survivorship research in geriatric oncology is lagging. As cancer survivorship is a continuum, planning for a healthy survivorship should start at the time of cancer diagnosis. GA can play an important role in identifying potential survivorship issues and optimising delivery of survivorship care. A goal-directed, patient-focused geriatric survivorship care plan that involves a multidisciplinary team provides a framework for a personalised delivery of survivorship care in this patient group and there is a need for tailored interventions that support self-management and care integration. Research on the impact of cancer and its treatment on geriatric-specific outcomes needs to be prioritised through global initiatives to encompass a diverse and heterogenous population of adult cancer survivors.

Age-related health deficits and five-year mortality among older, long-term cancer survivors

INTRODUCTION

Geriatric assessment evaluates multiple domains of health that, together, are superior to using chronologic age for predicting outcomes, such as hospitalization and mortality among patients with cancer. Most studies have not included comparison groups of individuals without cancer and assessed domains around the time of initial cancer diagnosis. Further, the potential for brief, self-reported measures to capture deficits that similarly predict mortality has not been well examined. This study compared age-related health deficit prevalence between older, long-term cancer survivors and individuals without a cancer history, and estimated associations between deficits and mortality risk among survivors.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Analyses included participants in the Cancer Prevention Study (CPS)-II Nutrition Cohort who were cancer-free at enrollment in 1992/1993 and completed the Patient Reported Outcome Measurement Information System® (PROMIS®) global health questionnaire in 2011. Age-related deficits in five domains (comorbidities, functional status, mental health, malnutrition/weight loss, and social support) were self-reported. Cancer information was self-reported and confirmed via medical records or state cancer registries. Vital status through 2016 and cause of death was ascertained by linkage with the National Death Index.

RESULTS

Analyses included 9979 participants (median age = 80) diagnosed with invasive cancer 5-20 years prior to completing the 2011 survey and 63,578 participants without a cancer history (median age = 79). Overall deficits in the five domains were similar among long-term cancer survivors and controls. However, survivors of specific cancer types - non-Hodgkin lymphoma (NHL), lung, and kidney cancer - were more likely to report deficits in mental health and functional status than the control group. Among all survivors, each domain was independently associated with all-cause mortality, particularly functional status (hazard ratio [HR] = 2.02; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.80-2.27) and mental health (HR = 1.84; 95% CI: 1.65-2.04). Mortality risk increased with the number of deficits.

DISCUSSION

These results suggest that, several years after treatment, NHL, lung, and kidney cancer survivors are still more likely to experience age-related deficits compared to other similarly-aged individuals. Furthermore, results show that shorter, self-reported physical and mental health assessments, such as the PROMIS® global health questions, are predictive of mortality among older, long-term cancer survivors and, therefore, may be useful in clinical and research settings.

New directions in cancer and aging: State of the science and recommendations to improve the quality of evidence on the intersection of aging with cancer control

Background

The global population of older cancer survivors is growing. However, the intersections of aging‐related health risks across the cancer control continuum are poorly understood, limiting the integration of aging into cancer control research and practice. The objective of this study was to review the state of science and provide future directions to improve the quality of evidence in 6 priority research areas in cancer and aging.

Methods

The authors identified priority research areas in cancer and aging through an evidence‐based Research Jam process involving 32 investigators and trainees from multiple disciplines and research centers in aging and cancer; then, they conducted a narrative review of the state of the science and future directions to improve the quality of evidence in these research areas. Priority research areas were defined as those in which gaps in scientific evidence or clinical practice limit the health and well‐being of older adults with cancer.

Results

Six priority research areas were identified: cognitive and physical functional outcomes of older cancer survivors, sampling issues in studies of older cancer survivors, risk and resilience across the lifespan, caregiver support and well‐being, quality of care for older patients with cancer, and health disparities. Evidence in these areas could be improved through the incorporation of bias reduction techniques into longitudinal studies of older cancer survivors, novel data linkage, and improved representation of older adults in cancer research.

Conclusions

The priority research areas and methodologies identified here may be used to guide interdisciplinary research and improve the quality of evidence on cancer and aging.

The population of older cancer survivors is growing, yet the effects of aging‐related health risks across the cancer control continuum remain poorly understood. This article identifies research areas that may be used to guide interdisciplinary research and improve the quality of evidence on cancer and aging.