TY - JOUR
T1 - Evaluating the association of frailty with communication about aging-related concerns between older patients with advanced cancer and their oncologists
AU - Gilmore, Nikesha
AU - Xu, Huiwen
AU - Kehoe, Lee
AU - Kleckner, Amber S.
AU - Moorthi, Kiran
AU - Lei, Lianlian
AU - Mohamed, Mostafa R.S.
AU - Loh, Kah Poh
AU - Culakova, Eva
AU - Flannery, Marie
AU - Ramsdale, Erika
AU - Duberstein, Paul R.
AU - Canin, Beverly
AU - Kamen, Charles
AU - Giri, Gilbert
AU - Watson, Erin
AU - Patil, Amita
AU - Onitilo, Adedayo A.
AU - Burnette, Brian
AU - Janelsins, Michelle
AU - Mohile, Supriya G.
N1 - Publisher Copyright:
© 2021 American Cancer Society.
PY - 2022/3/1
Y1 - 2022/3/1
N2 - Background: A geriatric assessment (GA) intervention improves communication about aging-related concerns, but its effect on communication in patients with various levels of frailty is unknown. Methods: This was a secondary analysis of a nationwide trial of patients aged ≥70 years with incurable cancer and impairment on 1 or more GA domains (ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier NCT02107443; principal investigator Supriya G. Mohile). Practice sites were randomized to either the GA-intervention or usual care. Frailty was assessed with a deficit accumulation index (range, 0-1), and patients were stratified as robust (0 to <0.2), prefrail (0.2 to <0.35), or frail (≥0.35). The clinic visit after the GA-intervention was audio-recorded, transcribed, and coded to evaluate the number and quality of conversations about aging-related concerns. Linear mixed models examined differences in the number and quality of conversations within and between arms. All P values were 2-sided. Results: Patients (n = 541) were classified as robust (27%), prefrail (42%), or frail (31%). In the usual care arm, frail patients (vs robust ones) engaged in more aging-related conversations (adjusted mean difference, 1.73; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.59-2.87), conversations of higher quality (difference, 1.12; 95% CI, 0.24-2.0), and more discussions about evidence-based recommendations (difference, 0.71; 95% CI, 0.04-1.38; all P values ≤.01). Similarly, in the GA intervention arm, frail patients (vs robust ones) engaged in more aging-related conversations (difference, 2.49; 95% CI, 1.51-3.47), conversations of higher quality (difference, 1.31; 95% CI, 0.56-2.06), and more discussions about evidence-based recommendations (difference, 0.87; 95% CI, 0.32-1.42; all P values ≤.01). Furthermore, the GA-intervention significantly improved the number and quality of conversations in all patients: robust, prefrail, and frail (all P values ≤.01). Conclusions: Patients with higher degrees of frailty and those exposed to the GA-intervention had more and higher quality conversations about aging-related concerns with oncologists. Lay Summary: A geriatric assessment (GA) intervention improves communication about aging-related concerns, but its effect on communication in patients with various levels of frailty is unknown. This study conducted a secondary analysis of a nationwide trial of patients aged ≥70 years with incurable cancer and 1 or more GA domain impairments. Patients were stratified as robust, prefrail, or frail. The number and quality of conversations about aging-related concerns that occurred during the clinic visit after the GA-intervention were determined. Patients with higher degrees of frailty and those in the GA intervention arm had more and higher quality conversations about aging-related concerns with oncologists.
AB - Background: A geriatric assessment (GA) intervention improves communication about aging-related concerns, but its effect on communication in patients with various levels of frailty is unknown. Methods: This was a secondary analysis of a nationwide trial of patients aged ≥70 years with incurable cancer and impairment on 1 or more GA domains (ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier NCT02107443; principal investigator Supriya G. Mohile). Practice sites were randomized to either the GA-intervention or usual care. Frailty was assessed with a deficit accumulation index (range, 0-1), and patients were stratified as robust (0 to <0.2), prefrail (0.2 to <0.35), or frail (≥0.35). The clinic visit after the GA-intervention was audio-recorded, transcribed, and coded to evaluate the number and quality of conversations about aging-related concerns. Linear mixed models examined differences in the number and quality of conversations within and between arms. All P values were 2-sided. Results: Patients (n = 541) were classified as robust (27%), prefrail (42%), or frail (31%). In the usual care arm, frail patients (vs robust ones) engaged in more aging-related conversations (adjusted mean difference, 1.73; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.59-2.87), conversations of higher quality (difference, 1.12; 95% CI, 0.24-2.0), and more discussions about evidence-based recommendations (difference, 0.71; 95% CI, 0.04-1.38; all P values ≤.01). Similarly, in the GA intervention arm, frail patients (vs robust ones) engaged in more aging-related conversations (difference, 2.49; 95% CI, 1.51-3.47), conversations of higher quality (difference, 1.31; 95% CI, 0.56-2.06), and more discussions about evidence-based recommendations (difference, 0.87; 95% CI, 0.32-1.42; all P values ≤.01). Furthermore, the GA-intervention significantly improved the number and quality of conversations in all patients: robust, prefrail, and frail (all P values ≤.01). Conclusions: Patients with higher degrees of frailty and those exposed to the GA-intervention had more and higher quality conversations about aging-related concerns with oncologists. Lay Summary: A geriatric assessment (GA) intervention improves communication about aging-related concerns, but its effect on communication in patients with various levels of frailty is unknown. This study conducted a secondary analysis of a nationwide trial of patients aged ≥70 years with incurable cancer and 1 or more GA domain impairments. Patients were stratified as robust, prefrail, or frail. The number and quality of conversations about aging-related concerns that occurred during the clinic visit after the GA-intervention were determined. Patients with higher degrees of frailty and those in the GA intervention arm had more and higher quality conversations about aging-related concerns with oncologists.
KW - communication
KW - frailty
KW - geriatric assessment
KW - older adults with cancer
KW - satisfaction with communication
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85118886531&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85118886531&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1002/cncr.34010
DO - 10.1002/cncr.34010
M3 - Article
C2 - 34762734
AN - SCOPUS:85118886531
SN - 0008-543X
VL - 128
SP - 1101
EP - 1109
JO - Cancer
JF - Cancer
IS - 5
ER -