Predicting fitness for chemotherapy in older adults with metastatic bladder cancer.
Brian Russell,Daniel E.C. Fein,Stephanie A. Berg,Shilpa Gupta,Jonathan E. Rosenberg,Toni K. CHOUEIRI,Joaquim Bellmunt
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1200/jco.2024.42.16_suppl.e13761
IF: 45.3
2024-05-31
Journal of Clinical Oncology
Abstract:e13761 Background: Guidelines advocate using comprehensive geriatric assessments (CGA) in older and frailer adults to optimize treatment recommendations, but it is unclear if genitourinary (GU) oncologists employ them. Through a national survey, this study aimed to evaluate techniques that providers use to predict fitness for chemotherapy in older adults with metastatic bladder cancer. Methods: This cross-sectional study surveyed US-based GU medical oncologists. Providers were included if they were identified as specializing in bladder cancer, had an accessible email address and worked at a National Cancer Institute-designated cancer center or an institution with an ACGME accredited hematology-oncology fellowship. Surveys were sent via email and collected in REDCap. The eleven-item survey consisted of multiple-choice questions and Likert scales evaluating use of geriatric assessments and other tools to predict chemotherapy tolerance. Results: There were 300 GU oncologists contacted, and 37.3% (n=112) completed the survey. Of respondents, 41 (36.6%) practiced in the Northeast with the remainder spread throughout the country. 51.8% (n=58) had practiced for ≥ 10 years, and 81.3% (n=91) had a panel composed primarily of patients ≥ 65-years-old. When making specific chemotherapeutic treatment recommendations, all providers consider a patients’ frailty. The majority (77.7%, n=87) do not use a specific age cut off, but rather, evaluate frailty on a case-by-case basis. Still, in predicting fitness for chemotherapy, 90.2% (n=101) almost never or never utilize a comprehensive geriatric assessment. Primary barriers centered on logistics including time constraints (71.4%, n=80), inadequate staffing (65.2%, n=73) and insufficient resources (33.9%, n=38). Beyond medical comorbidities, factors within a CGA that at least 50% of respondents consider important in predicting treatment tolerance include mobility (87.5%, n=98), social support (81.3%, n=91), cognitive function (73.2%, n=82) and nutritional status (71.4%, n=80) (Table). Conclusions: All surveyed providers believe frailty is important in predicting chemotherapy fitness, but the majority infrequently utilize CGAs in their evaluations. Highlighted barriers include time and resource constraints. While the CGA remains part of the standard of care in evaluating older adults for treatment, if a CGA cannot be performed, GU oncologists could consider focusing pre-treatment evaluation on the most important domains identified in this study: mobility, social support, cognitive function and nutritional status. [Table: see text]
oncology