Search Results

You are looking at 1 - 2 of 2 items for

  • Author: Eva Culakova x
Clear All Modify Search
Full access

Jeffrey Crawford, David C. Dale, Nicole M. Kuderer, Eva Culakova, Marek S. Poniewierski, Debra Wolff and Gary H. Lyman

This study was undertaken to describe the relationship between the occurrence and timing of neutropenic events and chemotherapy treatment in a community-based population of patients with cancer. The study included 2962 patients with breast, lung, colorectal, lymphoma, and ovarian cancers from a prospective U.S. registry of patients initiating a new chemotherapy regimen. Detailed patient-, disease-, and treatment-related data, including toxicities, were captured at baseline, the beginning of each cycle, and each midcycle blood draw for up to 4 cycles of treatment. Primary outcomes included febrile neutropenia (FN), severe neutropenia without fever/infection, and relative dose intensity (RDI). Thirty-seven percent of patients were aged 65 years or older, 43.5% had an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 1 or greater, and 27% had 1 or more comorbidities. Reductions in RDI to less than 85% of standard in the first cycle were planned in 23.6% of patients, whereas primary colony-stimulating factor prophylaxis was used in 18.2%. In the first 3 cycles of treatment, 10.7% of patients experienced FN, with most of these events (58.9%) occurring in the first cycle. This first-cycle pattern was consistently observed despite wide variations in event rates by tumor type, disease stage, chemotherapy regimen and dose, and patient characteristics. Despite frequent planned reductions from standard RDI, the incidence of FN remains high in community oncology practice in the United States. Improved methods of pretreatment assessment of patient risk factors for neutropenia are needed.

Full access

Mostafa R. Mohamed, Erika Ramsdale, Kah Poh Loh, Huiwen Xu, Amita Patil, Nikesha Gilmore, Spencer Obrecht, Megan Wells, Ginah Nightingale, Katherine M. Juba, Bryan Faller, Adedayo Onitilo, Thomas Bradley, Eva Culakova, Holly Holmes and Supriya G. Mohile

Background: Polypharmacy and potentially inappropriate medications (PIMs) are prevalent in older adults with cancer, but their associations with physical function are not often studied. This study examined the associations of polypharmacy and PIMs with physical function in older adults with cancer, and determined the optimal cutoff value for the number of medications most strongly associated with physical functional impairment. Methods: This cross-sectional analysis used baseline data from a randomized study enrolling patients aged ≥70 years with advanced cancer starting a new systemic cancer treatment. We categorized PIM using 2015 American Geriatrics Society Beers Criteria. Three validated physical function measures were used to assess patient-reported impairments: activities of daily living (ADL) scale, instrumental activities of daily living (IADL) scale, and the Older Americans Resources and Services Physical Health (OARS PH) survey. Optimal cutoff value for number of medications was determined by the Youden index. Separate multivariate logistic regressions were then performed to examine associations of polypharmacy and PIMs with physical function measures. Results: Among 439 patients (mean age, 76.9 years), the Youden index identified ≥8 medications as the optimal cutoff value for polypharmacy; 43% were taking ≥8 medications and 62% were taking ≥1 PIMs. On multivariate analysis, taking ≥8 medications was associated with impairment in ADL (adjusted odds ratio [aOR], 1.64; 95% CI, 1.01–2.58) and OARS PH (aOR, 1.73; 95% CI, 1.01–2.98). PIMs were associated with impairments in IADL (aOR, 1.72; 95% CI, 1.09–2.73) and OARS PH (aOR, 1.97; 95% CI, 1.15–3.37). A cutoff of 5 medications was not associated with any of the physical function measures. Conclusions: Physical function, an important component of outcomes for older adults with cancer, is cross-sectionally associated with polypharmacy (defined as ≥8 medications) and with PIMs. Future studies should evaluate the association of polypharmacy with functional outcomes in this population in a longitudinal fashion.