Practical Assessment and Management of Vulnerabilities in Older Patients Receiving Chemotherapy: ASCO Guideline for Geriatric Oncology Summary.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT:
SUBMITTER: Mohile SG
PROVIDER: S-EPMC6041128 | biostudies-literature | 2018 Jul
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Publications
Practical Assessment and Management of Vulnerabilities in Older Patients Receiving Chemotherapy: ASCO Guideline for Geriatric Oncology Summary.
Mohile Supriya G SG Dale William W Somerfield Mark R MR Hurria Arti A
Journal of oncology practice 20180622 7
Similar Datasets
Project description:Purpose To provide guidance regarding the practical assessment and management of vulnerabilities in older patients undergoing chemotherapy. Methods An Expert Panel was convened to develop clinical practice guideline recommendations based on a systematic review of the medical literature. Results A total of 68 studies met eligibility criteria and form the evidentiary basis for the recommendations. Recommendations In patients ? 65 years receiving chemotherapy, geriatric assessment (GA) should be used to identify vulnerabilities that are not routinely captured in oncology assessments. Evidence supports, at a minimum, assessment of function, comorbidity, falls, depression, cognition, and nutrition. The Panel recommends instrumental activities of daily living to assess for function, a thorough history or validated tool to assess comorbidity, a single question for falls, the Geriatric Depression Scale to screen for depression, the Mini-Cog or the Blessed Orientation-Memory-Concentration test to screen for cognitive impairment, and an assessment of unintentional weight loss to evaluate nutrition. Either the CARG (Cancer and Aging Research Group) or CRASH (Chemotherapy Risk Assessment Scale for High-Age Patients) tools are recommended to obtain estimates of chemotherapy toxicity risk; the Geriatric-8 or Vulnerable Elders Survey-13 can help to predict mortality. Clinicians should use a validated tool listed at ePrognosis to estimate noncancer-based life expectancy ? 4 years. GA results should be applied to develop an integrated and individualized plan that informs cancer management and to identify nononcologic problems amenable to intervention. Collaborating with caregivers is essential to implementing GA-guided interventions. The Panel suggests that clinicians take into account GA results when recommending chemotherapy and that the information be provided to patients and caregivers to guide treatment decision making. Clinicians should implement targeted, GA-guided interventions to manage nononcologic problems. Additional information is available at www.asco.org/supportive-care-guidelines .
| S-EPMC6063790 | biostudies-literature
Project description: Not available
| S-EPMC2793597 | biostudies-literature
Project description: Not available
| S-EPMC2793604 | biostudies-literature
Project description:At the 11th annual meeting of the Society of Urologic Oncology, an expert panel was convened to discuss the practical use of perioperative chemotherapy for muscle-invasive bladder cancer. The discussion was structured as a case-based debate among the panelists. The topics included: neoadjuvant chemotherapy with a focus on T2 disease, pros and cons, survival data, tolerability of cisplatin-based therapy, can we avoid radical cystectomy in complete responders, limitations and alternatives to cisplatin-based therapy, management of 'suboptimal' chemotherapy, residual disease after neoadjuvant chemotherapy, adjuvant chemotherapy, and key aspects of radical cystectomy and lymph-node dissection in multimodal therapy. The presentations were derived from published literature. The panelists agreed that patients with muscle-invasive bladder cancer should be managed with a multidisciplinary team, including urologist and medical oncologist. Cisplatin-based neoadjuvant chemotherapy has demonstrated improved survival and should be incorporated into the management of all eligible patients with muscle-invasive bladder cancer. However, in some centers, neoadjuvant chemotherapy is reserved for patients with >T2 disease or high-risk features. There are no data for the administration of non-cisplatin-based neoadjuvant chemotherapy, such as carboplatin-combinations. Cisplatin-ineligible patients should proceed directly to surgical extirpation with adjuvant cisplatin-based chemotherapy considered based on pathologic findings. However, the data for adjuvant chemotherapy is less compelling. As our refinement of the selection process continues, we may be able to better identify subsets of patients who may be spared chemotherapy, but much work remains to be done in this arena. The current standard for muscle-invasive bladder cancer patients is cisplatin-based neoadjuvant chemotherapy followed by radical cystectomy and pelvic lymph-node dissection.
| S-EPMC3524835 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundOlder patients with colorectal cancer (CRC) experience chemotherapy dose reductions or discontinuation. Comprehensive geriatric assessment (CGA) predicts survival and chemotherapy completion in patients with cancer, but the benefit of geriatric interventions remains unexplored.MethodsThe GERICO study is a randomised Phase 3 trial including patients ≥70 years receiving adjuvant or first-line palliative chemotherapy for CRC. Vulnerable patients (G8 questionnaire ≤14 points) were randomised 1:1 to CGA-based interventions or standard care, along with guideline-based chemotherapy. The primary outcome was chemotherapy completion without dose reductions or delays. Secondary outcomes were toxicity, survival and quality of life (QoL).ResultsOf 142 patients, 58% received adjuvant and 42% received first-line palliative chemotherapy. Interventions included medication changes (62%), nutritional therapy (51%) and physiotherapy (39%). More interventional patients completed scheduled chemotherapy compared with controls (45% vs. 28%, P = 0.0366). Severe toxicity occurred in 39% of controls and 28% of interventional patients (P = 0.156). QoL improved in interventional patients compared with controls with the decreased burden of illness (P = 0.048) and improved mobility (P = 0.008).ConclusionGeriatric interventions compared with standard care increased the number of older, vulnerable patients with CRC completing adjuvant chemotherapy, and may improve the burden of illness and mobility.Trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov ID: NCT02748811.
| S-EPMC8185087 | biostudies-literature
Project description:PurposeTo develop recommendations for treatment of patients with metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC).MethodsASCO convened an Expert Panel to conduct a systematic review of relevant studies and develop recommendations for clinical practice.ResultsFive systematic reviews and 10 randomized controlled trials met the systematic review inclusion criteria.RecommendationsDoublet chemotherapy should be offered, or triplet therapy may be offered to patients with previously untreated, initially unresectable mCRC, on the basis of included studies of chemotherapy in combination with anti-vascular endothelial growth factor antibodies. In the first-line setting, pembrolizumab is recommended for patients with mCRC and microsatellite instability-high or deficient mismatch repair tumors; chemotherapy and anti-epidermal growth factor receptor therapy is recommended for microsatellite stable or proficient mismatch repair left-sided treatment-naive RAS wild-type mCRC; chemotherapy and anti-vascular endothelial growth factor therapy is recommended for microsatellite stable or proficient mismatch repair RAS wild-type right-sided mCRC. Encorafenib plus cetuximab is recommended for patients with previously treated BRAF V600E-mutant mCRC that has progressed after at least one previous line of therapy. Cytoreductive surgery plus systemic chemotherapy may be recommended for selected patients with colorectal peritoneal metastases; however, the addition of hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy is not recommended. Stereotactic body radiation therapy may be recommended following systemic therapy for patients with oligometastases of the liver who are not considered candidates for resection. Selective internal radiation therapy is not routinely recommended for patients with unilobar or bilobar metastases of the liver. Perioperative chemotherapy or surgery alone should be offered to patients with mCRC who are candidates for potentially curative resection of liver metastases. Multidisciplinary team management and shared decision making are recommended. Qualifying statements with further details related to implementation of guideline recommendations are also included.Additional information is available at www.asco.org/gastrointestinal-cancer-guidelines.
| S-EPMC10506310 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Background:Fatigue is the most common and debilitating symptom experienced by oncology patients during chemotherapy (CTX). Fatigue severity demonstrates a large amount of inter-individual and diurnal variability. Purpose:Study purposes were to evaluate for subgroups of patients with distinct evening fatigue profiles and evaluate how these subgroups differed on demographic, clinical, and symptom characteristics. Methods:Outpatients with breast, gastrointestinal, gynecological, or lung cancer (n=1332) completed questionnaires six times over two cycles of CTX. Lee Fatigue Scale (LFS) evaluated evening fatigue severity. Latent profile analysis was used to identify distinct evening fatigue profiles. Results:Four distinct evening fatigue classes (i.e., Low (14.0%), Moderate (17.2%), High (36.0%), Very High (32.8%)) were identified. Compared to the Low class, patients in the Very High evening fatigue class were: younger, female, had childcare responsibilities, had more years of education, had a lower functional status, had a higher comorbidity burden, and were diagnosed with breast cancer. Patients in the Very High class reported higher levels of depressive symptoms, sleep disturbance, and evening fatigue at enrollment. Conclusions:Findings provide new insights into modifiable risk factors for higher levels of evening fatigue. Clinicians can use this information to identify higher risk patients and plan appropriate interventions.
| S-EPMC5926814 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Purpose In 2016, ASCO published a guideline to assist in clinical decision making in metastatic pancreatic cancer for initial assessment after diagnosis, first- and second-line treatment options, palliative and supportive care, and follow-up. The purpose of this update is to incorporate new evidence related to second-line therapy for patients who have experienced disease progression or intolerable toxicity during first-line therapy. Methods ASCO convened an Expert Panel to conduct a systematic review of the literature on second-line therapy published between June 2015 and January 2018. Recommendations on other topics covered in the 2016 Metastatic Pancreatic Cancer Guideline were endorsed by the Expert Panel. Results Two new studies were found that met the inclusion criteria. Recommendations For second-line therapy, gemcitabine plus nanoparticle albumin-bound paclitaxel should be offered to patients with first-line treatment with FOLFIRINOX (leucovorin, fluorouracil, irinotecan, and oxaliplatin), an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status (ECOG PS) of 0 to 1, and a favorable comorbidity profile; fluorouracil plus nanoliposomal irinotecan can be offered to patients with first-line treatment with gemcitabine plus NAB-paclitaxel, an ECOG PS of 0 to 1, and a favorable comorbidity profile; fluorouracil plus irinotecan or fluorouracil plus oxaliplatin may be offered when there is a lack of availability of fluorouracil plus nanoliposomal irinotecan; gemcitabine or fluorouracil should be offered to patients with either an ECOG PS of 2 or a comorbidity profile that precludes other regimens. Testing select patients for mismatch repair deficiency or microsatellite instability is recommended, and pembrolizumab is recommended for patients with mismatch repair deficiency or high microsatellite instability tumors. Endorsed recommendations from the 2016 version of this guideline for computed tomography, baseline performance status and comorbidity profile, defining goals of care, first-line therapy, and palliative care are also contained within the full guideline text. Additional information is available at www.asco.org/gastrointestinal-cancer-guidelines .
| S-EPMC7504972 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundThe benefit of chemotherapy for older patients with hormone receptor (HR)-positive, human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2)-negative early breast cancer (EBC) is a key area of debate. Gene expression profiling (GEP) may identify patients deriving benefit, but their predictive role has not been established for older adults. We summarise evidence on efficacy, safety, and quality-of-life impacts of chemotherapy and on GEP use and impact in older HR-positive, HER2-negative EBC patients.MethodsWe conducted a literature search of PubMed and Embase on publications describing prospective studies evaluating chemotherapy in older adults with HR-positive, HER2-negative EBC and on publications describing retrospective and prospective studies evaluating GEP in older adults.ResultsEight publications on chemotherapy use, including 2,035 older patients with EBC were selected. Only one trial evaluated chemotherapy survival benefits in older adults, showing no benefit. Of four studies comparing different regimens, only one showed the superiority of taxanes versus anthracyclines alone. Those investigating alternative regimens did not show improvements over standard regimens despite significant limitations. Five publications on GEP, including 445,323 older patients, were included and investigated Oncotype DX. Limited evidence shows that GEP aids treatment decisions in this population. GEP was offered less frequently to older versus younger patients. Higher Recurrence Score was prognostic for distant recurrence, but chemotherapy did not improve prognosis.ConclusionsIn older patients with HR-positive, HER2-negative, chemotherapy survival benefits EBC are unclear and GEP is less used. Although its prognostic role is well established, its predictive role remains unknown.
| S-EPMC10861271 | biostudies-literature
Project description:PurposeTo improve goal setting in Geriatric Rehabilitation (GR), by developing an evidence-based practical guideline for patient-centred goal setting.MethodsParticipatory action research (PAR) in a cyclical process, with GR professionals as co-researchers. Each cycle consisted of five phases: problem analysis, literature review, development, practical experience, feedback & evaluation. The evaluation was based on video recordings of goal setting conversations, and on oral and written feedback of the GR professionals who tested the guideline.ResultsIn two PAR-cycles the guideline was developed, consisting of eight recommendations for setting and using goals, and of practical advices elaborating three of the recommendations, concerning conversational skills specific for goal setting conversations. After the second cycle the research team concluded that the guideline was feasible in daily practice and effective when used consciously.ConclusionIn this study, a practical guideline for setting and using goals in GR was developed. GR teams can improve their patient centred working with goals by discussing the recommendations in their team and choosing the recommendations to work on. This can be supported by the development of an interdisciplinary training. The effect on quality of care should be subject to further investigation.
| S-EPMC10587279 | biostudies-literature