Outcomes in studies regarding older patients with prostate cancer: A systematic review

INTRODUCTION: Older patients are often deemed ineligible for clinical research, and many frequently-used endpoints and outcome measures are not as relevant for older patients for younger ones. This systematic review aimed to present an overview of outcomes used in clinical research regarding patients over the age of 65 years with prostate cancer. MATERIALS AND METHODS: PubMed and Embase were systematically searched to identify studies on prostate cancer (treatment) in patients aged ≥65 between 2016 and 2023. Data on title, study design, number of participants and age, stage of disease, treatment, and investigated outcomes were synthesized and descriptively analyzed. RESULTS: Sixty-eight studies were included. Of these most included patients over 65 years, while others used a higher age. Overall, 39 articles (57.3%) reported on survival-related outcomes, 22 (32.4%) reported on progression of disease and 38 (55.9%) used toxicity or adverse events as an outcome measure. Health-related quality of life and functional outcomes were investigated in 29.4%, and cognition in two studies. The most frequently investigated survival-related outcomes were overall and cancer-specific survival (51.3%); however, 38.5% only studied overall survival. DISCUSSION: The main focus of studies included in this review remains survival and disease progression. There is limited attention for health-related quality of life and functional status, although older patients often prioritize the latter. Future research should incorporate outcome measures tailored to the aged population to improve care for older patients with prostate cancer

Older patients' experiences with and attitudes towards an oncogeriatric pathway: A qualitative study

INTRODUCTION: To tailor treatment for older patients with cancer, an oncogeriatric care pathway has been developed in the Leiden University Medical Center. In this care pathway a geriatric assessment is performed and preferences concerning cancer treatment options are discussed. This study aimed to explore patient experiences with and attitudes towards this pathway.MATERIALS AND METHODS: A qualitative study was performed using an exploratory descriptive approach. Individual face-to-face semi-structured interviews were conducted with older patients (≥70 years) who had followed the oncogeriatric care pathway in the six months prior to the interview. The interviews were audio-recorded and transcribed verbatim. The transcripts were analyzed inductively using thematic analysis.RESULTS: After interviews with 14 patients with a median age of 80 years, three main themes were identified. (1) Patients' positive experiences with the oncogeriatric pathway: Patients appreciated the attitudes of the healthcare professionals and felt heard and understood. (2) Unmet information needs about the oncogeriatric care pathway: Patients experienced a lack of information about the aim and process. (3) Incomplete information for decision-making: Most patients were satisfied with decision-making process. However, treatment decisions had often been made before oncogeriatric consultation. No explicit naming and explaining of different available treatment options had been provided, nor had risk of physical or cognitive decline during and after treatment been addressed.DISCUSSION: Older patients had predominately positive attitudes towards the oncogeriatric care pathway. Most patients were satisfied with the treatment decision. Providing information on the aim and process of the care pathway, available treatment options, and treatment-related risks of cognitive and physical decline may further improve the oncogeriatric care pathway and the decision-making process.</p

A Prospective Comparison of Younger and Older Patients' Preferences for Adjuvant Chemotherapy and Hormonal Therapy in Early Breast Cancer

AbstractBackgroundIt is unknown what minimal benefit in disease-free survival older patients with breast cancer require from adjuvant systemic therapy, and if this differs from that required by younger patients. We prospectively examined patients' preferences for adjuvant chemotherapy (aCT) and adjuvant hormonal therapy (aHT), factors related to minimally-required benefit, and patients' self-reported motivations.Patients and MethodsFifty-two younger (40-64 years) and 29 older (≥ 65 years) women with a first primary, invasive tumor were interviewed post-surgery, prior to receiving aCT/aHT recommendation.ResultsThe proportions of younger versus older participants who would accept, refuse, or were undecided about therapy were 92% versus 62%, 4% versus 24%, and 4% versus 14% for aCT, and 92% versus 59%, 8% versus 17%, and 0% versus 24% for aHT. The proportion of older participants who would refuse rather than accept aCT was larger than that of younger participants (P = .005). No significant difference was found for aHT (P = .12). Younger and older participants' minimally-required benefit, in terms of additional 10-year disease-free survival, to accept aCT (median, 5% vs. 4%; P = .13) or aHT (median, 10% vs. 8%; P = .15) did not differ. Being single/divorced/widowed (odds ratio [OR], 0.16; P = .005), presence of geriatric condition (inability to perform daily activities, incontinence, severe sensory impairment, depression, polypharmacy, difficulties with walking; OR, 0.27; P = .047), and having a preference to make the treatment decision either alone or after considering the clinician's opinion (active role; OR, 0.15; P = .012) were independently related to requiring larger benefits from aCT. The most frequent motivations for/against therapy included the wish to survive/avoid recurrence, clinician's recommendation, side effects, and treatment duration (only aHT).ConclusionWhereas older participants were less willing to accept aCT than younger participants, no significant difference was found for aHT. However, a majority of older participants would still accept both therapies. Adjuvant systemic therapy should be discussed with eligible patients regardless of age

Older patients' experiences with and attitudes towards an oncogeriatric pathway: A qualitative study

INTRODUCTION: To tailor treatment for older patients with cancer, an oncogeriatric care pathway has been developed in the Leiden University Medical Center. In this care pathway a geriatric assessment is performed and preferences concerning cancer treatment options are discussed. This study aimed to explore patient experiences with and attitudes towards this pathway.MATERIALS AND METHODS: A qualitative study was performed using an exploratory descriptive approach. Individual face-to-face semi-structured interviews were conducted with older patients (≥70 years) who had followed the oncogeriatric care pathway in the six months prior to the interview. The interviews were audio-recorded and transcribed verbatim. The transcripts were analyzed inductively using thematic analysis.RESULTS: After interviews with 14 patients with a median age of 80 years, three main themes were identified. (1) Patients' positive experiences with the oncogeriatric pathway: Patients appreciated the attitudes of the healthcare professionals and felt heard and understood. (2) Unmet information needs about the oncogeriatric care pathway: Patients experienced a lack of information about the aim and process. (3) Incomplete information for decision-making: Most patients were satisfied with decision-making process. However, treatment decisions had often been made before oncogeriatric consultation. No explicit naming and explaining of different available treatment options had been provided, nor had risk of physical or cognitive decline during and after treatment been addressed.DISCUSSION: Older patients had predominately positive attitudes towards the oncogeriatric care pathway. Most patients were satisfied with the treatment decision. Providing information on the aim and process of the care pathway, available treatment options, and treatment-related risks of cognitive and physical decline may further improve the oncogeriatric care pathway and the decision-making process.</p

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

Reliability and agreement of radiological and pathological tumor size in patients with multiple endocrine neoplasia type 1-related pancreatic neuroendocrine tumors: results from a population-based cohort

Background: Pancreatic neuroendocrine tumors (pNETs) have a high prevalence in patients with multiple endocrine neoplasia type 1 (MEN1) and are the leading cause of death. Tumor size is still regarded as the main prognostic factor and therefore used for surgical decision-making. We assessed reliability and agreement of radiological and pathological tumor size in a population-based cohort of patients with MEN1-related pNETs. Methods: Patients were selected from the Dutch MEN1 database if they had undergone a resection for a pNET between 2003 and 2018. Radiological (MRI, CT, and endoscopic ultrasonography [EUS]) and pathological tumor size were collected from patient records. Measures of agreement (Bland-Altman plots with limits of agreement [LoA] and absolute agreement) and reliability (intraclass correlation coefficients [ICC] and unweighted kappa) were calculated for continuous and categorized (= 2 cm) pNET size. Results: In 73 included patients, the median radiological and pathological tumor sizes measured were 22 (3-160) and 21 (4-200) mm, respectively. Mean bias between radiological and pathological tumor size was -0.2 mm and LoA ranged from -12.9 to 12.6 mm. For the subgroups of MRI, CT, and EUS, LoA of radiological and pathological tumor size ranged from -9.6 to 10.9, -15.9 to 15.8, and -13.9 to 11.0, respectively. ICCs for the overall cohort, MRI, CT, and EUS were 0.80, 0.86, 0.75, and 0.76, respectively. Based on the 2 cm criterion, agreement was 81.5%; hence, 12 patients (18.5%) were classified differently between imaging and pathology. Absolute agreement and kappa values of MRI, CT, and EUS were 88.6, 85.7, and 75.0%, and 0.77, 0.71, and 0.50, respectively. Conclusion: Within a population-based cohort, MEN1-related pNET size was not systematically over- or underestimated on preoperative imaging. Based on agreement and reliability measures, MRI is the preferred imaging modality.Surgical oncolog

Geriatric Oncology: From Research to Clinical Practice

The incidence of cancer in older adults is strongly increasing due to the ageing of the population [...

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