Search

OBJECTIVES: ―A study to assess the effectiveness of pelvic floor muscle strengthening exercises on erectile dysfunction in rectal cancer survivors at tertiary cancer hospital, TMH, Mumbai. METHODOLOGY: Single arm prospective study approach was used for the study. The research design was self-controlled trial design. Sample size were 39 participants who received an intervention of pelvic floor muscle strengthening exercises in the selected areas of Tata Memorial Hospital. Data gathered was analyzed using descriptive and inferential statistics. Participants had filled SHIM questionnaire pre intervention . Questionnaire had 5 different questions in terms of Confidence, erection, penetration, difficulty and satisfaction. Patients had been taught Pelvic floor muscle strengthening exercises on Day 0, which were asked to carry out 3 times a day for a period of 10 weeks. Assessment was done at the end of 10 weeks. RESULTS OF THE STUDIES: In pre-intervention SHIM questionnaire, Mean score and Standard Deviation among 5 questions were Confidence (2.6154±0.5901), Erection (2.5128±0.6014), Penetration (2.1764±0.3888) , Difficulty(2.2564±0.5964) and satisfaction(2.2821±0.5595). In Post intervention SHIM score among 5 questions were Confidence (3.0513±0.6047), Erection(2.8974±0.6804), Penetration(2.3590±0.6277), Difficulty(2.3590±0.6277) and satisfaction(2.6410±0.6684) The confidence, erection, satisfaction post intervention were statistically highly significant in participants (P< 0.001) and in term of Difficulty it was statistically significant (P 0.005). The Wilcoxon signed rank test explained that there was a significant increase in the scores of confidence (4.123), erection (3.873) and satisfaction (3.500). They were highly statistically significant (P< 0.001). There was a significant increase seen in the scores of penetration (4.123) and difficulty (3.873). They were statistically significant (p 0.001 and 0.046) respectively. Hence the pelvic floor muscle strengthening exercises were helpful in improving erectile dysfunction among rectal cancer survivors. CONCLUSION: It could be concluded that null hypothesis H0 is rejected and H1 hypothesis of Pelvic floor muscle strengthening exercises has helped to improve erectile dysfunction among men. Limitation being since study time was for 10 weeks only, the results for better outcome in terms of penetration and difficulty can have continuous exercises and then follow up.

OBJECTIVES: ―A study to assess the effectiveness of pelvic floor muscle strengthening exercises on erectile dysfunction in rectal cancer survivors at tertiary cancer hospital, TMH, Mumbai. METHODOLOGY: Single arm prospective study approach was used for the study. It was considered to be the most suitable method here. The research design used for the present study was self-controlled trial design. The desired sample for the present study was 39 participants. The proposed sample size was 39 for approval to regulatory authorities. The sample selected were 39 participants who will be receiving an intervention of pelvic floor muscle strengthening exercises in the selected areas of Tata Memorial Hospital. Data gathered was analyzed using descriptive and inferential statistics. RESULTS OF THE STUDIES: For this study 39 participants were enrolled. All participants had filled pre-intervention SHIM questionnaire having 5 different questions in terms of Confidence, erection, penetration, difficulty and satisfaction. Patients had been taught Pelvic floor muscle strengthening exercises on Day 0, which were asked to carry out 3 times a day for a period of 10 weeks. After 10 weeks of exercises , patient had taken for Post- intervention SHIM score of all 39 participants. In pre-intervention SHIM questionnaire, Mean score and Standard Deviation among 5 questions were Confidence (2.6154±0.5901), Erection (2.5128±0.6014), Penetration (2.1764±0.3888) , Difficulty(2.2564±0.5964) and satisfaction(2.2821±0.5595). In Post intervention SHIM score among 5 questions were Confidence (3.0513±0.6047), Erection(2.8974±0.6804), Penetration(2.3590±0.6277), Difficulty(2.3590±0.6277) and satisfaction(2.6410±0.6684) The confidence, erection, satisfaction post intervention were statistically highly significant in participants (P< 0.001) and in term of Difficulty it was statistically significant (P 0.005). The Wilcoxon signed rank test explains that there was a significant increase seen in the scores of confidence (4.123), erection (3.873) and satisfaction (3.500). They were highly statistically significant (P< 0.001). There was a significant increase seen in the scores of penetration (4.123) and difficulty (3.873). They were statistically significant (p 0.001 and 0.046) respectively. Hence the pelvic floor muscle strengthening exercises were helpful in improving erectile dysfunction among rectal cancer survivors. CONCLUSION: It could be concluded that null hypothesis H0 is rejected and H1 hypothesis is accepted. Pelvic floor muscle strengthening exercises in rectal cancer survivors helped to improve erectile dysfunction among men. As the study is done for 10 weeks. The result for better outcome in terms of penetration and difficulty needs monitoring or follow up to 6 months with continuous exercises taught to patient

Older patients with cancer are more vulnerable to the effects of cognitive impairment affecting their functional status, quality of life, compliance to treatment and ultimately survival. Cancer-related cognitive impairment may be due to the cancer itself or due to the treatment of cancer. There are no data regarding the prevalence of cognitive impairment in older persons with cancer and brain metastasis.This retrospective analysis was conducted on a prospectively collected data set of patients who attended the geriatric oncology clinic at a tertiary care comprehensive cancer centre in India from June 2018 to July 2021. Patients aged 60 years and above with malignancy were included. Cognition was assessed with the mini-mental status examination (MMSE); the Hindi MMSE was used for illiterate patients. A score of ≤23 on the MMSE was considered abnormal. Correlation between the presence of cognitive impairment and brain metastasis was tested using the chi-square test.A total of 597 patients were included, of which 462 (77.4%) were male. The median age was 69 years (range: 60-100 years). All patients had solid tumours; 244 (40.9%) had lung, 189 (31.7%) had gastrointestinal and 75 (12.6%) had head and neck malignancies. Forty-one (6.9%) patients had brain metastases, of which 10 (24.4%) had solitary, 30 (73.2%) had multiple lesions and 1 (2.4%) had leptomeningeal metastases. Cognitive impairment was noted in 11 (26.8%) of the 41 patients with brain metastases and 91 (16.4%) of the 556 patients without brain metastases. There was no significant correlation between the presence of brain metastases and cognitive impairment,Older persons with cancer and brain metastases were not found to have a higher occurrence of cognitive impairment than those without brain metastases in this study. The next step is to understand whether older persons with brain metastases are at a higher risk for cognitive decline as a result of therapeutic interventions such as cranial radiotherapy and chemotherapy.

Most of the long-term care for older adults with chronic or debilitating illnesses is provided by unpaid family members or informal caregivers. There is limited information on caregiver burden among caregivers of older patients with cancer in India. Hence, we assessed the prevalence and severity of caregiver burden among caregivers of older Indian patients with cancer.This was an observational study conducted at the geriatric oncology clinic at Tata Memorial Centre, Mumbai, India. Caregivers of patients aged 60 years and over with a diagnosis of cancer were assessed for caregiver burden using the Zarit Burden Interview. Descriptive statistics were used for demographic and clinical variables. Factors impacting caregiver burden were analyzed using multiple linear regression analysis.Caregiver burden was assessed among 127 caregivers of older Indian patients with cancer. The median patient age was 69 years (range 60-90). Most patients were men (75.6%). There were 33 female caregivers (26%), and 94 male caregivers (74%). The median caregiver burden score was 12 (IQR 6-20). Caregiver burden was "little/none" in 97 (76.4%), "mild-moderate" in 25 (19.7%), "moderate-severe" in four (3.1%) and "severe" in one (0.8%) of the caregivers assessed. On multivariate analysis, factors that significantly impacted caregiver burden scores were the presence of psychological issues in the patient and the caregiver's educational level.Caregiver burden was low among caregivers of older Indian patients with cancer seen at a single center. Caregivers of patients with psychological disorders, and those who had less schooling reported higher caregiver burden.

e24012 Background: ASCO guidelines recommend that geriatric assessment (GA) should be performed in all older adults with cancer. However, GA is labor- and time-intensive, hence the uptake is poor, especially in crowded resource poor-settings. There are no data correlating GA with overall survival (OS) outcomes from the Indian subcontinent. Methods: A prospective observational study in the geriatric oncology clinic of the Tata Memorial Hospital in Mumbai, India. Patients aged 60 years and above, with cancer who underwent a GA were enrolled. The domains assessed included: function (basic and instrumental activities of daily living, timed-up-and-go), nutrition (body mass index, unintentional weight loss, mini-nutritional assessment), comorbidities, cognition, psychological (depression, anxiety), social support, and medication (polypharmacy and potentially inappropriate medications). Patients with > 2 deranged GA domains were considered frail. Results: Between June 2018 and January 2022, 909 patients were enrolled. The median age was 69 (IQR, 60-88) years. Common malignancies included lung (40%), esophagus (21%) and head and neck (11%); 53% had metastatic disease. 80% had > 2 impaired domains in GA patients had vulnerabilities in a median of 3 (IQR, 0-5) domains. Median OS in fit patients based on the GA was 17.5 (95% CI, 13.9-21.0) months vs 12.1 (95% CI, 10.1-14.0) months in frail patients, (HR 0.66; 95% CI, 0.49-0.88, p = 0.005), which remained significant after adjusting for age, sex, and stage (HR, 0.71; 95% CI: 0.53-0.94, p = 0.021). In the multivariate analysis (Table), the domains that were predictive of survival were nutrition (HR: 0.65, 95% CI: 0.47-0.92, p = 0.014), cognition (HR: 0.65; 95% CI: 0.46-0.91, p = 0.012) and fatigue (HR: 0.74, 95% CI: 0.56-0.98, p = 0.038). Conclusions: In older Indian patients with cancer, GA is a powerful prognosticator of survival. In settings where a complete GA is not possible, nutrition, cognition, and fatigue should be the minimum domains assessed. Clinical trial information: CTRI/2020/04/024675. [Table: see text]

e24011 Background: Frail older patients present with increased symptom burden, medical complexity and reduced tolerance to medical and surgical interventions. Data regarding the prevalence of frailty and its association with outcomes, such as overall survival, is limited from India. This study aimed to establish the prevalence of frailty and its association with overall survival (OS) in older patients with cancer. Methods: This was a prospective study conducted in geriatric oncology clinic of Tata memorial hospital (Mumbai India). Patients aged 60 years and above referred to the clinic were included. Frailty was identified using the Rockwoods Clinical frailty scale, and patients with a score of five or more were diagnosed as frail. Demographic details, type of cancer, stage and multi-domains geriatric assessment was done. Cancer and Ageing Research group online toxicity tool was used to assess the chemotherapy toxicity risk. A t-test or two-sample Wilcoxon rank-sum test was used to study the association between frailty status and non-categorical variables and the Pearson chi-squared test was used to measure the association between categorical variables. The Kaplan Meier survival estimation and the Cox proportional hazard model were used to perform the survival analysis. Results: Between June 2018 to January 2022, 909 patients were evaluated and 662 patients with clinical frailty score were included. The median age was 68 (60-86) years and 107 (16%) were above the age of 75 years. The most common malignancies were lung (39%), esophagus (21%) and head and neck (10%); 53% had metastatic disease. 192 (29%) were frail, and it prevalence increased with age. Frailty status was associated with poor OS (unadjusted HR: 2.512; 95% CI: 1.931-3.268). This association was significant even after adjusting for age, gender, BMI and stage of cancer (adjusted HR: 2.104; 95% CI: 1.598-2.770). Frailty was associated with comorbidities such as diabetes (32% vs 23%, p = 0.014), chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (13% vs 7%, p = 0.045) and cardiovascular disease (19% vs 12%, p = 0.017). Among the geriatric domains, frail patients had greater incidence of polypharmacy (52% vs 33%, p < 0.01), slower gait speed (53% vs 12%, p < 0.01), impaired cognition (25% vs 7%, p < 0.01), poor nutritional status (51% vs 17%, p < 0.001), depression (29% vs 8%, p < 0.01) and anxiety (14% vs 5%, p < 0.01). Conclusions: The prevalence of frailty among older cancer patients is high. It is associated with poor physical, cognitive and psychological resilience and is associated with poor overall survival. Our study supports the routine assessment of frailty in older patients with cancer to guide treatment decisions. Clinical trial information: CTRI/2020/04/024675.

e24019 Background: Normal aging is associated with a decline in neurocognitive abilities. Regardless of age, 42% to 91% of persons with cancer and brain metastases are reported to have neurocognitive impairment. There are no data regarding the prevalence of cognitive impairment in older persons with cancer and brain metastasis. Methods: This retrospective analysis was performed on a prospectively collected dataset of patients who attended the geriatric oncology clinic at the Tata Memorial Hospital, a tertiary-care comprehensive cancer center in India from June 2018 to February 2021. Patient aged 60 years and over with malignancy were included. Cognition was assessed with the mini-mental status examination (MMSE); the Hindi MMSE was used for illiterate patients. A score of < 23 on the MMSE was considered abnormal. Correlation between the presence of cognitive impairment and brain metastases was tested using the chi-square test. Results: A total of 401 patients were included, of which 318 (79.3%) were males. The median age was 70 years (range: 60-100 years). All patients had solid tumors; 162 (40.4%) had lung, 139 (34.7%) had gastrointestinal and 48 (12%) had head and neck malignancies. Twenty-five (6.2%) patients had brain metastases, of which 5 (20%) had solitary, 19 (76%) had multiple lesions, and 1 (4%) had leptomeningeal metastases. Cognitive impairment was noted in 4 (16%) of the 25 patients with brain metastases and 61 (16.2%) out of 376 patients without brain metastases. There was no significant correlation between the presence of brain metastases and cognitive impairment, p = 0.57. Conclusions: Older persons with cancer and brain metastases do not have a higher incidence of cognitive impairment than those without brain metastases. The next step is to understand whether older persons with brain metastases are more at risk for cognitive decline as a result of therapeutic interventions such as cranial radiotherapy and chemotherapy.

e24015 Background: The geriatric assessment (GA) is a multidimensional evaluation of an older person. Identification of the non-oncologic vulnerabilities, estimation of life expectancy and chemotherapy risk prediction aid the clinicians in the therapeutic risk-benefit ratio analysis. Globally, GA leads to changes in oncologic decisions in 28% of patients. Methods: An observational study with a retrospective and prospective cohort of patients who underwent a GA in the geriatric oncology clinic at the Tata Memorial Hospital in Mumbai, India. The study was approved by the institutional ethics committee (IEC) and registered with Clinical Trials Registry of India-CTRI/2020/04/024675. Written informed consent was obtained from the patients enrolled in the prospective part of the study; the IEC granted a consent waiver for the retrospective portion of the study. Patients aged 60 years and older with a diagnosis of malignancy were evaluated in the geriatric oncology clinic. The results of the GA were entered in the electronic medical records (EMR). The systemic therapy plan prior to the GA and the actual therapy plan made were retrospectively captured from the EMR. The primary objective was to determine the proportion of patients in whom the systemic therapy plan was changed following the GA. Results: Between June 2018 and Feb 2021, 340 patients were evaluated in the geriatric oncology clinic for whom the pre-GA and post-GA systemic therapy plans were available. The median age was 70 years (range, 60-100); 264 (78%) were men. The common malignancies were lung cancer in 134 (39.4%) and gastrointestinal in 119 (35%). The intent of therapy was palliative in 190 (56%) patients. Following the GA, the systemic therapy plan was changed in 125 (36.8%) patients. The most common change was deintensification of therapy in 106 patients (31.2%), including dose reduction in 41 (12%), decrease in the number of chemotherapy medicines in 8 (2.4%), substitution of chemotherapy by targeted therapy (4, 1.2%)/oral hormonal therapy (4, 1.2%)/oral TKI (11, 3.2%)/immunotherapy (2, 0.6%) and withholding systemic therapy in 36 (10.6%) patients. Withholding systemic therapy consisted of a change from chemoradiotherapy to radical radiation alone in 17 (5%), withholding neoadjuvant or adjuvant chemotherapy in 5 (1.5%) and a change to best supportive care in 14 (4.1%). Conclusions: The results of the GA led to a change in the management plan in over one-third of older Indian patients with cancer. GA is an important tool in the oncologic decision-making process for older persons with cancer. Clinical trial information: CTRI/2020/04/024675.