Geriatric assessment in older patients with a hematologic malignancy: a systematic review

The aim of this systematic review is to give an update of all currently available evidence on the relevance of a geriatric assessment in the treatment of older patients with hematologic malignancies. A systematic search in MEDLINE and EMBASE was performed to find studies in which a geriatric assessment was used to detect impaired geriatric domains or to address the association between geriatric assessment and survival or clinical outcome measures. The literature search included 4,629 reports, of which 54 publications from 44 studies were included. Seventy-three percent of the studies were published in the last 5 years. The median age of the patients was 73 years (range, 58-86) and 71% had a good World Health Organization (WHO) performance status. The median prevalence of geriatric impairments varied between 17% and 68%, even in patients with a good WHO performance status. Polypharmacy, nutritional status and instrumental activities of daily living were most frequently impaired. Whereas several geriatric impairments and frailty (based on a frailty screening tool or summarized geriatric assessment score) were predictive for a shorter overall survival, WHO performance status lost its predictive value in most studies. The association between geriatric impairments and treatment-related toxicity varied, with a trend towards a higher risk of (non-)hematologic toxicity in frail patients. During the follow-up, frailty seemed to be associated with treatment non-completion, especially when patients were malnourished. Patients with a good physical capacity had a shorter stay in hospital and a lower rate of hospitalization. Geriatric assessment, even in patients with a good performance status, can detect impaired geriatric domains and these impairments may be predictive of mortality. Moreover, geriatric impairments suggest a higher risk of treatment-related toxicity, treatment non-completion and use of healthcare services. A geriatric assessment should be considered before starting treatment in older patients with hematologic malignancies

Geriatric Assessment and Management in Cancer

As the majority of patients with cancer are older than 65 years, most medical, surgical, and radiation oncologists treat a large number of older adults in their clinical practice. Older adults are a heterogeneous group of patients, in terms of physiologic reserves, comorbidity, and geriatric conditions such as cognitive impairment and disability. Comorbidities become increasingly common as people age, as does frailty (limited physiologic reserves that increase the risk of negative outcomes).1 Neither chronological age alone nor performance status does justice to characterizing this heterogeneity. Furthermore, since older patients are under-represented in clinical cancer trials, especially if they are frail with comorbidity or functional dependency, traditional treatment algorithms may not be applicable.2,3 As a result, treatment decisions in older adults with cancer are not straightforward

Medical decision making for older patients during multidisciplinary oncology team meetings

Objectives: Multidisciplinary team meetings aim to facilitate efficient and accurate communication surrounding the complex process of treatment decision making for older patients with cancer. This process is even more complicated for older (≥70 years) patients as the lack of empirical evidence on treatment regimens in patients with age-related problems such as comorbidity and polypharmacy, necessitates a patient-centred approach.This study investigates the decision making process for older patients with cancer during multidisciplinary team meetings and the extent to which geriatric evaluation and geriatric expertise contribute to this process. Methods: Non-participant observations of 171 cases (≥70 years) during 30 multidisciplinary team meetings in five hospitals and systematically analysed using a medical decision making framework. All cases were in patients with colon or rectal cancer. Results: First, not all steps from the medical decision making framework were followed. Second, we found limited use of patient-centred information such as (age-related) patient characteristics and patient preferences during the decision making process. Third, a geriatric perspective was largely missing in multidisciplinary team meetings. Conclusions: This study uncovers gaps in the treatment decision making process for older patients with cancer during multidisciplinary team meetings. In particular individual vulnerabilities and patient wishes are often neglected

The chance of survival and the functional outcome after in-hospital cardiopulmonary resuscitation in older people: a systematic review

physicians are frequently confronted with the question whether cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) is a medically appropriate treatment for older people. For physicians, patients and relatives, it is important to know the chance of survival and the functional outcome after CPR in order to make an informed decision. a systematic search was performed in MEDLINE, Embase and Cochrane up to November 2012. Studies that were included described the chance of survival, the social status and functional outcome after in-hospital CPR in older people aged 70 years and above. we identified 11,377 publications of which 29 were included in this review; 38.6% of the patients who were 70 years and older had a return of spontaneous circulation. More than half of the patients who initially survived resuscitation died in the hospital before hospital discharge. The pooled survival to discharge after in-hospital CPR was 18.7% for patients between 70 and 79 years old, 15.4% for patients between 80 and 89 years old and 11.6% for patients of 90 years and older. Data on social and functional outcome after surviving CPR were scarce and contradictory. the chance of survival to hospital discharge for in-hospital CPR in older people is low to moderate (11.6-18.7%) and decreases with age. However, evidence about functional or social outcomes after surviving CPR is scarce. Prospective studies are needed to address this issue and to identify pre-arrest factors that can predict survival in the older people in order to define subgroups that could benefit from CP

Current palliative chemotherapy trials in the elderly neglect patient-centred outcome measures

The elderly comprise the majority of patients newly diagnosed with cancer. Despite this, little evidence-based data are available on the care of the growing number of older patients with cancer. The objective of the current study was to evaluate the characteristics and outcome measures of current clinical trials on palliative chemotherapy in elderly patients. Fourteen international clinical trials registries were searched using the terms "cancer" and "elderly" to identify clinical palliative chemotherapy trials designed specifically for patients aged 70+ years. From the trial protocol, data were extracted on trial characteristics and outcome measures. Of 127 trials, 81% formulated one or more stringent criteria with respect to organ function; 32% excluded patients with WHO performance status (PS) 2 and 83% with PS3. Functional outcomes, health care utilisation, cognitive function after treatment, and quality of life were reported in 6%, 3%, 6%, and 31% of trials, respectively. In only 16% of trials on palliative cancer treatment, a geriatric assessment was performed at baseline. Although recent years have seen a growing evidence base regarding fit older patients, our study suggests a lack of representative cohorts of older patients and patient-centred outcome measures in current palliative treatment trials for the elderly. Research addressing alternative outcome measures, including quality of life and impact of therapy on general functioning, cognition, and preservation of independence, and incorporation of a geriatric assessment are needed to provide elderly patients with cancer and their treating physicians with realistic information about palliative chemotherap

The value of a comprehensive geriatric assessment for patient care in acutely hospitalized older patients with cancer

A comprehensive geriatric assessment systematically collects information on geriatric conditions and is propagated in oncology as a useful tool when assessing older cancer patients. The objectives were: (a) to study the prevalence of geriatric conditions in cancer patients aged ≥ 65 years, acutely admitted to a general medicine ward; (b) to determine functional decline and mortality within 12 months after admission; and (c) to assess which geriatric conditions and cancer-related variables are associated with 12-month mortality. This was an observational cohort study of 292 cancer patients aged ≥ 65 years, acutely admitted to the general medicine and oncology wards of two university hospitals and one secondary teaching hospital. Baseline assessments included patient characteristics, reason for admission, comorbidity, and geriatric conditions. Follow-up at 3 and 12 months was aimed at functional decline (loss of one or more activities of daily living [ADL]) and mortality. The median patient age was 74.9 years, and 95% lived independently; 126 patients (43%) had metastatic disease. A high prevalence of geriatric conditions was found for instrumental ADL impairment (78%), depressive symptoms (65%), pain (65%), impaired mobility (48%), malnutrition (46%), and ADL impairment (38%). Functional decline was observed in 8% and 33% of patients at 3 and 12 months, respectively. Mortality rates were 38% at 3 months and 64% at 12 months. Mortality was associated with cancer-related factors only. In these acutely hospitalized older cancer patients, mortality was only associated with cancer-related factors. The prevalence of geriatric conditions in this population was high. Future research is needed to elucidate if addressing these conditions can improve quality of lif

Frailty screening methods for predicting outcome of a comprehensive geriatric assessment in elderly patients with cancer: a systematic review

Comprehensive geriatric assessment (CGA) is done to detect vulnerability in elderly patients with cancer so that treatment can be adjusted accordingly; however, this process is time-consuming and pre-screening is often used to identify fit patients who are able to receive standard treatment versus those in whom a full CGA should be done. We aimed to assess which of the frailty screening methods available show the best sensitivity and specificity for predicting the presence of impairments on CGA in elderly patients with cancer. We did a systematic search of Medline and Embase, and a hand-search of conference abstracts, for studies on the association between frailty screening outcome and results of CGA in elderly patients with cancer. Our search identified 4440 reports, of which 22 publications from 14 studies, were included in this Review. Seven different frailty screening methods were assessed. The median sensitivity and specificity of each screening method for predicting frailty on CGA were as follows: Vulnerable Elders Survey-13 (VES-13), 68% and 78%; Geriatric 8 (G8), 87% and 61%; Triage Risk Screening Tool (TRST 1+; patient considered frail if one or more impairments present), 92% and 47%, Groningen Frailty Index (GFI) 57% and 86%, Fried frailty criteria 31% and 91%, Barber 59% and 79%, and abbreviated CGA (aCGA) 51% and 97%. However, even in case of the highest sensitivity, the negative predictive value was only roughly 60%. G8 and TRST 1+ had the highest sensitivity for frailty, but both had poor specificity and negative predictive value. These findings suggest that, for now, it might be beneficial for all elderly patients with cancer to receive a complete geriatric assessment, since available frailty screening methods have insufficient discriminative power to select patients for further assessmen

Amerikaanse richtlijn voor geriatrische oncologie

American guideline for geriatric oncology; applicable to Dutch clinical practice? The American Society of Clinical Oncology (ASCO) has recently issued a guideline for geriatric oncology that provides guidance regarding the practical assessment and management of vulnerabilities in older patients undergoing chemotherapy. The recommendations are discussed and a practical framework for implementation in Dutch oncology practice is described

Initiation and termination of dialysis in older patients with advanced cancer: providing guidance in a complicated situation

Cancer and chronic kidney disease prevalence both increase with age. As a consequence, physicians are more frequently encountering older people with cancer who need dialysis, or patients on dialysis diagnosed with cancer. Decisions in this context are particularly complex and multifaceted. In this Review, we aim to provide an overview of the key points to address when making a treatment strategy in these patients. We provide information on what happens if dialysis is not started or is stopped, and how physicians should deal with such patients. Informed decisions about dialysis require a personalised care plan that considers the prognosis and treatment options for each condition while also respecting patient preferences. The concept of prognosis should include quality-of-life considerations, functional status, and burden of care. Close collaboration between oncologists, nephrologists, and geriatricians is crucial to making optimal treatment decisions, and several tools are available for estimating cancer prognosis, prognosis of renal disease, and general age-related prognosis. Emerging evidence shows that these geriatric assessment tools, which measure degrees of frailty, are useful in patients with chronic kidney disease. In this Review, we try to hand tools to practising physicians, to guide decision making regarding the initiation and termination of dialysis in patients with advanced cancer

The impact of surgery and adjuvant chemotherapy on health-related quality of life in patients with colon cancer: Changes at group level versus individual level

OBJECTIVE: This study aims to evaluate changes in health-related quality of life (HR-QoL) 1 year after surgical treatment in patients with primary resectable colon cancer and to assess whether changes at group level differ from changes at individual level. In addition, we assess which characteristics are associated with a decline of HR-QoL. METHODS: Patients with primary resectable colon cancer who received surgical treatment and adjuvant chemotherapy if indicated were selected from the Prospective Dutch ColoRectal Cancer cohort (PLCRC). HR-QoL was assessed using EORTC-QLQ-C30 questionnaire before surgery and 12 months post-surgery. Outcomes were assessed at group and individual levels. Logistic regression analysis was conducted to assess which socio-demographic and clinical characteristics were associated with a clinically relevant decline of HR-QoL at 12 months. RESULTS: Of all 324 patients, the baseline level of HR-QoL summary score was relatively high with a mean of 88.1 (SD 11.4). On group level, the change of HR-QoL at 12 months varied between -2% for cognitive functioning and +9% for emotional functioning. On individual level, 15% of all patients experienced a clinically relevant decline in HR-QoL summary score at 12 months. Older age, comorbidity burden or the reception of adjuvant chemotherapy was independently associated with a decline of HR-QoL in one of the functional subscales of EORTC-QLQ-C30 at 12 months. CONCLUSION: Only trivial changes of HR-QoL were observed after colon cancer treatment on group level, whereas on individual level, at least 1 out of 10 patients experienced a decline of HR-QoL 12 months post-surgery. It is important to consider individual differences while making a treatment decision