Show simple item record

Capacity to Provide Geriatric Specialty Care for Older Adults in Community Oncology Practices

dc.contributor.authorWilliams, Grant R.
dc.contributor.authorWeaver, Kathryn E.
dc.contributor.authorLesser, Glenn J.
dc.contributor.authorDressler, Emily
dc.contributor.authorWinkfield, Karen M.
dc.contributor.authorNeuman, Heather B.
dc.contributor.authorKazak, Anne E.
dc.contributor.authorCarlos, Ruth
dc.contributor.authorGansauer, Lucy J.
dc.contributor.authorKamen, Charles S.
dc.contributor.authorUnger, Joseph M.
dc.contributor.authorMohile, Supriya G.
dc.contributor.authorKlepin, Heidi D.
dc.date.accessioned2021-01-05T18:47:26Z
dc.date.availableWITHHELD_12_MONTHS
dc.date.available2021-01-05T18:47:26Z
dc.date.issued2020-12
dc.identifier.citationWilliams, Grant R.; Weaver, Kathryn E.; Lesser, Glenn J.; Dressler, Emily; Winkfield, Karen M.; Neuman, Heather B.; Kazak, Anne E.; Carlos, Ruth; Gansauer, Lucy J.; Kamen, Charles S.; Unger, Joseph M.; Mohile, Supriya G.; Klepin, Heidi D. (2020). "Capacity to Provide Geriatric Specialty Care for Older Adults in Community Oncology Practices." The Oncologist 25(12): 1032-1038.
dc.identifier.issn1083-7159
dc.identifier.issn1549-490X
dc.identifier.urihttps://hdl.handle.net/2027.42/163900
dc.description.abstractBackgroundAmerican Society of Clinical Oncology guidelines recommend that patients ≥65 years of age starting chemotherapy undergo a geriatric assessment (GA) to inform and guide management; however, little is known about resources available in community oncology practices to implement these guidelines and to facilitate geriatric oncology research.Materials and MethodsOncology practices within the National Cancer Institute Community Oncology Research Program (NCORP) were electronically surveyed in 2017 regarding the availability of specialty providers, supportive services, and practice characteristics, as part of a larger survey of cancer care delivery research capacity.ResultsOf the 943 NCORP practices, 504 (54%) responded to the survey, representing 210 practice groups. The median new cancer cases per year ≥65 years of age was 457 (interquartile range 227–939). Of respondents, only 2.0% of practices had a fellowship‐trained geriatric oncologist on staff. Geriatricians were available for consultation or comanagement at 37% of sites, and of those, only 13% had availability within the oncology clinic (5% of overall). Practice size of ≥1,000 new adult cancer cases (ages ≥18) per year was associated with higher odds (1.81, confidence interval 1.02–3.23) of geriatrician availability. Other multidisciplinary care professionals that could support GA were variably available onsite: social worker (84%), nurse navigator (81%), pharmacist (77%), dietician (71%), rehabilitative medicine (57%), psychologist (42%), and psychiatrist (37%).ConclusionOnly a third of community oncology practices have access to a geriatrician within their group and only 5% of community sites have access within the oncology clinic. Use of primarily self‐administered GA tools that direct referrals to available services may be an effective implementation strategy for guideline‐based care.Implications for PracticeOnly a minority of community oncology practices in the U.S. have access to geriatric specialty care. Developing models of care that use patient‐reported measures and/or other geriatric screening tools to assess and guide interventions in older adults, rather than geriatric consultations, are likely the most practical methods to improve the care of this vulnerable population.Treatment of cancer in older adults is complicated by the aging process. This article assesses the availability of geriatric specialty care to support the management of older adults with cancer in community oncology settings.
dc.publisherJohn Wiley & Sons, Inc.
dc.subject.otherCommunity oncology
dc.subject.otherGeriatric oncology
dc.subject.otherCancer care delivery
dc.subject.otherAging
dc.subject.otherGeriatric assessment
dc.titleCapacity to Provide Geriatric Specialty Care for Older Adults in Community Oncology Practices
dc.typeArticle
dc.rights.robotsIndexNoFollow
dc.subject.hlbsecondlevelHematology and Oncology
dc.subject.hlbtoplevelHealth Sciences
dc.description.peerreviewedPeer Reviewed
dc.description.bitstreamurlhttp://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/163900/1/onco13490_am.pdf
dc.description.bitstreamurlhttp://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/163900/2/onco13490.pdf
dc.description.bitstreamurlhttp://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/163900/3/onco13490-sup-0001-TableS1.pdf
dc.identifier.doi10.1634/theoncologist.2020-0189
dc.identifier.sourceThe Oncologist
dc.identifier.citedreferencePergolotti M, Deal AM, Williams GR et al. Older adults with cancer: A randomized controlled trial of occupational and physical therapy. J Am Geriatr Soc 2019; 67: 953 – 960.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceMagnuson A, Allore H, Cohen HJ et al. Geriatric assessment with management in cancer care: Current evidence and potential mechanisms for future research. J Geriatr Oncol 2016; 7: 242 – 248.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceExtermann M, Boler I, Reich RR et al. Predicting the risk of chemotherapy toxicity in older patients: The Chemotherapy Risk Assessment Scale for High‐Age Patients (CRASH) score. Cancer 2012; 118: 3377 – 3386.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceHurria A, Mohile S, Gajra A et al. Validation of a prediction tool for chemotherapy toxicity in older adults with cancer. J Clin Oncol 2016; 34: 2366 – 2371.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceGajra A, Loh KP, Hurria A et al. Comprehensive geriatric assessment‐guided therapy does improve outcomes of older patients with advanced lung cancer. J Clin Oncol 2016; 34: 4047 – 4048.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceKenis C, Decoster L, Flamaing J et al. Adherence to geriatric assessment‐based recommendations in older patients with cancer: A multicenter prospective cohort study in Belgium. Ann Oncol 2018; 29: 1987 – 1994.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceMohile SG, Epstein RM, Hurria A et al. Communication with older patients with cancer using geriatric assessment: A cluster‐randomized clinical trial from the National Cancer Institute Community Oncology Research Program. JAMA Oncol 2019; 6: 1 – 9.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceCathcart‐Rake EJ, Zemla T, Jatoi A et al. Acquisition of sexual orientation and gender identity data among NCI Community Oncology Research Program practice groups. Cancer 2019; 125: 1313 – 1318.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceCarlos RC, Sicks JD, Chang GJ et al. Capacity for cancer care delivery research in National Cancer Institute Community Oncology research program community practices: Availability of radiology and primary care research partners. J Am Coll Radiol 2017; 14: 1530 – 1537.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceMagnuson A, Dale W, Mohile S. Models of care in geriatric oncology. Curr Geriatr Rep 2014; 3: 182 – 189.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceMagnuson A, Canin B, van Londen GJ et al. Incorporating geriatric medicine providers into the care of the older adult with cancer. Curr Oncol Rep 2016; 18: 65.
dc.identifier.citedreferencePuts MTE, Hsu T, Mariano C et al. Clinical and Cost‐effectiveness of a Comprehensive geriatric assessment and management for Canadian elders with Cancer‐The 5C study: A study protocol for a randomised controlled phase III trial. BMJ Open 2019; 9: e024485.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceNadaraja S, Matzen LE, Jorgensen TL et al. The impact of comprehensive geriatric assessment for optimal treatment of older patients with cancer: A randomized parallel‐group clinical trial. J Geriatr Oncol 2020; 11: 488 – 495.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceMolga A, Wall M, Chhetri R et al. Comprehensive geriatric assessment predicts azacitidine treatment duration and survival in older patients with myelodysplastic syndromes. J Geriatr Oncol 2020; 11: 114 – 120.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceCaillet P, Canoui‐Poitrine F, Vouriot J et al. Comprehensive geriatric assessment in the decision‐making process in elderly patients with cancer: ELCAPA study. J Clin Oncol 2011; 29: 3636 – 3642.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceRodin MB, Mohile SG. A practical approach to geriatric assessment in oncology. J Clin Oncol 2007; 25: 1936 – 1944.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceWilliams GR, Kenzik KM, Parman M et al. Integrating geriatric assessment into routine gastrointestinal (GI) consultation: The Cancer and Aging Resilience Evaluation (CARE). J Geriatr Oncol 2020; 11: 270 – 273.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceFesten S, Kok M, Hopstaken JS et al. How to incorporate geriatric assessment in clinical decision‐making for older patients with cancer. An implementation study. J Geriatr Oncol 2019; 10: 951 – 959.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceKlepin HD, Wildes TM. Fighting for the integration of geriatric principles into oncology. J Geriatr Oncol 2018; 9: 705 – 706.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceMagnuson A, Lemelman T, Pandya C et al. Geriatric assessment with management intervention in older adults with cancer: A randomized pilot study. Support Care Cancer 2018; 26: 605 – 613.
dc.identifier.citedreferencePergolotti M, Deal AM, Lavery J et al. The prevalence of potentially modifiable functional deficits and the subsequent use of occupational and physical therapy by older adults with cancer. J Geriatr Oncol 2015; 6: 194 – 201.
dc.identifier.citedreferencePergolotti M, Langer MM, Deal AM et al. Mental status evaluation in older adults with cancer: Development of the Mental Health Index‐13. J Geriatr Oncol 2019; 10: 241 – 245.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceWeiss Wiesel TR, Nelson CJ, Tew WP et al. The relationship between age, anxiety, and depression in older adults with cancer. Psychooncology 2015; 24: 712 – 717.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceMcCorkle R, Strumpf NE, Nuamah IF et al. A specialized home care intervention improves survival among older post‐surgical cancer patients. J Am Geriatr Soc 2000; 48: 1707 – 1713.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceRocque GB, Pisu M, Jackson BE et al. Resource use and medicare costs during lay navigation for geriatric patients with cancer. JAMA Oncol 2017; 3: 817 – 825.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceBasch E. Patient‐reported outcomes ‐ Harnessing patients’ voices to improve clinical care. N Engl J Med 2017; 376: 105 – 108.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceBasch E, Deal AM, Dueck AC et al. Overall survival results of a trial assessing patient‐reported outcomes for symptom monitoring during routine cancer treatment. JAMA 2017; 318: 197 – 198.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceBasch E, Deal AM, Kris MG et al. Symptom monitoring with patient‐reported outcomes during routine cancer treatment: A randomized controlled trial. J Clin Oncol 2016; 34: 557 – 565.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceStrasser F, Blum D, von Moos R et al. The effect of real‐time electronic monitoring of patient‐reported symptoms and clinical syndromes in outpatient workflow of medical oncologists: E‐MOSAIC, a multicenter cluster‐randomized phase III study (SAKK 95/06). Ann Oncol 2016; 27: 324 – 332.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceDenis F, Basch E, Septans AL et al. Two‐year survival comparing web‐based symptom monitoring vs routine surveillance following treatment for lung cancer. JAMA 2019; 321: 306 – 307.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceLoh KP, Ramsdale E, Culakova E et al. Novel mHealth app to deliver geriatric assessment‐driven interventions for older adults with cancer: Pilot feasibility and usability study. JMIR Cancer 2018; 4: e10296.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceNipp RD, Horick NK, Deal AM et al. Differential effects of an electronic symptom monitoring intervention based on the age of patients with advanced cancer. Ann Oncol 2020; 31: 123 – 130.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceSmith BD, Smith GL, Hurria A et al. Future of cancer incidence in the United States: Burdens upon an aging, changing nation. J Clin Oncol 2009; 27: 2758 – 2765.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceWilliams GR, Mackenzie A, Magnuson A et al. Comorbidity in older adults with cancer. J Geriatr Oncol 2016; 7: 249 – 257.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceCouderc AL, Boulahssass R, Nouguerede E et al. Functional status in a geriatric oncology setting: A review. J Geriatr Oncol 2019; 10: 884 – 894.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceWilliams GR, Pisu M, Rocque GB et al. Unmet social support needs among older adults with cancer. Cancer 2019; 125: 473 – 481.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceKadambi S, Soto‐Perez‐de‐Celis E, Garg T et al. Social support for older adults with cancer: Young international society of geriatric oncology review paper. J Geriatr Oncol 2020; 11: 217 – 224.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceJolly TA, Deal AM, Nyrop KA et al. Geriatric assessment‐identified deficits in older cancer patients with normal performance status. The Oncologist 2015; 20: 379 – 385.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceKirkhus L, Saltyte Benth J, Rostoft S et al. Geriatric assessment is superior to oncologists’ clinical judgement in identifying frailty. Br J Cancer 2017; 117: 470 – 477.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceHamaker ME, Te Molder M, Thielen N et al. The effect of a geriatric evaluation on treatment decisions and outcome for older cancer patients ‐ A systematic review. J Geriatr Oncol 2018; 9: 430 – 440.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceBruijnen CP, van Harten‐Krouwel DG, Koldenhof JJ et al. Predictive value of each geriatric assessment domain for older patients with cancer: A systematic review. J Geriatr Oncol 2019; 10: 859 – 873.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceMohile SG, Dale W, Somerfield MR et al. Practical assessment and management of vulnerabilities in older patients receiving chemotherapy: ASCO guideline for geriatric oncology. J Clin Oncol 2018; 36: 2326 – 2347.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceVanderWalde N, Jagsi R, Dotan E et al. NCCN guidelines insights: Older adult oncology, version 2.2016. J Natl Compr Cancer Netw 2016; 14: 1357 – 1370.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceHamaker ME, Schiphorst AH, ten Bokkel Huinink D et al. The effect of a geriatric evaluation on treatment decisions for older cancer patients–A systematic review. Acta Oncol 2014; 53: 289 – 296.
dc.owningcollnameInterdisciplinary and Peer-Reviewed


Files in this item

Show simple item record

Remediation of Harmful Language

The University of Michigan Library aims to describe library materials in a way that respects the people and communities who create, use, and are represented in our collections. Report harmful or offensive language in catalog records, finding aids, or elsewhere in our collections anonymously through our metadata feedback form. More information at Remediation of Harmful Language.

Accessibility

If you are unable to use this file in its current format, please select the Contact Us link and we can modify it to make it more accessible to you.