Cindy Kenis

International Society of Geriatric Oncology Consensus on Geriatric Assessment in Older Patients With Cancer

PURPOSE To update the International Society of Geriatric Oncology (SIOG) 2005 recommendations on geriatric assessment (GA) in older patients with cancer. METHODS SIOG composed a panel with expertise in geriatric oncology to develop consensus statements after literature review of key evidence on the following topics: rationale for performing GA; findings from a GA performed in geriatric oncology patients; ability of GA to predict oncology treatment–related complications; association between GA findings and overall survival (OS); impact of GA findings on oncology treatment decisions; composition of a GA, including domains and tools; and methods for implementing GA in clinical care. RESULTS GA can be valuable in oncology practice for following reasons: detection of impairment not identified in routine history or physical examination, ability to predict severe treatment-related toxicity, ability to predict OS in a variety of tumors and treatment settings, and ability to influence treatment choice and intensity. The panel recommended that the following domains be evaluated in a GA: functional status, comorbidity, cognition, mental health status, fatigue, social status and support, nutrition, and presence of geriatric syndromes. Although several combinations of tools and various models are available for implementation of GA in oncology practice, the expert panel could not endorse one over another. CONCLUSION There is mounting data regarding the utility of GA in oncology practice; however, additional research is needed to continue to strengthen the evidence base.

Screening tools for multidimensional health problems warranting a geriatric assessment in older cancer patients: an update on SIOG recommendations†

BACKGROUND Screening tools are proposed to identify those older cancer patients in need of geriatric assessment (GA) and multidisciplinary approach. We aimed to update the International Society of Geriatric Oncology (SIOG) 2005 recommendations on the use of screening tools. MATERIALS AND METHODS SIOG composed a task group to review, interpret and discuss evidence on the use of screening tools in older cancer patients. A systematic review was carried out and discussed by an expert panel, leading to a consensus statement on their use. RESULTS Forty-four studies reporting on the use of 17 different screening tools in older cancer patients were identified. The tools most studied in older cancer patients are G8, Flemish version of the Triage Risk Screening Tool (fTRST) and Vulnerable Elders Survey-13 (VES-13). Across all studies, the highest sensitivity was observed for: G8, fTRST, Oncogeriatric screen, Study of Osteoporotic Fractures, Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group-Performance Status, Senior Adult Oncology Program (SAOP) 2 screening and Gerhematolim. In 11 direct comparisons for detecting problems on a full GA, the G8 was more or equally sensitive than other instruments in all six comparisons, whereas results were mixed for the VES-13 in seven comparisons. In addition, different tools have demonstrated associations with outcome measures, including G8 and VES-13. CONCLUSIONS Screening tools do not replace GA but are recommended in a busy practice in order to identify those patients in need of full GA. If abnormal, screening should be followed by GA and guided multidisciplinary interventions. Several tools are available with different performance for various parameters (including sensitivity for addressing the need for further GA). Further research should focus on the ability of screening tools to build clinical pathways and to predict different outcome parameters.

RELEVANCE OF A SYSTEMATIC GERIATRIC SCREENING AND ASSESSMENT IN OLDER PATIENTS WITH CANCER RESULTS OF A PROSPECTIVE MULTICENTRIC STUDY

BACKGROUND To evaluate the large-scale feasibility and usefulness of geriatric screening and assessment in clinical oncology practice by assessing the impact on the detection of unknown geriatric problems, geriatric interventions and treatment decisions. PATIENTS AND METHODS Eligible patients who had a malignant tumour were ≥70 years old and treatment decision had to be made. Patients were screened using G8; if abnormal (score ≤14/17) followed by Comprehensive Geriatric Assessment (CGA). The assessment results were communicated to the treating physician using a predefined questionnaire to assess the topics mentioned above. RESULTS One thousand nine hundred and sixty-seven patients were included in 10 hospitals. Of these patients, 70.7% had an abnormal G8 score warranting a CGA. Physicians were aware of the assessment results at the time of treatment decision in two-thirds of the patients (n = 1115; 61.3%). The assessment detected unknown geriatric problems in 51.2% of patients. When the physician was aware of the assessment results at the time of decision making, geriatric interventions were planned in 286 patients (25.7%) and the treatment decision was influenced in 282 patients (25.3%). CONCLUSION Geriatric screening and assessment in older patients with cancer is feasible at large scale and has a significant impact on the detection of unknown geriatric problems, leading to geriatric interventions and adapted treatment.

Performance of Two Geriatric Screening Tools in Older Patients With Cancer

PURPOSE To compare the diagnostic characteristics of two geriatric screening tools (G8 and Flemish version of the Triage Risk Screening Tool [fTRST]) to identify patients with a geriatric risk profile and to evaluate their prognostic value for functional decline and overall survival (OS). PATIENTS AND METHODS Patients ≥ 70 years old with a malignant tumor were included if a new cancer event occurred requiring treatment decision. Geriatric screening with G8 and fTRST (cutoff ≥ 1 [fTRST (1)] and ≥ 2 [fTRST (2)] evaluated) was performed in all patients, as well as a geriatric assessment (GA) evaluating social situation, functionality (activities of daily living [ADL] + instrumental activities of daily living [IADL]), cognition, depression, and nutrition. Functionality was re-evaluated 2 to 3 months after cancer treatment decision, and death rate was followed. Functional decline and OS were evaluated in relation to normal versus abnormal score on both screening tools. RESULTS Nine hundred thirty-seven patients were included (October 2009 to July 2011). G8 and fTRST (1) showed high sensitivity (86.5% to 91.3%) and moderate negative predictive value (61.3% to 63.4%) to detect patients with a geriatric risk profile. G8 and fTRST (1) were strongly prognostic for functional decline on ADL and IADL, and G8, fTRST (1), and fTRST (2) were prognostic for OS (all P < .001). G8 had the strongest prognostic value for OS (hazard ratio for G8 normal v abnormal, 0.38; 95% CI, 0.27 to 0.52). CONCLUSION Both geriatric screening tools, G8 and fTRST, are simple and useful instruments in older patients with cancer for identifying patients with a geriatric risk profile and have a strong prognostic value for functional decline and OS.

The influence of clinical assessment (including age) and geriatric assessment on treatment decisions in older patients with cancer

OBJECTIVES The aim of this prospective study in older patients with cancer was to evaluate how clinical assessment (including age) determines the physicians treatment decisions, and how geriatric assessment (GA) further influences these decisions. PATIENTS AND METHODS Patients aged ≥70years old with cancer were included if a new therapy was considered. All patients underwent a GA and results were communicated to the treating physician. After the final treatment decision, a predefined questionnaire was completed by the physician. RESULTS In total, 937 patients with median age of 76years old were included. A total of 902 (96.3%) questionnaires were completed by the treating physicians. In 381/902 patients (42.2%) clinical assessment led to a different treatment decision compared to younger patients without co-morbidities. This difference was most prominent for chemotherapy/targeted therapy decisions. In 505/902 cases (56%) the treating physician consulted GA results before the final treatment decision. In these patients, the treatment decision was influenced by clinical assessment in 44.2%. In 31/505 patients (6.1%) the GA further influenced treatment, mostly concerning chemotherapy/targeted therapy. In eight patients GA influenced the physician to choose a more aggressive chemotherapy. CONCLUSIONS Physicians use different treatment regimens in older versus younger patients, based on clinical assessment, including age. GA results further influence treatment decisions in a minority of patients and may trigger the use of less aggressive as well as more aggressive treatments. GA information is not always utilized by oncologists, indicating the need for better education and sensitization.

Development of the European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer quality of life questionnaire module for older people with cancer: The EORTC QLQ-ELD15

BACKGROUND AND AIM There is a lack of instruments that focus on the specific health-related quality of life (HRQOL) issues that affect older people with cancer. The aim of this study was to develop a HRQOL questionnaire module to supplement the European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) core questionnaire, the EORTC QLQ-C30 for older (>70years) patients with cancer. METHODS Phases 1-3 were conducted in seven countries following modified EORTC Quality of Life Group guidelines for module development. Phase 1: potentially relevant issues were identified by a systematic literature review, a questionnaire survey of 17 multi-disciplinary health professionals and two rounds of qualitative interviews. The first round included 9 patients aged >70. The second round was a comparative series of interviews with 49 patients >70years with a range of cancer diagnoses and 40 patients aged 50-69years matched for gender and disease site. In Phase 2 the issues were formulated into a long provisional item list. This was administered in Phase 3 together with the QLQ-C30 to two further groups of cancer patients aged >70 (n=97) or 50-69years (n=85) to determine the importance, relevance and acceptability of each item. Redundant and duplicate items were removed; issues specific to the older group were selected for the final questionnaire. RESULTS In Phase 1, 75 issues were identified. These were reduced in Phase 2 to create a 45 item provisional list. Phase 3 testing of the provisional list led to the selection of 15 items with good range of response, high scores of importance and relevance in the older patients. This resulted in the EORTC QLQ-ELD15, containing five conceptually coherent scales (functional independence, relationships with family and friends, worries about the future, autonomy and burden of illness). CONCLUSION The EORTC QLQ-ELD15 in combination with the EORTC QLQ-C30 is ready for large-scale validation studies, and will assess HRQOL issues of most relevance and concern for older people with cancer across a wide range of cancer sites and treatment stages.

The impact of frailty on postoperative outcomes in individuals aged 65 and over undergoing elective surgery for colorectal cancer: A systematic review

Colorectal cancer surgery is frequently performed in the older population. Many older persons have less physiological reserves and are thus more susceptible to adverse postoperative outcomes. Therefore, it seems important to distinguish the fit patients from the more vulnerable or frail. The aim of this review is to examine the evidence regarding the impact of frailty on postoperative outcomes in older patients undergoing surgery for colorectal cancer. A systematic literature search of Medline Ovid was performed focusing on studies that examined the impact of frailty on postoperative outcomes after colorectal surgery in older people aged ≥65years. The methodological quality of the studies was evaluated using the MINORS quality assessment. Five articles, involving four studies and 486 participants in total, were included. Regardless of varying definitions of frailty and postoperative outcomes, the frail patients had less favourable outcomes in all of the studies. Compared to the non-frail group, the frail group had a higher risk of developing moderate to severe postoperative complications, had longer hospital stays, higher readmission rates, and decreased long-term survival rates. The results of this systematic review suggest the importance of assessing frailty in older persons scheduled for colorectal surgery because frailty is associated with a greater risk of postoperative adverse outcomes. We conclude that, although there is no consensus on the definition of frailty, assessing frailty in colorectal oncology seems important to determine operative risks and benefits and to guide perioperative management.

Circulating MicroRNAs as easy-to-measure aging biomarkers in older breast cancer patients: correlation with chronological age but not with fitness/frailty status.

Circulating microRNAs (miRNAs) hold great promise as easily accessible biomarkers for diverse (patho)physiological processes, including aging. We have compared miRNA expression profiles in cell-free blood from older versus young breast cancer patients, in order to identify “aging miRNAs” that can be used in the future to monitor the impact of chemotherapy on the patient’s biological age. First, we assessed 175 miRNAs that may possibly be present in serum/plasma in an exploratory screening in 10 young and 10 older patients. The top-15 ranking miRNAs showing differential expression between young and older subjects were further investigated in an independent cohort consisting of another 10 young and 20 older subjects. Plasma levels of miR-20a-3p, miR-30b-5p, miR106b, miR191 and miR-301a were confirmed to show significant age-related decreases (all p≤0.004). The remaining miRNAs included in the validation study (miR-21, miR-210, miR-320b, miR-378, miR-423-5p, let-7d, miR-140-5p, miR-200c, miR-374a, miR376a) all showed similar trends as observed in the exploratory screening but these differences did not reach statistical significance. Interestingly, the age-associated miRNAs did not show differential expression between fit/healthy and non-fit/frail subjects within the older breast cancer cohort of the validation study and thus merit further investigation as true aging markers that not merely reflect frailty.

19 The Flemish version of the Triage Risk Screening Tool (TRST): a multidimensional short screening tool for the assessment of elderly patients

The mean total cost per patient for the medication prescribed during radiotherapy (concomitant and supportive care medications), was €612 for the elderly and €992 for the younger patients. The cost for supportive care for the elderly and younger patients was €358 and €647 respectively. When costs were analyzed on the basis of the type of treatment (palliative or radical), the same pattern was noted. More specifically, the mean total medication cost per person for the younger group of patients undergoing radical radiotherapy was €1005, as compared to €976 for the elderly. The mean total medication cost per person for the younger and elderly patients undergoing palliative radiotherapy, was €742 and €423 respectively. Conclusions: Our study showed that elderly patients had a higher co morbidity rate than the younger patients, being prescribed a greater amount of medications for the management of co morbidities. During radiotherapy the need of medication for supportive care was higher for the younger group of patients, resulting in a higher mean total medication cost per patient. The mean total prescription cost per patient was markedly higher for the younger patients undergoing palliative radiotherapy (as compared to the elderly patients undergoing the same type of therapy). Finally, the cost of supportive care medications seems to be more expensive than the concomitant prescribed regiments for both groups.

The impact of adjuvant chemotherapy in older breast cancer patients on clinical and biological aging parameters

Purpose This prospective observational study aimed to evaluate the impact of adjuvant chemotherapy on biological and clinical markers of aging and frailty. Methods Women ≥ 70 years old with early breast cancer were enrolled after surgery and assigned to a chemotherapy (Docetaxel and Cyclophosphamide) group (CTG, n=57) or control group (CG, n=52) depending on their planned adjuvant treatment. Full geriatric assessment (GA) and Quality of Life (QoL) were evaluated at inclusion (T0), after 3 months (T1) and at 1 year (T2). Blood samples were collected to measure leukocyte telomere length (LTL), levels of interleukin-6 (IL-6) and other circulating markers potentially informative for aging and frailty: Interleukin-10 (IL-10), Tumor Necrosis Factor Alpha (TNF-α), Insulin-like Growth Factor 1 (IGF-1), Monocyte Chemotactic Protein 1 (MCP-1) and Regulated on Activation, Normal T cell Expressed and Secreted (RANTES). Results LTL decreased significantly but comparably in both groups, whereas IL-6 was unchanged at T2. However, IL-10, TNF-α, IGF-1 and MCP-1 suggested a minor biological aging effect of chemotherapy. Clinical frailty and QoL decreased at T1 in the CTG, but recovered at T2, while remaining stable in the CG. Conclusion Chemotherapy (TC) is unlikely to amplify clinical aging or induce frailty at 1 year. Accordingly, there is no impact on the most established aging biomarkers (LTL, IL-6).