Screening Tool Identifies Older Adults With Cancer at Risk for Poor Outcomes
Search for other papers by Ryan D. Nipp in
Current site
Google Scholar
PubMed
Search for other papers by Leah L. Thompson in
Current site
Google Scholar
PubMed
Search for other papers by Brandon Temel in
Current site
Google Scholar
PubMed
Search for other papers by Charn-Xin Fuh in
Current site
Google Scholar
PubMed
Search for other papers by Christine Server in
Current site
Google Scholar
PubMed
Search for other papers by Paul S. Kay in
Current site
Google Scholar
PubMed
Search for other papers by Sophia Landay in
Current site
Google Scholar
PubMed
Search for other papers by Daniel E. Lage in
Current site
Google Scholar
PubMed
Search for other papers by Lara Traeger in
Current site
Google Scholar
PubMed
Search for other papers by Erin Scott in
Current site
Google Scholar
PubMed
Search for other papers by Vicki A. Jackson in
Current site
Google Scholar
PubMed
Search for other papers by Nora K. Horick in
Current site
Google Scholar
PubMed
Search for other papers by Joseph A. Greer in
Current site
Google Scholar
PubMed
Search for other papers by Areej El-Jawahri in
Current site
Google Scholar
PubMed
Search for other papers by Jennifer S. Temel in
Current site
Google Scholar
PubMed
Background: Oncologists often struggle with managing the complex issues unique to older adults with cancer, and research is needed to identify patients at risk for poor outcomes. Methods: This study enrolled patients aged ≥70 years within 8 weeks of a diagnosis of incurable gastrointestinal cancer. Patient-reported surveys were used to assess vulnerability (Vulnerable Elders Survey [scores ≥3 indicate a positive screen for vulnerability]), quality of life (QoL; EORTC Quality of Life of Cancer Patients questionnaire [higher scores indicate better QoL]), and symptoms (Edmonton Symptom Assessment System [ESAS; higher scores indicate greater symptom burden] and Geriatric Depression Scale [higher scores indicate greater depression symptoms]). Unplanned hospital visits within 90 days of enrollment and overall survival were evaluated. We used regression models to examine associations among vulnerability, QoL, symptom burden, hospitalizations, and overall survival. Results: Of 132 patients approached, 102 (77.3%) were enrolled (mean [M] ± SD age, 77.25 ± 5.75 years). Nearly half (45.1%) screened positive for vulnerability, and these patients were older (M, 79.45 vs 75.44 years; P=.001) and had more comorbid conditions (M, 2.13 vs 1.34; P=.017) compared with nonvulnerable patients. Vulnerable patients reported worse QoL across all domains (global QoL: M, 53.26 vs 66.82; P=.041; physical QoL: M, 58.95 vs 88.24; P<.001; role QoL: M, 53.99 vs 82.12; P=.001; emotional QoL: M, 73.19 vs 85.76; P=.007; cognitive QoL: M, 79.35 vs 92.73; P=.011; social QoL: M, 59.42 vs 82.42; P<.001), higher symptom burden (ESAS total: M, 31.05 vs 15.00; P<.001), and worse depression score (M, 4.74 vs 2.25; P<.001). Vulnerable patients had a higher risk of unplanned hospitalizations (hazard ratio, 2.38; 95% CI, 1.08–5.27; P=.032) and worse overall survival (hazard ratio, 2.26; 95% CI, 1.14–4.48; P=.020). Conclusions: Older adults with cancer who screen positive as vulnerable experience a higher symptom burden, greater healthcare use, and worse survival. Screening tools to identify vulnerable patients should be integrated into practice to guide clinical care.
Submitted May 5, 2019; accepted for publication September 3, 2019.
Previous presentation: Presented as an abstract at the 2017 ASCO Annual Meeting; June 2–6, 2017; Chicago, Illinois. Abstract 10040.
Author contributions: Study concept and design: All authors. Data acquisition/analysis and interpretation: All authors. Manuscript preparation/critical revision for important intellectual content: All authors. Final approval: All authors.
Disclosures: Dr. Greer has disclosed that he receives grant/research support from and is a scientific advisor for Gaido Health/BCG Digital Ventures. The remaining authors have disclosed that they not received any financial consideration from any person or organization to support the preparation, analysis, results, or discussion of this article.
Funding: Research reported in this publication was supported by NCI of the National Institutes of Health under award number K24 CA181253 (Temel).
Disclaimer: The content is solely the responsibility of the authors and does not necessarily represent the official views of the NIH.
© 2019-2024 National Comprehensive Cancer Network