Differences in Pretreatment Frailty Across Gastrointestinal Cancers in Older Adults: Results From the Cancer and Aging Resilience Evaluation Registry

The association between social vulnerability and geriatric assessment impairments among older adults with gastrointestinal cancers-The CARE Registry

BACKGROUND

Older adults comprise the majority of patients with gastrointestinal (GI) cancer. Geriatric assessments (GAs) are recommended for older adults with cancer in part to detect aging-related impairments (e.g., frailty) associated with early mortality. Social factors like social vulnerability may also influence aging-related impairments. However, the association between social vulnerability and aging outcomes among older adults with cancer is understudied.

METHODS

The authors included 908 older adults aged 60 years and older who were recently diagnosed with GI cancer undergoing GA at their first prechemotherapy visit to the University of Alabama at Birmingham oncology clinic. The primary exposure of interest was the social vulnerability index (SVI). Outcomes were frailty (frail vs. robust/prefrail) and total number of GA impairments (range, 0-13). The authors examined the association between SVI and outcomes using Poisson regression with robust variance estimation and generalized estimating equations.

RESULTS

The median age at GA was 69 years (interquartile range, 64-75 years), 58.2% of patients were male, 22.6% were non-Hispanic Black, 29.1% had colorectal cancer, 28.2% had pancreatic cancer, and 70.3% had stage III/IV disease. Adjusting for age, sex, cancer type, and disease stage, each decile increase in the SVI was associated with an 8% higher prevalence of frailty (prevalence ratio, 1.08; 95% confidence interval, 1.05-1.11) and a 4% higher average count of total GA impairments (risk ratio, 1.04; 95% confidence interval, 1.02-1.06). The results were attenuated after further adjustment for race and education.

CONCLUSIONS

Greater social vulnerability was associated with a higher prevalence of frailty and an increasing average number of GA impairments among older adults with GI cancers before systemic treatment. Intervening on social vulnerability may be a target for improving the risk of frailty and GA impairments, but associations of race and education should be further evaluated.

Geriatric assessment-identified impairments and frailty in adults with cancer younger than 65: An opportunity to optimize oncology care

INTRODUCTION

Frailty, a state of increased vulnerability to stressors due to aging or treatment-related accelerated aging, is associated with declines in physical, cognitive and/or social functioning, and quality of life for cancer survivors. For survivors aged <65 years, little is known about frailty status and associated impairments to inform intervention. We aimed to evaluate the prevalence of frailty and contributing geriatric assessment (GA)-identified impairments in adults aged <65 versus ≥65 years with cancer.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

This study is a secondary analysis of clinical trial data (NCT04852575). Participants were starting a new line of systemic therapy at a community-based oncology private practice. Before starting treatment, participants completed an online patient-reported GA and the Physical Activity (PA) Vital Sign questionnaire. Frailty score and category were derived from GA using a validated deficit accumulation model: frail (>0.35), pre-frail (0.2-0.35), or robust (0-0.2). PA mins/week were calculated, and participants were coded as either meeting/not-meeting guidelines (≥90 min/week). We used Spearman (ρ) correlation to examine the association between age and frailty score and chi-squared/Fisher's-exact or ANOVA/Kruskal-Wallis statistic to compare frailty and PA outcomes between age groups.

RESULTS

Participants (n = 96) were predominantly female (62%), Caucasian (68%), beginning first-line systemic therapy (69%), and 1.75 months post-diagnosis (median). Most had stage III to IV disease (66%). Common cancer types included breast (34%), gastrointestinal (23%), and hematologic (15%). Among participants <65, 46.8% were frail or pre-frail compared to 38.7% of those ≥65. There was no association between age and frailty score (ρ = 0.01, p = 0.91). Between age groups, there was no significant difference in frailty score (p = 0.95), the prevalence of frailty (p = 0.68), number of GA impairments (p = 0.33), or the proportion meeting PA guidelines (p = 0.72). However, older adults had more comorbid conditions (p = 0.03) and younger adults had non-significant but clinically relevant differences in functional ability, falls, and PA level.

DISCUSSION

In our cohort, the prevalence of frailty was similar among adults with cancer <65 when compared to those older than 65, however, types of GA impairments differed. These results suggest GA and the associated frailty index could be useful to identify needs for intervention and inform clinical decisions during cancer treatment regardless of age. Additional research is needed to confirm our findings.

Harnessing physical activity monitoring and digital biomarkers of frailty from pendant based wearables to predict chemotherapy resilience in veterans with cancer

This study evaluated the use of pendant-based wearables for monitoring digital biomarkers of frailty in predicting chemotherapy resilience among 27 veteran cancer patients (average age: 64.6 ± 13.4 years), undergoing bi-weekly chemotherapy. Immediately following their first day of chemotherapy cycle, participants wore a water-resistant pendant sensor for 14 days. This device tracked frailty markers like cadence (slowness), daily steps (inactivity), postural transitions (weakness), and metrics such as longest walk duration and energy expenditure (exhaustion). Participants were divided into resilient and non-resilient groups based on adverse events within 6 months post-chemotherapy, including dose reduction, treatment discontinuation, unplanned hospitalization, or death. A Chemotherapy-Resilience-Index (CRI) ranging from 0 to 1, where higher values indicate poorer resilience, was developed using regression analysis. It combined physical activity data with baseline Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) assessments. The protocol showed a 97% feasibility rate, with sensor metrics effectively differentiating between groups as early as day 6 post-therapy. The CRI, calculated using data up to day 6 and baseline ECOG, significantly distinguished resilient (CRI = 0.2 ± 0.27) from non-resilient (CRI = 0.7 ± 0.26) groups (p < 0.001, Cohen's d = 1.67). This confirms the potential of remote monitoring systems in tracking post-chemotherapy functional capacity changes and aiding early non-resilience detection, subject to validation in larger studies.