Low preoperative skeletal muscle density is predictive for negative postoperative outcomes in older women with ovarian cancer

Objective. To determine the predictive value of lumbar skeletal muscle mass and density for postoperative outcomes in older women with advanced stage ovarian cancer.Methods. A multicenter, retrospective cohort study was performed in women >= 70 years old receiving surgery for primary, advanced stage ovarian cancer. Skeletal muscle mass and density were assessed in axial CT slices on level L3. Low skeletal muscle mass was defined as skeletal muscle index = 2).Conclusion. Low skeletal muscle density, as a proxy of muscle quality, is associated with poor postoperative outcomes in older patients with advanced stage ovarian cancer. These findings can contribute to postoperative risk assessment and clinical decision making. (C) 2021 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier Inc.Cervix cance

Differences in treatment and survival of older patients with operable breast cancer between the United Kingdom and the Netherlands – a comparison of two national prospective longitudinal multi-centre cohort studies

Background Previous studies have shown that survival outcomes for older patients with breast cancer vary substantially across Europe, with worse survival reported in the United Kingdom. It has been hypothesised that these differences in survival outcomes could be related to treatment variation. Objectives We aimed to compare patient and tumour characteristics, treatment selection and survival outcomes between two large prospective cohorts of older patients with operable breast cancer from the United Kingdom (UK) and The Netherlands. Methods Women diagnosed with operable breast cancer aged ≥70 years were included. A baseline comprehensive geriatric assessment was performed in both cohorts, with data collected on age, comorbidities, cognition, nutritional and functional status. Baseline tumour characteristics and treatment type were collected. Univariable and multivariable Cox regression models were used to compare overall survival between the cohorts. Results 3262 patients from the UK Age Gap cohort and 618 patients from the Dutch Climb cohort were included, with median ages of 77.0 (IQR: 72.0–81.0) and 75.0 (IQR: 72.0–81.0) years, respectively. The cohorts were generally comparable, with slight differences in rates of comorbidity and frailty. Median follow-up for overall survival was 4.1 years (IQR 2.9–5.4) in Age Gap and 4.3 years (IQR 2.9–5.5) in Climb. In Age Gap, both the rates of primary endocrine therapy and adjuvant hormonal therapy after surgery were approximately twice those in Climb (16.6% versus 7.3%, p < 0.001 for primary endocrine therapy, and 62.2% versus 38.8%, p < 0.001 for adjuvant hormonal therapy). There was no evidence of a difference in overall survival between the cohorts (adjusted HR 0.94, 95% CI 0.74–1.17, p = 0.568). Conclusions In contrast to previous studies, this comparison of two large national prospective longitudinal multi-centre cohort studies demonstrated comparable survival outcomes between older patients with breast cancer treated in the UK and The Netherlands, despite differences in treatment allocation

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

What Defines Quality of Life for Older Patients Diagnosed with Cancer? A Qualitative Study

The treatment of cancer can have a significant impact on quality of life in older patients and this needs to be taken into account in decision making. However, quality of life can consist of many different components with varying importance between individuals. We set out to assess how older patients with cancer define quality of life and the components that are most significant to them. This was a single-centre, qualitative interview study. Patients aged 70 years or older with cancer were asked to answer open-ended questions: What makes life worthwhile? What does quality of life mean to you? What could affect your quality of life? Subsequently, they were asked to choose the five most important determinants of quality of life from a predefined list: cognition, contact with family or with community, independence, staying in your own home, helping others, having enough energy, emotional well-being, life satisfaction, religion and leisure activities. Afterwards, answers to the open-ended questions were independently categorized by two authors. The proportion of patients mentioning each category in the open-ended questions were compared to the predefined questions. Overall, 63 patients (median age 76 years) were included. When asked, “What makes life worthwhile?”, patients identified social functioning (86%) most frequently. Moreover, to define quality of life, patients most frequently mentioned categories in the domains of physical functioning (70%) and physical health (48%). Maintaining cognition was mentioned in 17% of the open-ended questions and it was the most commonly chosen option from the list of determinants (72% of respondents). In conclusion, physical functioning, social functioning, physical health and cognition are important components in quality of life. When discussing treatment options, the impact of treatment on these aspects should be taken into consideration

Early stage breast cancer treatment and outcome of older patients treated in an oncogeriatric care and a standard care setting: an international comparison

Introduction: Since older patients with breast cancer are underrepresented in clinical trials, an oncogeriatric approach is advocated to guide treatment decisions. However, the effect on outcomes is unclear. The aim of this study was to compare treatments and outcomes between patients treated in an oncogeriatric and a standard care setting. Methods: Patients aged ≥ 70 years with early stage breast cancer were included. The oncogeriatric cohort comprised unselected patients from the Moffitt Cancer Center, and the standard cohort patients from a Dutch population-based cohort. Cox models were used to characterize the influence of care setting on recurrence risk and overall mortality. Results: Overall, 268 patients were included in the oncogeriatric and 1932 patients in the standard cohort. Patients in the oncogeriatric cohort were slightly younger, had more comorbidity, and received more adjuvant endocrine therapy and chemotherapy. Oncogeriatric care was associated with a lower risk of recurrence, which remained significant after adjustment for patient and tumour characteristics [hazard ratio (HR) 0.66, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.44–0.99]. Oncogeriatric care was also associated with a lower overall mortality, which also remained significant after adjustment for patient and tumour characteristics (HR 0.69, 95% CI 0.55–0.87). Conclusions: Patients treated in the oncogeriatric care setting had a lower risk of recurrence, which may be explained by more systemic treatment. Overall mortality was also lower, but other explanations besides care setting could not be ruled out as the cohorts had different patient profiles. Future studies need to clarify the impact of an oncogeriatric approach on outcomes

Nationwide trends in chemotherapy use and survival of elderly patients with metastatic pancreatic cancer

Despite an aging population and underrepresentation of elderly patients in clinical trials, studies on elderly patients with metastatic pancreatic cancer are scarce. This study investigated the use of chemotherapy and survival in elderly patients with metastatic pancreatic cancer. From the Netherlands Cancer Registry, all 9407 patients diagnosed with primary metastatic pancreatic adenocarcinoma in 2005-2013 were selected to investigate chemotherapy use and overall survival (OS), using Kaplan-Meier and Cox proportional hazard regression analyses. Over time, chemotherapy use increased in all age groups ( <70 years: from 26 to 43%, 70-74 years: 14 to 25%, 75-79 years: 5 to 13%, all P < 0.001, and ≥80 years: 2 to 3% P = 0.56). Median age of 2,180 patients who received chemotherapy was 63 years (range 21-86 years, 1.6% was ≥80 years). In chemotherapy-treated patients, with rising age ( <70, 70-74, 75-79, ≥80 years), microscopic tumor verification occurred less frequently (91-88-87-77%, respectively, P = 0.009) and OS diminished (median 25-26-19-16 weeks, P = 0.003). After adjustment for confounding factors, worse survival of treated patients ≥75 years persisted. Despite limited chemotherapy use in elderly age, suggestive of strong selection, elderly patients (≥75 years) who received chemotherapy for metastatic pancreatic cancer exhibited a worse survival compared to younger patients receiving chemotherap

Predictive Biomarkers for Outcomes of Immune Checkpoint Inhibitors (ICIs) in Melanoma: A Systematic Review

Immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) have strongly improved the survival of melanoma patients. However, as durable response to ICIs are only seen in a minority, there is an unmet need to identify biomarkers that predict response. Therefore, we provide a systematic review that evaluates all biomarkers studied in association with outcomes of melanoma patients receiving ICIs. We searched Pubmed, COCHRANE Library, Embase, Emcare, and Web of Science for relevant articles that were published before June 2020 and studied blood, tumor, or fecal biomarkers that predicted response or survival in melanoma patients treated with ICIs. Of the 2536 identified reports, 177 were included in our review. Risk of bias was high in 40%, moderate in 50% and low in 10% of all studies. Biomarkers that correlated with response were myeloid-derived suppressor cells (MDSCs), circulating tumor cells (CTCs), CD8+ memory T-cells, T-cell receptor (TCR) diversity, tumor-infiltrating lymphocytes (TILs), gene expression profiling (GEP), and a favorable gut microbiome. This review shows that biomarkers for ICIs in melanoma patients are widely studied, but heterogeneity between studies is high, average sample sizes are low, and validation is often lacking. Future studies are needed to further investigate the predictive utility of some promising candidate biomarkers

Real-life safety of PD-1 and PD-L1 inhibitors in older patients with cancer: An observational study

Introduction: To compare the real-world safety profile of programmed cell death-1 (PD-1) and programmed cell death ligand-1 (PD-L1) inhibitors between younger and older patients. Materials and Methods: All patients receiving pembrolizumab, nivolumab, atezolizumab or durvalumab between September 2016 and September 2019 at Haga Teaching Hospital, The Hague, The Netherlands were included in this retrospective study. Immune-related adverse drug reactions (irADRs) were manually retrieved from the electronic patient files. The cumulative incidence of irADRs were compared between younger (<65 years) and older (≥65 years) patients using a Pearsons Chi-square test. Results: We identified 217 patients who were treated with at least one dose of PD-(L)1 inhibitor. 58% were 65 years or older at the start of immunotherapy. 183 patients (84.3%) received monotherapy PD-(L)1 inhibitors and 34 (15.7%) received chemo-immunotherapy. A total of 278 irADRs were registered. Cutaneous irADRs (53.9%), thyroid gland disorders (20.3%), and non-infectious diarrhoea/colitis (17.5%) were the most frequently reported irADRs. The majority of the irADRs were mild to moderate and no fatal irADRs were observed. 61 (21.9%) of the irADRs needed systemic treatment, of which 19 (6.8%) required treatment with corticosteroids. 18 irADRs (6.5%) were severe and resulted in hospitalisation. The cumulative incidence of cutaneous irADRs was different between the age groups: 45.7% of the patients <65 years and in 60.0% of the patients ≥65 years (p = 0.036). No statistical difference was found in the cumulative incidence of other irADRs between the two age groups. Discussion: Advanced age is not associated with immune-related adverse drug reactions of PD-1 and PD-L1 inhibitors

Deciding about (neo-)adjuvant rectal and breast cancer treatment: Missed opportunities for shared decision making

The first step in shared decision making (SDM) is creating choice awareness. This is particularly relevant in consultations concerning preference-sensitive treatment decisions, e.g. those addressing (neo-)adjuvant therapy. Awareness can be achieved by explicitly stating, as the 'reason for encounter', that a treatment decision needs to be made. It is unknown whether oncologists express such reason for encounter. This study aims to establish: 1) if 'making a treatment decision' is stated as a reason for the encounter and if not, what other reason for encounter is provided; and 2) whether mentioning that a treatment decision needs to be made is associated with enhanced patient involvement in decision making. Consecutive first consultations with: 1) radiation oncologists and rectal cancer patients; or 2) medical oncologists and breast cancer patients, facing a preference-sensitive treatment decision, were audiotaped. The tapes were transcribed and coded using an instrument developed for the study. Oncologists' involvement of patients in decision making was coded using the OPTION-scale. Oncologists (N = 33) gave a reason for encounter in 70/100 consultations, usually (N = 52/70, 74%) at the start of the consultation. The reason for encounter stated was 'making a treatment decision' in 3/100 consultations, and 'explaining treatment details' in 44/100 consultations. The option of foregoing adjuvant treatment was not explicitly presented in any consultation. Oncologist' involvement of patients in decision making was below baseline (Md OPTION-score = 10). Given the small number of consultations in which the need to make a treatment decision was stated, we could not investigate the impact thereof on patient involvement. This study suggests that oncologists rarely express that a treatment decision needs to be made in consultations concerning preference-sensitive treatment decisions. Therefore, patients might not realize that foregoing (neo-)adjuvant treatment is a viable choice. Oncologists miss a crucial opportunity to facilitate SD