scholarly journals Strategies to Improve Participation of Older Adults in Cancer Research

2020 ◽  
Vol 9 (5) ◽  
pp. 1571 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jennifer Liu ◽  
Eutiquio Gutierrez ◽  
Abhay Tiwari ◽  
Simran Padam ◽  
Daneng Li ◽  
...  

Cancer is a disease associated with aging. As the US population ages, the number of older adults with cancer is projected to dramatically increase. Despite this, older adults remain vastly underrepresented in research that sets the standards for cancer treatments and, consequently, clinicians struggle with how to interpret data from clinical trials and apply them to older adults in practice. A combination of system, clinician, and patient barriers bar opportunities for trial participation for many older patients, and strategies are needed to address these barriers at multiple fronts, five of which are offered here. This review highlights the need to (1) broaden eligibility criteria, (2) measure relevant end points, (3) expand standard trial designs, (4) increase resources (e.g., institutional support, interdisciplinary care, and telehealth), and (5) develop targeted interventions (e.g., behavioral interventions to promote patient enrollment). Implementing these solutions requires a substantial investment in engaging and collaborating with community-based practices, where the majority of older patients with cancer receive their care. Multifaceted strategies are needed to ensure that older patients with cancer, across diverse healthcare settings, receive the highest-quality, evidence-based care.

2007 ◽  
Vol 25 (14) ◽  
pp. 1824-1831 ◽  
Author(s):  
Martine Extermann ◽  
Arti Hurria

Purpose During the last decade, oncologists and geriatricians have begun to work together to integrate the principles of geriatrics into oncology care. The increasing use of a comprehensive geriatric assessment (CGA) is one example of this effort. A CGA includes an evaluation of an older individual's functional status, comorbid medical conditions, cognition, nutritional status, psychological state, and social support; and a review of the patient's medications. This article discusses recent advances on the use of a CGA in older patients with cancer. Methods In this article, we provide an update on the studies that address the domains of a geriatric assessment applied to the oncology patient, review the results of the first studies evaluating the use of a CGA in developing interventions to improve the care of older adults with cancer, and discuss future research directions. Results The evidence from recent studies demonstrates that a CGA can predict morbidity and mortality in older patients with cancer. Accumulating data show the benefits of incorporating a CGA in the evaluation of older patients with cancer. Prospective trials evaluating the utility of a CGA to guide interventions to improve the quality of cancer care in older adults are justified. Conclusion Growing evidence demonstrates that the variables examined in a CGA can predict morbidity and mortality in older patients with cancer, and uncover problems relevant to cancer care that would otherwise go unrecognized.


2019 ◽  
Vol 37 (15_suppl) ◽  
pp. 11547-11547 ◽  
Author(s):  
Deborah Assouan ◽  
Elena Paillaud ◽  
Philippe Caillet ◽  
Emmanuelle Kempf ◽  
Helene Vincent ◽  
...  

11547 Background: Among older adults with cancer, comorbidities compete with cancer as the cause of death. The objectives were to quantify the proportion and rate of cancer-specific death in older patients with cancer, and to analyze the associations between geriatric factors and cancer death. Methods: Between January 2007 and December 2014, older patients with cancer were prospectively included by the ELCAPA cohort study’s eight investigating centers. Competing risk methods were used to estimate 6-month and 3-year cancer mortality rates and to probe associations between geriatric factors and cancer death. Results: A total of 1678 patients were included (mean ± standard deviation age: 81.3 ± 5.8; women: 49%). The most common cancers were colorectal (19%), breast (17%) and urinary (15%) cancers and 49% had metastasis. After a median follow-up period of 34 months, a total of 948 deaths were observed. Of the 282 deaths in non-metastatic patients, 203 (72%; 95% confidence interval (CI): [66%-77%]) were attributable to cancer. This proportion was 92% (89–94; N = 448/498) for metastatic patients. The 6-month and 3-year cancer mortality rates was respectively 12% (9–15) and 34% (29-38) for non-metastatic tumors and 45% (41–49) and 83% (80–87) for metastatic stage tumors. At 6 months, the geriatric factors independently associated with cancer death were a dependency in activities of daily living (ADL) score ≤ 5 (adjusted subhazard ratio: 2.11 (95%CI: [1.68–2.64]), mobility impairment (Timed Get Up and Go (TGUG) test time > 20 s (1.40 [1.05–1.87]) or inability to perform the TGUG (2.41 [1.67–3.48])) and comorbidities (total Cumulative Index Rating Scale-Geriatric score ≥13) (1.59 [1.23–2.06]). At 3 years, the independently associated factors were ADL ≤ 5 (1.60, [1.34–1.91]), TGUG > 20 s (1.28, [1.04–1.59]) or inability to perform TGUG (2.02 [1.47–2.79]), and cognitive impairment (1.23 [1.01–1.50]). Conclusions: Most older adults with cancer die from this disease and not from other comorbidities. However, geriatric parameters (dependency, impaired mobility, comorbidities, and cognitive impairment) are independently associated with cancer death. These geriatric impairments should be taken into account when assessing the cancer patient’s prognosis in clinical practice. Clinical trial information: NCT02884375.


2019 ◽  
Vol 37 (15_suppl) ◽  
pp. e23020-e23020
Author(s):  
Clark DuMontier ◽  
Kah Poh Loh ◽  
Paul A Bain ◽  
Rebecca A Silliman ◽  
Gregory A. Abel ◽  
...  

e23020 Background: The terms “undertreatment” and “overtreatment” are often used to describe the management of older adults with cancer. The aim of this scoping review was to explore the explicit and implicit definitions associated with the use of these terms. Methods: We searched PubMed (NCBI), Embase (Elsevier), and CINAHL (EBSCO) for titles and abstracts that included the terms "undertreatment" or "overtreatment" (overtreat OR undertreat OR over treat OR under treat) of older adults with cancer. We included all types of articles, cancers, and treatments. We excluded studies that only included patients younger than 60 years old or studies without a defined focus on older adults. CD and KL independently reviewed a subset of included articles to assess for inter-reviewer reliability. Results: We identified 224 primary and secondary research articles that used the terms “undertreatment” (192), “overtreatment” (72), or both (45) regarding the management of older adults with cancer. Only 14 (6.3%) articles provided an explicit definition; for the remaining articles, we derived the implicit definitions from the terms’ surrounding context. There was substantial agreement between CD and KL in their interpretation of definitions of these terms (kappa 0.81). “Undertreatment” was commonly used to imply less than “standard” therapy (130 articles, 67.7%), or less than “standard” therapy that contributed to worse outcomes (62, 32.3%). Many articles did not account for the underrepresentation of older adults in trials leading to “standard” therapy, and 24 primary studies performed no or limited adjustment for geriatric domains (e.g., function) in their analyses that suggested worse survival in older adults treated with substandard therapy. “Overtreatment” was commonly used to imply cancer treatment in an older adult whose cancer would not have caused symptoms in his/her remaining lifetime (31, 43.1%), or aggressive treatment in whom the harms of treatment outweigh its benefits (41, 56.9%). Conclusions: Nearly all articles used the terms “undertreatment” and/or “overtreatment” without an explicit definition, and we identified variability and limitations in the meanings implied by these terms.


2018 ◽  
Vol 10 (1) ◽  
pp. 25-35 ◽  
Author(s):  
Beatrice J Edwards ◽  
Xiaotao Zhang ◽  
Ming Sun ◽  
Juhee Song ◽  
Peter Khalil ◽  
...  

ObjectivesA growing number of patients with cancer are older adults. We sought to identify the predictors for overall survival (OS) in older adults with solid tumour and haematological malignancies between January 2013 and December 2016.MethodsRetrospective cohort study. A comprehensive geriatric assessment was performed, with a median follow-up of 12.8 months. Analysis: univariate and multivariate Cox proportional hazards regression analysis.ResultsIn this study, among the 455 patients with last follow-up date or date of death, 152 (33.4%) died during the follow-up. The median follow-up is 12.8 months (range 0.2–51.1 months) and the median OS is 20.5 months (range 0.3–44.5 months). Among all older patients with cancer, predictors of OS included male gender, cancer stage, malnutrition, history of smoking, heavy alcohol use, frailty, weight loss, major depression, low body weight and nursing home residence. Traditional performance scores (Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) and Karnofsky Performance Scale (KPS)) were predictors of OS. Independent predictors included age >85 years and haematological malignancies. Among solid tumours (n=311) in addition to the above predictors, comorbidity, gait speed and vitamin D deficiency were associated with OS.ConclusionsWe identified specific geriatric factors associated with OS in older patients with cancer, and comparable in predictive ability to traditional performance scores such as KPS and ECOG. Prospective studies will be necessary to confirm our findings.


2015 ◽  
Vol 11 (6) ◽  
pp. 470-474 ◽  
Author(s):  
Emily J. Guerard ◽  
Allison M. Deal ◽  
Grant R. Williams ◽  
Trevor A. Jolly ◽  
Kirsten A. Nyrop ◽  
...  

The authors found that only 10% of older patients with cancer who self-reported a recent fall had appropriate medical record documentation.


Blood ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 134 (Supplement_1) ◽  
pp. 3478-3478
Author(s):  
Bindiya Patel ◽  
Suhong Luo ◽  
Tanya M. Wildes ◽  
Kristen M. Sanfilippo

Introduction: Multiple Myeloma (MM) predominantly affects older patients, and treatment in older patients is fraught with challenges due to the spectrum of aging-associated vulnerabilities present in older patients. Age-associated cumulative decline across physiological systems results in a diminished resistance to stressors, including cancer and its treatment, creating a vulnerable state known as frailty. Frailty is associated with increased risk of adverse outcomes in patients with cancer. Identification of frailty in retrospective data, including the electronic medical record, can allow for assessment of prognosis, provide input during treatment selection and facilitate control for confounding, as in comparative effectiveness research. A frailty index (FI) operationalizes frailty using an accumulation of health-related deficits (Rockwood 2007). The deficits accumulation approach to frailty is validated in many populations and settings, including in older patients with cancer receiving chemotherapy and older adults with myeloma. Routinely collected health information in the electronic medical record system may provide a standardized and feasible means of identifying cumulative deficits and generating a FI in older adults with myeloma. The objective of this study was to develop a claims-based FI in veterans with MM. Methods: From the Veterans Administration Central Cancer Registry (VACCR), we identified all patients aged 65 years and older diagnosed with MM between 1999 and 2014. For the construction of the FI using an accumulation of health-related deficits model, we followed the method described by Orkaby et al (Orkaby, J Gerontol A Biol Sci Med Sci, 2018). The FI is calculated by dividing the total number of deficits an individual has by the total number of possible variables, giving a score between 0 and 1. We included 31 deficits in a range of systems including comorbidity, functional status, cognition, mood, sensory loss, and other geriatric domains. We categorized the FI into five groups as recommended: non-frail (FI 0-0.1), pre-frail (0.11-0.20), mild frailty (0.21-0.30), moderate frailty (0.31-0.40), and severe frailty (>0.4). We used Kaplan-Meier curves to demonstrate the relationship between frailty status and mortality in patients with MM. Next, we used cox proportional hazards regression to control for the following factors in the mortality analyses: age, BMI, race, diagnosis year, MM treatment, bisphosphonate use, and statin use. Results: We identified 3807 patients aged 65 years and older diagnosed with MM. Prior to starting treatment for MM, 28.7% of the cohort was classified as non-frail, 41.3% as pre-frail, 21.6% as mildly frail, 6.6% as moderately frail, and 1.7% as severely frail. Increasing frailty status was associated with increased mortality (Figure 1). The median overall survival for non-frail veterans was 38 months, compared to those who were pre-frail (27 months), mildly frail (15 months), moderately frail (8 months), and severely frail (9 months). After controlling for the relevant variables, higher frailty score remained significantly associated with higher mortality (Table 1). Conclusions: In this study, we demonstrate a systematic method of calculating a FI using the readily available administrative and claims data from the Electronic Medical Record in veterans with MM. Frailty status was strongly associated with mortality, independent of age, race, BMI, MM treatment, and statin use. Assessment of frailty status using the readily available electronic medical records data in retrospective data allows for assessment of prognosis. Disclosures Sanfilippo: Bristol-Myers Squibb: Speakers Bureau; Pfizer: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Bayer: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; AstraZeneca: Other: Travel Expenses; NHLBI: Research Funding.


2014 ◽  
Vol 32 (24) ◽  
pp. 2587-2594 ◽  
Author(s):  
Arti Hurria ◽  
William Dale ◽  
Margaret Mooney ◽  
Julia H. Rowland ◽  
Karla V. Ballman ◽  
...  

A majority of cancer diagnoses and deaths occur in patients age ≥ 65 years. With the aging of the US population, the number of older adults with cancer will grow. Although the coming wave of older patients with cancer was anticipated in the early 1980s, when the need for more research on the cancer-aging interface was recognized, many knowledge gaps remain when it comes to treating older and/or frailer patients with cancer. Relatively little is known about the best way to balance the risks and benefits of existing cancer therapies in older patients; however, these patients continue to be underrepresented in clinical trials. Furthermore, the available clinical trials often do not include end points pertinent to the older adult population, such as preservation of function, cognition, and independence. As part of its ongoing effort to advance research in the field of geriatric oncology, the Cancer and Aging Research Group held a conference in November 2012 in collaboration with the National Cancer Institute, the National Institute on Aging, and the Alliance for Clinical Trials in Oncology. The goal was to develop recommendations and establish research guidelines for the design and implementation of therapeutic clinical trials for older and/or frail adults. The conference sought to identify knowledge gaps in cancer clinical trials for older adults and propose clinical trial designs to fill these gaps. The ultimate goal of this conference series is to develop research that will lead to evidence-based care for older and/or frail adults with cancer.


2017 ◽  
Vol 8 (1) ◽  
pp. 34-37 ◽  
Author(s):  
Xiaotao Zhang ◽  
Ming Sun ◽  
Suyu Liu ◽  
Cheuk Hong Leung ◽  
Linda Pang ◽  
...  

ObjectivesA rising number of patients with cancer are older adults (65 years of age and older), and this proportion will increase to 70% by the year 2020. Falls are a common condition in older adults. We sought to assess the prevalence and risk factors for falls in older patients with cancer.MethodsThis is a single-site, retrospective cohort study. Patients who were receiving cancer care underwent a comprehensive geriatric assessments, including cognitive, functional, nutritional, physical, falls in the prior 6 months and comorbidity assessment. Vitamin D and bone densitometry were performed.AnalysisDescriptive statistics and multivariable logistic regression.ResultsA total of 304 patients aged 65 or above were enrolled in this study. The mean age was 78.4±6.9 years. They had haematological, gastrointestinal, urological, breast, lung and gynaecological cancers. A total of 215 patients with available information about falls within the past 6 months were included for final analysis. Seventy-seven (35.8%) patients had at least one fall in the preceding 6 months. Functional impairment (p=0.048), frailty (p<0.001), dementia (p=0.021), major depression (p=0.010) and low social support (p=0.045) were significantly associated with the fall status in the univariate analysis. Multivariate logistic regression analysis identified frailty and functional impairment to be independent risk factors for falls.ConclusionsFalls are common in older patients with cancer and lead to adverse clinical outcomes. Major depression, functional impairment, frailty, dementia and low social support were risk factors for falls. Heightened awareness and targeted interventions can prevent falls in older patients with cancer.


Author(s):  
Ryan D. Nipp ◽  
Kessely Hong ◽  
Electra D. Paskett

Clinical trials are imperative for testing novel cancer therapies, advancing the science of cancer care, and determining the best treatment strategies to enhance outcomes for patients with cancer. However, barriers to clinical trial enrollment contribute to low participation in cancer clinical trials. Many factors play a role in the persistently low rates of trial participation, including financial barriers, logistical concerns, and the lack of resources for patients and clinicians to support clinical trial enrollment and retention. Furthermore, restrictive eligibility criteria often result in the exclusion of certain patient populations, which thus adds to the widening disparities seen between patients who enroll in trials and those treated in routine practice. Moreover, additional factors, such as difficulty by patients and clinicians in coping with the uncertainty inherent to clinical trial participation, contribute to low trial enrollment and represent key components of the decision-making process. Specifically, patients and clinicians may struggle to assess the risk-benefit ratio and may incorrectly estimate the probability and severity of challenges associated with clinical trial participation, thus complicating the informed consent process. Importantly, research has increasingly focused on overcoming barriers to clinical trial enrollment. A promising solution involves the use of patient navigators to help enhance clinical trial recruitment, enrollment, and retention. Although clinical trials are essential for improving and prolonging the lives of patients with cancer, barriers exist that can impede trial enrollment; yet, efforts to recognize and address these barriers and enhance trial enrollment are being investigated.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document