Implementing geriatric assessment and management for older Canadians with cancer: Adherence to and satisfaction with the intervention, results of the 5C study

INTRODUCTION

Geriatric assessment and management (GAM) is recommended by professional organizations and recently several randomized controlled trials (RCTs) demonstrated benefits in multiple health outcomes. GAM typically leads to one or more recommendations for the older adult on how to optimize their health. However, little is known about how well recommendations are adhered to. Understanding these issues is vital to designing GAM trials and clinical programs. Therefore, the aim of this study was to examine the number of GAM recommendations made and adherence to and satisfaction with the intervention in a multicentre RCT of GAM for older adults with cancer.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

The 5C study was a two-group parallel RCT conducted in eight hospitals across Canada. Each centre kept a detailed recruitment and retention log. The intervention teams documented adherence to their recommendations. Medical records were also reviewed to assess which recommendations were adhered to. Twenty-three semi-structured interviews were conducted with 12 members of the intervention teams and 11 oncology team members to assess implementation of the study and the intervention.

RESULTS

Of the 350 participants who were enrolled, 173 were randomized to the intervention arm. Median number of recommendations was seven. Mean adherence to recommendations based on the GAM was 69%, but it varied by type of recommendation, ranging from 98% for laboratory tests to 28% for psychosocial/psychiatry oncology referrals. There was no difference in the number of recommendations or non-adherence to recommendations by sex, level of frailty, or functional status. Oncologists and intervention team members were satisfied with the study implementation and intervention delivery.

DISCUSSION

Adherence to recommendations was variable. Adherence to laboratory investigations and further imaging were generally high but much lower for recommendations regarding psychosocial support. Further collaborative work with older adults with cancer is needed to understand how to optimize the intervention to be consistent with patient goals, priorities, and values to ensure maximal impact on health outcomes.

Impact of Geriatric Assessment and Management on Quality of Life, Unplanned Hospitalizations, Toxicity, and Survival for Older Adults With Cancer: The Randomized 5C Trial

PURPOSE

American Society of Clinical Oncology recommends that older adults with cancer being considered for chemotherapy receive geriatric assessment (GA) and management (GAM), but few randomized controlled trials have examined its impact on quality of life (QOL).

PATIENTS AND METHODS

The 5C study was a two-group parallel 1:1 single-blind multicenter randomized controlled trial of GAM for 6 months versus usual oncologic care. Eligible patients were age 70+ years, diagnosed with a solid tumor, lymphoma, or myeloma, referred for first-/second-line chemotherapy or immunotherapy or targeted therapy, and had an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 0-2. The primary outcome QOL was measured with the global health scale of the European Organisation for the Research and Treatment of Cancer QOL questionnaire and analyzed with a pattern mixture model using an intent-to-treat approach (at 6 and 12 months). Secondary outcomes included functional status, grade 3-5 treatment toxicity; health care use; satisfaction; cancer treatment plan modification; and overall survival.

RESULTS

From March 2018 to March 2020, 350 participants were enrolled. Mean age was 76 years and 40.3% were female. Fifty-four percent started treatment with palliative intent. Eighty-one (23.1%) patients died. GAM did not improve QOL (global QOL of 4.4 points [95% CI, 0.9 to 8.0] favoring the control arm). There was also no difference in survival, change in treatment plan, unplanned hospitalization/emergency department visits, and treatment toxicity between groups.

CONCLUSION

GAM did not improve QOL. Most intervention group participants received GA on or after treatment initiation per patient request. Considering recent completed trials, GA may have benefit if completed before treatment selection. The COVID-19 pandemic may have affected our QOL outcome and intervention delivery for some participants.

International trends in cancer incidence in middle-aged and older adults in 44 countries

OBJECTIVE

We examine international incidence trends of lung, colorectal, prostate, and breast cancers, as well as all cancers combined excluding non-melanoma skin cancer (NMSC) in adults aged 50 and older, over a fifteen-year period using data from 113 high quality population-based cancer registries included in the Cancer in Five Continents (CI5) series and NORDCAN.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We calculated annual incidence rates between 1998 and 2012 for ages 50-64, 65-74, and 75+, by sex and both sexes combined. We estimated average annual percentage change (AAPC) in rates using quasi-Poisson regression models.

RESULTS

From 1998 to 2012, incidence trends for all cancers (excluding NMSC) have increased in most countries across all age groups, with the greatest increase observed in adults aged 75+ in Ecuador (AAPC = +3%). Colorectal cancer incidence rates increased in the majority of countries, across all age groups. Lung cancer rates among females have increased but decreased for males. Prostate cancer rates have sharply increased in men aged 50-64 with AAPC between 5% and 15% in 24 countries, while decreasing in the 75+ age group in 21 countries, by up to -7% in Bahrain. Female breast cancer rates have increased across all age groups in most countries, especially in the 65-74 age group and in Asia with AAPC increasing to 7% in the Republic of Korea.

CONCLUSIONS

These findings assist with anticipating changing patterns and needs internationally. Due to the specific needs of older patients, it is urgent that cancer systems adapt to address their growing number.

Self-management interventions for issues identified in a geriatric assessment: A systematic review

BACKGROUND

With the development of electronic geriatric assessment (GA), recommendations for self-management can be provided to patients without the presence of health care providers. Our research question was to identify what self-management interventions can be used by patients to address issues identified in GA and to determine their effect on patient-centered outcomes such as quality of life, health, mood, cognition, and functional status.

METHODS

Searches were conducted on July 13, 2021, by a health sciences librarian in Medline, Embase, CINAHL, PsycInfo, and the Cochrane Library. A combination of database-specific subject headings and text word searches was used such as self-management, a key word for each of the geriatric assessment domains and older adults. Two independent reviewers reviewed abstracts and full texts for inclusion and abstracted data. Narrative synthesis was used to summarize findings.

RESULTS

Among 28,520 abstracts reviewed, 34 randomized controlled trials were included. The most frequently studied geriatric domains were mood (n = 13 studies), mobility/falls (n = 12), quality of life (n = 11), and functional status (n = 7). The majority of studies demonstrated positive effects on mobility/falls (9 of 12), pain (3 of 5), comorbidity (4 of 4), and medication management (4 of 4). Most studies were of low to moderate quality. All geriatric domains were targeted in at least one study.

CONCLUSIONS

Low- to moderate-quality studies show a variety of effective self-efficacy-targeted interventions exist for older adults to improve several important geriatric domains and related outcomes. However, long-term effects, validation, and scalability of these interventions remain largely unknown.

Comprehensive geriatric assessment and management for Canadian elders with Cancer: The 5C study

12011

Background: Comprehensive Geriatric Assessment (CGA) is recommended by ASCO for older adults with cancer undergoing chemotherapy to identify issues that can interfere with treatment delivery and optimize functional status and quality of life. However, few randomized controlled trials have been completed so far. Our objective is to evaluate the effectiveness of CGA on improving quality of life for older adults receiving cancer treatment. Methods: Eligible patients were aged 70+, diagnosed with a solid tumour, lymphoma or myeloma, referred for first/second line chemotherapy, speaking English/French, and with an Eastern Collaborative Oncology Group Performance Status 0–2. The CGA was done by a nurse and geriatrician followed by monthly phone calls by the study nurse for 6 months. Patients were randomly assigned (1:1) to receive either the intervention (CGA plus follow-up by geriatric trained team in addition to usual oncology care) or usual care alone. All participants received a monthly healthy aging booklet for attention control. Randomization was stratified by center and treatment intent (curative/adjuvant versus palliative). Our primary outcome was health-related quality of life (HRQOL) assessed with the European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) QLQ-C30 global health scale (items 29 and 30). Secondary outcomes include functional status (Instrumental Activities of Daily Living). Outcome data collection was completed monthly for the first 6 months, then at 9 and 12 months. For the primary outcome we used a pattern mixture model using an intent-to-treat approach (at 0, 3, and 6 months). The last data collection took place March 8 2021. Results: From May 2017 to March 2020, 351 participants from 8 hospitals across Canada were enrolled. All patients were seen on or after day 1 of treatment for the intervention per patient request. Patient characteristics at baseline were similar in both arms. The average age was 75.7 (SD = 4.8), 60.4% was male and 54.3% had treatment with palliative intent. Change in HRQOL scores did not differ by arm (p =.80). Neither group exceeded the MCID of 10 points. There was also no difference in IADL between the groups (p = 0.82). Conclusion: CGA was not effective in improving quality of life for older adults receiving cancer treatment in this study. CGA may need to be performed prior to treatment initiation to achieve benefits. Clinical trial information: NCT03154671.