Search

An academic career in aging research is filled with the incredible highs of important discoveries that improve the lives of older adults and repeated lows when papers and grants are rejected or studies are negative. To normalize the experience of setbacks and failures in aging research, we invited three senior investigators to share their journeys of persistence and resilience as they have navigated their research careers. This career development symposium was presented at the 2021 Annual Scientific Meeting of the American Geriatrics Society, which was held virtually. We aimed to connect researchers in aging, especially trainees and junior investigators, through personal stories of persistence and shared strategies to build resilience and respond to setbacks with a growth mindset.

Objectives Oncologists estimate patients' prognosis to guide care. Evidence suggests oncologists tend to overestimate life expectancy, which can lead to care with questionable benefits. Information obtained from geriatric assessment may improve prognostication for older adults. In this study, we created a geriatric assessment-based prognostic model for older adults with advanced cancer and compared its performance to alternative models. Materials and methods We conducted a secondary analysis of a trial (URCC 13070; PI: Mohile) capturing geriatric assessment and vital status up to one year for adults age ≥ 70 years with advanced cancer. Oncologists estimated life expectancy as 0–6 months, 7–12 months, and > 1 year. Three statistical models were developed: (1) a model including age, sex, cancer type, and stage (basic model), (2) basic model + Karnofsky Performance Status (≤50, 60–70, and 80+) (KPS model), and (3) basic model +16 binary indicators of geriatric assessment impairments (GA model). Cox regression was used to model one-year survival; c-indices and time-dependent c-statistics assessed model discrimination and stratified survival curves assessed model calibration. Results We included 484 participants; mean age was 75; 48% had gastrointestinal or lung cancer. Overall, 43% of patients died within one year. Oncologists classified prognosis accurately for 55% of patients, overestimated for 35%, and underestimated for 10%. C-indices were 0.61 (basic model), 0.62 (KPS model), and 0.63 (GA model). The GA model was well-calibrated. Conclusions The GA model showed moderate discrimination for survival, similar to alternative models, but calibration was improved. Further research is needed to optimize geriatric assessment-based prognostic models for use in older adults with advanced cancer.

Context Systematic collection of patient-reported outcomes (PROs) reduces symptom burden and improves quality of life. The ability of older adults to complete PROs, however, has not been thoroughly studied. Objectives To determine whether older adults with advanced cancer received assistance completing PROs, the nature of the assistance, the factors associated with receiving assistance, and how the prevalence of assistance changed over time. Methods Data were obtained from a multisite cluster randomized controlled study of geriatric assessment (Clinicaltrials.gov: NCT02107443). Adults ≥70 years with advanced cancer completed multiple PROs at 4 time points (enrollment, 6 weeks, 3 months, 6 months). Factors associated with receipt of assistance were assessed with bivariate and multivariate analyses. Results The study included 541 adults (range 70-96 years, 49% female, mixed incurable cancer diagnoses). Twenty-eight percent (153/541) received assistance completing PROs. Of these, 42% received assistance from caregivers, 37% from research staff, and 15% from both. Factors associated with receiving assistance included older age [Adjusted Odds Ratio (AOR) 3.71, 95% Confidence Interval (CI) 1.03-13.38], lower education level (3.92, 2.11-7.29), impaired cognition (1.90, 1.23-2.93), impaired functional status (2.16, 1.33-3.52), and impaired hearing (1.38, 1.05-1.80). Eighty percent of individuals who received assistance were identified at study initiation. Receiving assistance decreased over time from 28% to 18%, partially due to drop-outs. Conclusion Over a quarter of older adults with advanced cancer in this study received assistance completing PROs. Completing PROs is a key aspect of many clinical programs and cancer trials; assistance in completing PROs should be offered and provided.

Introduction Treatment toxicities are common in older adults with cancer and consequently, treatment modifications are sometimes considered. We evaluated the prevalence and factors associated with treatment modifications at the first cycle in older patients receiving palliative systemic treatment. Methods Patients (n = 369) from the GAP 70+ Trial ( NCT02054741 ; PI: Mohile) usual care arm were included. Enrolled patients were aged 70+ with advanced cancer and ≥ 1 Geriatric Assessment (GA) domain impairment. Treatment modification was defined as any change from National Comprehensive Cancer Network guidelines or published clinical trials. Baseline variables included: 1) sociodemographic factors; 2) clinical variables; 3) GA domains; and 4) physician beliefs about life expectancy. Bivariate analyses and multivariable cluster-weighted generalized estimating equation model were conducted to assess the association of baseline variables with cycle 1 treatment modifications. Results Mean age was 77.2 years (range: 70–94); 62% had lung or gastrointestinal cancers, and 35% had treatment modifications at cycle 1. Increasing age by one year (odds ratio (OR) 1.1, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.0–1.2), receipt of ≥second line of chemotherapy (OR 1.8, CI 1.1–3.0), functional impairment (OR 1.6, CI 1.1–2.3) and income ≤$50,000 (OR 1.7, CI 1.1–2.4) were independently associated with a higher likelihood of cycle 1 treatment modification. Conclusion Treatment modifications occurred in 35% of older adults with advanced cancer at cycle 1. Increasing age, receipt of ≥second line of chemotherapy, functional impairment, and lower income were independently associated with treatment modifications. These findings emphasize the need for evidence-based regimens in older adults with cancer and GA impairments.

BackgroundAging-related deficits that eventually manifest as frailty may be associated with poor emotional health in older patients with advanced cancer. This study aimed to examine the relationship between frailty and emotional health in this population.MethodsThis was a secondary analysis of baseline data from a nationwide cluster randomized trial. Patients were aged ≥70 years with incurable stage III/IV solid tumors or lymphomas, had ≥1 geriatric assessment (GA) domain impairment, and had completed the Geriatric Depression Scale, Generalized Anxiety Disorder-7, and Distress Thermometer. Frailty was assessed using a Deficit Accumulation Index (DAI; range 0–1) based on GA, which did not include emotional health variables (depression and anxiety), and participants were stratified into robust, prefrail, and frail categories. Multivariate logistic regression models examined the association of frailty with emotional health outcomes. Adjusted odds ratios (aORs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were reported.ResultsFive hundred forty-one patients were included (mean age: 77 years; 70–96). DAI ranged from 0.04 to 0.94; 27% of patients were classified as robust, 42% prefrail, and 31% frail. Compared with robust patients, frail patients had an increased risk of screening positive for depression (aOR = 12.8; 95% CI = 6.1–27.0), anxiety (aOR = 6.6; 95% CI = 2.2–19.7), and emotional distress (aOR = 4.62; 95% CI = 2.9–8.3). Prefrail compared with robust patients also had an increased risk of screening positive for depression (aOR = 2.22; 95% CI = 1.0–4.8) and distress (aOR = 1.71; 95% CI = 1.0–2.8).ConclusionIn older patients with advanced cancer, frailty is associated with poorer emotional health, which indicates a need for an integrated care approach to treating these patients.Implications for PracticeA relationship exists between frailty and poor emotional health in older adults with advanced cancer. Identifying areas of frailty can prompt screening for emotional health and guide delivery of appropriate interventions. Alternatively, attention to emotional health may also improve frailty.

PURPOSE Providing a geriatric assessment (GA) summary with management recommendations to oncologists reduces clinician-rated toxicity in older patients with advanced cancer receiving treatment. This secondary analysis of a national cluster randomized clinical trial (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT02054741 ) aims to assess the effects of a GA intervention on symptomatic toxicity measured by Patient-Reported Outcomes Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (PRO-CTCAE). METHODS From 2014 to 2019, the study enrolled patients age ≥ 70 years, with advanced solid tumors or lymphoma and ≥ 1 GA domain impairment, who were initiating a regimen with high prevalence of toxicity. Patients completed PRO-CTCAEs, including the severity of 24 symptoms (11 classified as core symptoms) at enrollment, 4-6 weeks, 3 months, and 6 months. Symptoms were scored as grade ≥ 2 (at least moderate) and grade ≥ 3 (severe/very severe). Symptomatic toxicity was determined by an increase in severity during treatment. A generalized estimating equation model was used to assess the effects of the GA intervention on symptomatic toxicity. RESULTS Mean age was 77 years (range, 70-96 years), 43% were female, and 88% were White, 59% had GI or lung cancers, and 27% received prior chemotherapy. In 706 patients who provided PRO-CTCAEs at baseline, 86.1% reported at least one moderate symptom and 49.7% reported severe/very severe symptoms at regimen initiation. In 623 patients with follow-up PRO-CTCAE data, compared with usual care, fewer patients in the GA intervention arm reported grade ≥ 2 symptomatic toxicity (overall: 88.9% v 94.8%, P = .035; core symptoms: 83.4% v 91.7%, P = .001). The results for grade ≥ 3 toxicity were comparable but not significant ( P > .05). CONCLUSION In the presence of a high baseline symptom burden, a GA intervention for older patients with advanced cancer reduces patient-reported symptomatic toxicity.

This cross-sectional study assesses differences in clinical trial participation among older vs younger adults with cancer.

Background Cancer-related cognitive decline (CRCD) is an important clinical problem, but limited research exists on assessment of cognitive function in patients with lymphoma. Methods The overall objective of this nationwide, prospective, observational study conducted in the National Cancer Institute Community Clinical Oncology Research Program (NCORP) was to assess changes in memory, attention, and executive function in patients with lymphoma from pre- (A1) to postchemotherapy (A2) and to 6 months postchemotherapy (A3). Individuals without cancer served as noncancer controls, paired to patients by age and sex, and assessed at the same time-equivalent points. Longitudinal linear mixed models (LMM) including A1, A2, and A3 and adjusting for age, education, race, sex, cognitive reserve score, baseline anxiety, and depressive symptoms were fit. We assessed changes in patients compared with control participants without cancer and assessed differences in cognitive function in those patients with Hodgkin vs non-Hodgkin disease and by disease subtype. All statistical tests were 2-sided. Results Patients with lymphoma (n = 248) and participants without cancer serving as controls (n = 212) were recruited from 19 NCORP sites. From pre- to postchemotherapy and from prechemotherapy to 6 months follow-up, patients reported more cognitive problems over time compared with controls (Functional Assessment of Cancer-Therapy-Cognitive Function [FACT-Cog] perceived cognitive impairment effect size (ES) = 0.83 and 0.84 for A1 to A2 and A1 to A3, respectively; P Conclusion Patients with lymphoma experience worse patient-reported and objectively assessed cognitive function from prechemotherapy to 6-month follow-up compared with age- and sex-paired controls without cancer assessed at similar time intervals.

PURPOSE: Falls are a modifiable source of morbidity for older adults with cancer, yet are underassessed in oncology practice. In this secondary analysis of a nationwide cluster-randomized controlled trial, we examined characteristics associated with patient-oncologist conversations about falls, and whether oncologist knowledge of geriatric assessment (GA) resulted in more conversations. METHODS: Eligible patients (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT02107443 ) were age ≥ 70 years, had stage III/IV solid tumor or lymphoma, were being treated with noncurative treatment intent, and ≥ 1 GA domain impairment. Patients in both arms underwent GA. At practices randomly assigned to the intervention arm, oncologists were provided a GA summary with management recommendations. In both arms, patients had one clinical encounter audio-recorded, transcribed, and coded to categorize whether a conversation about falls occurred. Generalized linear mixed models adjusted for arm, practice site, and other important covariates were used to generate proportions and odds ratios (ORs) from the full sample. RESULTS: Of 541 patients (intervention N = 293 and usual care N = 248, mean age: 77 years, standard deviation: 5.3), 528 had evaluable audio recordings. More patients had conversations about falls in the intervention versus usual care arm (61.3% v 10.3%, P < .001). Controlling for the intervention and practice site, history of falls (OR, 2.1; 95% CI, 1.3 to 3.6; P = .005) and impaired physical performance (OR, 4.7; 95% CI, 1.7 to 12.8; P = .002) were significantly associated with patient-oncologist conversations about falls. CONCLUSION: GA intervention increased conversations about falls. History of falls and impaired physical performance were associated with patient-oncologist conversations about falls in community oncology practice.

Functional outcomes during non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) treatment are critically important to older adults. Yet, data on physical function and which measures best capture functional change remain limited.This multisite, mixed methods cohort study recruited adults ≥65 years with advanced NSCLC starting systemic treatment (i.e., chemotherapy, immunotherapy, and/or targeted therapy) with non-curative intent. Participants underwent serial geriatric assessments prior to starting treatment and at one, two, four, and six months, which included the Karnofsky Performance Scale (KPS, range: 0-100%), instrumental activities of daily living (IADL, range: 0-14), European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Questionnaire Physical Functioning subscale (EORTC QLQ-C30 PF, range: 0-100), and Life-Space Assessment (LSA, range: 0-120). For all measures, higher scores represent better functioning. In a qualitative substudy, 20 patients completed semi-structured interviews prior to starting treatment and at two and six months to explore how treatment affected their daily functioning. We created joint displays for each interview participant that integrated their longitudinal KPS, IADL, EORTC QLQ-C30 PF, and LSA scores with patient quotes describing their function.Among 87 patients, median age was 73 years (range 65-96). Mean pretreatment KPS score was 79% (standard deviation [SD] 13), EORTC QLQ-C30 PF was 69 (SD 23), and LSA was 67 (SD 28); median IADL was 13 (interquartile range [IQR] 10-14). At two months after treatment initiation, 70% of patients experienced functional decline on at least one measure, with only 13% of these patients recovering at six months. At two and six months, decline in LSA was the most common (48% and 35%, respectively). Joint displays revealed heterogeneity in how well each quantitative measure of physical function captured the qualitative patient experience.Functional decline during NSCLC treatment is common among older adults. LSA is a useful measure to detect subtle functional decline that may be missed by other measures. Given heterogeneity in how well each quantitative measure captures changes in physical function, there is value to including more than one functional measure in geriatric oncology research studies.

Background: Polypharmacy and potentially inappropriate medications (PIMs) are prevalent in older adults with cancer, but their associations with physical function are not often studied. This study examined the associations of polypharmacy and PIMs with physical function in older adults with cancer, and determined the optimal cutoff value for the number of medications most strongly associated with physical functional impairment. Methods: This cross-sectional analysis used baseline data from a randomized study enrolling patients aged ≥70 years with advanced cancer starting a new systemic cancer treatment. We categorized PIM using 2015 American Geriatrics Society Beers Criteria. Three validated physical function measures were used to assess patient-reported impairments: activities of daily living (ADL) scale, instrumental activities of daily living (IADL) scale, and the Older Americans Resources and Services Physical Health (OARS PH) survey. Optimal cutoff value for number of medications was determined by the Youden index. Separate multivariate logistic regressions were then performed to examine associations of polypharmacy and PIMs with physical function measures. Results: Among 439 patients (mean age, 76.9 years), the Youden index identified ≥8 medications as the optimal cutoff value for polypharmacy; 43% were taking ≥8 medications and 62% were taking ≥1 PIMs. On multivariate analysis, taking ≥8 medications was associated with impairment in ADL (adjusted odds ratio [aOR], 1.64; 95% CI, 1.01–2.58) and OARS PH (aOR, 1.73; 95% CI, 1.01–2.98). PIMs were associated with impairments in IADL (aOR, 1.72; 95% CI, 1.09–2.73) and OARS PH (aOR, 1.97; 95% CI, 1.15–3.37). A cutoff of 5 medications was not associated with any of the physical function measures. Conclusions: Physical function, an important component of outcomes for older adults with cancer, is cross-sectionally associated with polypharmacy (defined as ≥8 medications) and with PIMs. Future studies should evaluate the association of polypharmacy with functional outcomes in this population in a longitudinal fashion.

Background Virtual Learning Collaboratives (VLC), learning communities focused on a common purpose, are used frequently in healthcare settings to implement best practices. Yet, there is limited research testing the effectiveness of this approach compared to other implementation strategies. This study evaluates the effectiveness of a VLC compared to Technical Assistance (TA) among community oncology practices implementing ENABLE (Educate, Nurture, Advise, Before Life Ends), an evidence-based, early palliative care telehealth, psycho-educational intervention for patients with newly diagnosed advanced cancer and their caregivers. Methods Using Reach, Effectiveness, Adoption, Implementation, Maintenance (RE-AIM) and Proctor’s Implementation Outcomes Frameworks, this two-arm hybrid type-III cluster-randomized controlled trial (RCT) will compare two implementation strategies, VLC versus TA, among the 48 National Cancer Institute Community Oncology Research Program (NCORP) practice clusters that have not historically provided palliative care to all patients with advanced cancer. Three cohorts of practice clusters will be randomized to the study arms. Each practice cluster will recruit 15–27 patients and a family caregiver to participate in ENABLE. The primary study outcome is ENABLE uptake (patient level), i.e., the proportion of eligible patients who complete the ENABLE program (receive a palliative care assessment and complete the six ENABLE sessions over 12 weeks). The secondary outcome is overall program implementation (practice cluster level), as measured by the General Organizational Index at baseline, 6, and 12 months. Exploratory aims assess patient and caregiver mood and quality of life outcomes at baseline, 12, and 24 weeks. Practice cluster randomization will seek to keep the proportion of rural practices, practice sizes, and minority patients seen within each practice balanced across the two study arms. Discussion This study will advance the field of implementation science by evaluating VLC effectiveness, a commonly used but understudied, implementation strategy. The study will advance the field of palliative care by building the capacity and infrastructure to implement an early palliative care program in community oncology practices. Trial registration Clinicaltrials.gov. NCT04062552; Pre-results. Registered: August 20, 2019. https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT04062552?term=NCT04062552&draw=2&rank=1

Background: Older adults (age ≥65 years) receiving chemotherapy are at risk for hospitalization. Predictors of unplanned hospitalization among older adults receiving chemotherapy for cancer were recently published using data from a study conducted by the Cancer and Aging Research Group (CARG). Our study aimed to externally validate these predictors in an independent cohort including older adults with advanced cancer receiving chemotherapy. Methods: This validation cohort included patients (n=369) from the GAP70+ trial usual care arm. Enrolled patients were aged ≥70 years with incurable cancer and were starting a new line of chemotherapy. Previously identified risk factors proposed by the CARG study were ≥3 comorbidities, albumin level Results: Mean age of the cohort was 77 years, 45% of patients were women, and 29% experienced unplanned hospitalization within the first 3 months of treatment. The proportions of hospitalized patients with 0–3, 4–5, and 6–7 identified risk factors were 24%, 28%, and 47%, respectively (P=.04). Impaired ADLs (odds ratio, 1.76; 95% CI, 1.04–2.99) and albumin level Conclusions: The presence of a higher number of risk factors was associated with increased odds of unplanned hospitalization. This association was largely driven by impairment in ADLs and low albumin level. Validated predictors of unplanned hospitalization can help with counseling and shared decision-making with patients and their caregivers. ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT02054741

PURPOSE Limited tools exist to predict the risk of chemotherapy toxicity in older adults with early-stage breast cancer. METHODS Patients of age ≥ 65 years with stage I-III breast cancer from 16 institutions treated with neoadjuvant or adjuvant chemotherapy were prospectively evaluated for geriatric and clinical features predictive of grade 3-5 chemotherapy toxicity. Logistic regression with best-subsets selection was used to identify and incorporate independent predictors of toxicity into a model with weighted variable scoring. Model performance was evaluated using area under the ROC curve (AUC) and goodness-of-fit statistics. The model was internally and externally validated. RESULTS In 473 patients (283 in development and 190 in validation cohort), 46% developed grade 3-5 chemotherapy toxicities. Eight independent predictors were identified (each assigned weighted points): anthracycline use (1 point), stage II or III (3 points), planned treatment duration > 3 months (4 points), abnormal liver function (3 points), low hemoglobin (3 points), falls (4 points), limited walking (3 points), and lack of social support (3 points). We calculated risk scores for each patient and defined three risk groups: low (0-5 points), intermediate (6-11 points), or high (≥ 12 points). In the development cohort, the rates of grade 3-5 chemotherapy toxicity for these three groups were 19%, 54%, and 87%, respectively ( P < .01). In the validation cohort, the corresponding toxicity rates were 27%, 45%, and 76%. The AUC was 0.75 (95% CI, 0.70 to 0.81) in the development cohort and 0.69 (95% CI, 0.62 to 0.77) in the validation cohort. Risk groups were also associated with hospitalizations and reduced dose intensity ( P < .01). CONCLUSION The Cancer and Aging Research Group-Breast Cancer (CARG-BC) score was developed and validated to predict grade 3-5 chemotherapy toxicity in older adults with early-stage breast cancer.

The functional status and physical performance of older adults with cancer are underassessed and undertreated despite the high prevalence of impaired functional status and physical performance in this population and their associations with chemotherapy-induced toxic effects and mortality.To examine the association between providing oncologists with a geriatric assessment (GA) summary with recommendations and having oncologist-patient conversations about functional and physical performance.Data for this secondary analysis were collected from October 29, 2014, to April 28, 2017, for a national cluster randomized clinical trial conducted by the University of Rochester Cancer Center National Cancer Institute Community Oncology Research Program evaluating the effect of a GA intervention on patient satisfaction with communication about aging-related concerns. There were 17 practice clusters in the intervention group and 14 in the usual care group. All 541 participants underwent a GA including standardized functional and physical performance measures and had 1 clinical encounter audio-recorded, transcribed, and blindly coded to categorize conversations by GA domain. Participants were aged 70 years or older, with a stage III or IV solid tumor or lymphoma with palliative treatment intent, and impairment in 1 or more GA domain. Statistical analysis was performed from August 18, 2020, to January 10, 2022.Oncologist practices randomized to the intervention received a GA summary and validated recommendations for each patient prior to the audio-recorded clinical encounter.The primary analysis of this clinical trial assessed the effect of the intervention on patient satisfaction with oncologist communication about aging-related concerns. This secondary analysis assessed the post hoc hypothesis that the intervention would be associated with an increase in the proportion of patients having conversations with their oncologists and receiving oncologist recommendations specific to functional and physical performance concerns.A total of 541 patients (276 men [51%]; mean [SD] age, 77.5 [5.2] years [range, 70-96 years]) were analyzed at baseline. Excluding 13 patients without audio recordings, 86% of patients (95% CI, 78%-91%) in the intervention group vs 59% of patients (95% CI, 47%-69%; P .001) receiving usual care had conversations about functional or physical performance. Conversations were more frequently initiated by oncologists in the intervention group (84%; 95% CI, 77%-90%) than oncologists in the usual care group (58%; 95% CI, 45%-70%; P .001). Oncologists in the intervention group were more likely to address patients' concerns (43%; 95% CI, 33%-53%) than oncologists in the usual care group (17%; 95% CI, 10%-26%; P .001).In this secondary analysis of a cluster randomized clinical trial, providing oncologists with a GA summary was associated with an increase in the number of oncologist-patient conversations about functional and physical performance-related concerns with recommendations to address these concerns. These findings support the use of the GA summary and recommendations as important tools in caring for older adults with advanced cancer and functional or physical impairments.ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02107443.

Understanding decisional involvement and information preferences in patients with hematologic malignancies may help to optimize physician-patient communication about treatment decisions and align the decision-making processes with patients’ preferences. We described and examined factors associated with preferences of patients with hematologic malignancies for decisional involvement, information sources, and presentation of information. In a multicenter observational study, we recruited 216 patients with hematologic malignancies of any stage from September 2003 to June 2007. Patients were asked about their decisional involvement preferences (Control Preferences Scale), information sources (including most useful source of information), and preferences for their oncologists’ presentation of treatment success information. We used multivariate logistic regressions to identify factors associated with decisional involvement preferences and usefulness of information sources (physicians vs nonphysicians). Patient-directed, shared, and physician-directed approaches were preferred in 34%, 38%, and 28% of patients, respectively. Physicians and computer/Internet were the most common information sources; 42% perceived physicians as the most useful source. On multivariate analysis, patients with less than a college education (vs postgraduate education) were less likely to perceive their physician as the most useful source (adjusted odds ratio [AOR], 0.46; 95% confidence interval (CI), 0.21-1.00), whereas patients with acute leukemia (vs other blood cancers) were more likely to perceive their physician as the most useful source (AOR, 2.49; 95% CI, 1.07-5.80). In terms of communicating treatment success rates, 70% preferred ≥1 method(s), and 88% preferred presentation in percentages. Our study suggests that decisional involvement and information preferences vary and should be assessed explicitly as part of each decision-making encounter.

Little is known about the characteristics of patients, physicians, and organizations that influence treatment decisions in older patients with AML. We conducted qualitative interviews with community oncologists and older patients with AML to elicit factors that influence their treatment decision-making. Recruitment was done via purposive sampling and continued until theoretical saturation was reached, resulting in the inclusion of 15 patients and 15 oncologists. Participants’ responses were analyzed using directed content analysis. Oncologists and patients considered comorbidities, functional status, emotional health, cognition, and social factors when deciding treatment; most oncologists evaluated these using clinical gestalt. Sixty-seven percent of patients perceived that treatment was their only option and that they had not been offered a choice. In conclusion, treatment decision-making is complex and influenced by patient-related factors. These factors can be assessed as part of a geriatric assessment which can help oncologists better determine fitness and guide treatment decision-making.

Cancer is a disease of aging and, as the world's population ages, the number of older persons with cancer is increasing and will make up a growing share of the oncology population in virtually every country. Despite this, older patients remain vastly underrepresented in research that sets the standards for cancer treatments. Consequently, most of what we know about cancer therapeutics is based on clinical trials conducted in younger, healthier patients, and effective strategies to improve clinical trial participation of older adults with cancer remain sparse. For this systematic review, the authors evaluated published studies regarding barriers to participation and interventions to improve participation of older adults in cancer trials. The quality of the available evidence was low and, despite a literature describing multifaceted barriers, only one intervention study aimed to increase enrollment of older adults in trials. The findings starkly amplify the paucity of evidence-based, effective strategies to improve participation of this underrepresented population in cancer trials. Within these limitations, the authors provide their opinion on how the current cancer research infrastructure must be modified to accommodate the needs of older patients. Several underused solutions are offered to expand clinical trials to include older adults with cancer. However, as currently constructed, these recommendations alone will not solve the evidence gap in geriatric oncology, and efforts are needed to meet older and frail adults where they are by expanding clinical trials designed specifically for this population and leveraging real-world data.

Despite substantial improvements in the outcomes of patients with cancer over the past two decades, older adults (aged ≥65 years) with cancer are a rapidly increasing population and continue to have worse outcomes than their younger counterparts. Managing cancer in this population can be challenging because of competing health-related and ageing-related conditions that can influence treatment decision-making and affect outcomes. Geriatric screening tools and comprehensive geriatric assessment can help to identify patients who are most at risk of poor outcomes from cancer treatment and to better allocate treatment for these patients. The use of evidence-based management strategies to optimize geriatric conditions can improve communication and satisfaction between physicians, patients and caregivers as well as clinical outcomes in this population. Clinical trials are currently underway to further determine the effect of geriatric assessment combined with management interventions on cancer outcomes, as well as the predictive value of geriatric assessment in context of treatment with contemporary systemic therapies, such as immunotherapies and targeted therapies. In this Review, we summarize the unique challenges of treating older adults with cancer and describe current guidelines as well as investigational studies underway to improve the outcomes of these patients.

Background: Oncologists often struggle with managing the unique care needs of older adults with cancer. This study sought to determine the feasibility of delivering a transdisciplinary intervention targeting the geriatric-specific (physical function and comorbidity) and palliative care (symptoms and prognostic understanding) needs of older adults with advanced cancer. Methods: Patients aged ≥65 years with incurable gastrointestinal or lung cancer were randomly assigned to a transdisciplinary intervention or usual care. Those in the intervention arm received 2 visits with a geriatrician, who addressed patients’ palliative care needs and conducted a geriatric assessment. We predefined the intervention as feasible if >70% of eligible patients enrolled in the study and >75% of eligible patients completed study visits and surveys. At baseline and week 12, we assessed patients’ quality of life (QoL), symptoms, and communication confidence. We calculated mean change scores in outcomes and estimated intervention effect sizes (ES; Cohen’s d) for changes from baseline to week 12, with 0.2 indicating a small effect, 0.5 a medium effect, and 0.8 a large effect. Results: From February 2017 through June 2018, we randomized 62 patients (55.9% enrollment rate [most common reason for refusal was feeling too ill]; median age, 72.3 years; cancer types: 56.5% gastrointestinal, 43.5% lung). Among intervention patients, 82.1% attended the first visit and 79.6% attended both. Overall, 89.7% completed all study surveys. Compared with usual care, intervention patients had less QoL decrement (–0.77 vs –3.84; ES = 0.21), reduced number of moderate/severe symptoms (–0.69 vs +1.04; ES = 0.58), and improved communication confidence (+1.06 vs –0.80; ES = 0.38). Conclusions: In this pilot trial, enrollment exceeded 55%, and >75% of enrollees completed all study visits and surveys. The transdisciplinary intervention targeting older patients’ unique care needs showed encouraging ES estimates for enhancing patients’ QoL, symptom burden, and communication confidence.

PURPOSE: Chronic inflammation is a significant physiologic feature of frailty; however, its role and clinical utility in cancer-related frailty remains unknown. We sought to determine if pre-chemotherapy inflammation is predictive of frailty after chemotherapy in patients with breast cancer. METHODS: Female patients (N=144; age ≥50) with stage I-III breast cancer scheduled to receive chemotherapy and age-matched non-cancer controls (N=142) were included in this secondary analysis and assessed pre- and post-chemotherapy. Controls were assessed at equivalent time-points. Frailty was assessed using a modified Fried’s score (0-4) using self-reported measures of weakness, exhaustion, walking speed, and physical activity. Serum levels of interleukin (IL) 6, and soluble tumor necrosis factor-alpha (sTNFR) I and II were measured. Associations between pre-chemotherapy cytokine and receptors level (median as cutoff) and post-chemotherapy frailty were evaluated using T-tests. RESULTS: Pre-chemotherapy, patients with breast cancer were more frail than non-cancer controls (mean score: 1.17 vs 0.65; p

Objectives Immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) have revolutionized the treatment of cancer, but outcomes in older adults are not well defined. We evaluated the associations of geriatric assessment (GA) domains with treatment-related outcomes in older adults with solid tumors receiving ICIs. Methods We performed a single-center, retrospective study of patients age ≥65 years diagnosed with solid tumors who received ICIs and were evaluated with a GA from January 2011 to April 2017. Using Wilcoxon rank sum test, we examined the associations of GA domains and treatment-related outcomes, including the number of ICI cycles received, best response, immune-related adverse events (irAEs), and hospitalizations during ICI treatment. Results We identified 28 patients (median age at ICI treatment = 78 years, range 66–93); 60% had Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) Performance Status of ≥2; 39% had lung cancer; 89% had stage IV cancer; and 50% received pembrolizumab. Seventy-five percent had at least one GA domain impairment. Patients with any instrumental activities of daily living (IADL) impairment received fewer cycles of ICI (median: 2.0 vs. 7.0 cycles, p = 0.02). In this small sample, neither age nor GA domain measures were associated with best response, irAEs, or hospitalization during ICI treatment. Conclusions Older adults treated with ICIs had a high prevalence of impairments in GA domains, and IADL impairments were associated with shorter duration of ICI treatment. Future prospective studies are needed to evaluate the role of the GA further in this vulnerable patient population in the immunotherapy era.

Objectives Oncologists can be one of the major barriers to older adult's participation in research. Multiple studies have described academic clinicians' concerns for not enrolling older adults onto trials. Although the majority of older adults receive their cancer care in the community, few studies have examined the unique challenges that community oncologists face and how they differ from oncologist-related barriers in academia. Methods Semi-structured interviews were conducted by telephone or face-to-face with 44 medical oncologists (24 academic-based and 20 community-based) at City of Hope from March to June 2018. Interviews explored oncologists' perceptions of barriers to clinical trial enrollment of older adults with cancer. Data were analyzed using qualitative content analysis. Results Of the 44 participants, 36% were women and 68% were in practice for >10 years. Among the entire sample, stringent eligibility criteria (n = 20) and oncologist concerns for treatment toxicities (n = 15) were the most commonly cited barriers. Compared to academic oncologists, community oncologists more often cited patient attitudes, beliefs, and understanding (n = 9 vs. n = 2) and caregiver burden (n = 6 vs. n = 0). In contrast, compared to community oncologists, academic oncologists more often cited oncologist bias (n = 10 vs. n = 3) and insufficient time/support (n = 4 vs. n = 1). Conclusions Differences in perceptions among academic and community oncologists about trials suggest that barriers are multifaceted, complex, and vary by practice setting. Interventions to increase trial accrual among older adults with cancer may benefit from being tailored to address the unique barriers of different practice settings.

Objectives The goal of this study was to evaluate the relationship between social support (SS) and grade 3–5 chemotherapy-related toxicities among older adults with cancer. Methods This is a secondary analysis of a prospective longitudinal study of patients aged 65+ with solid cancer which led to the development of a predictive model for grade 3–5 chemotherapy-related toxicity (the Cancer and Aging Research Group [CARG] Chemotherapy Toxicity Risk Score). SS was measured by a modified version of Medical-Outcome Study-Social Support Survey and grade 3–5 hematological and non-hematological toxicities were captured and graded using CTCAE version 3.0. Patients were categorized into those with poor (SS score ≤ 75) and good SS (score of 76–100). Multivariate polychotomous logistic regression was used to examine the associations between SS and chemotherapy-related toxicity with adjustment for the CARG Toxicity Risk Score. Results Compared to patients with good SS, those with poor SS were less likely to have grade 3–5 toxicity, especially for non-hematological toxicity (adjusted OR = 0.52, p = .02). Patients who did not have someone to take them to the doctor “most” or “all of the time” were less likely to have grade 3–5 non-hematological toxicity compared to patients who had someone to take them to the doctor most or all of the time (adjusted OR = 0.32, p = .02). Conclusion Our study showed that patients with poor SS, especially those with less availability of someone to take them to doctors were less likely to have a documented grade 3–5 non-hematological toxicity.

Introduction Cognitive impairment (CI) increases chemotherapy toxicity risk with need to understand this association utilizing publicly available short screening tools. We evaluated this utilizing a lower threshold on a short screening tool in older adults with cancer. Materials and methods We analyzed data from the Cancer and Aging Research Group (CARG) Chemotherapy Toxicity Risk tool (CARG score) development and validation cohorts (n = 703), which recruited adults age ≥ 65 with cancer from academic centers. Cognition was evaluated with the Blessed Orientation-Memory-Concentration test (BOMC). Patients with BOMC score ≥ 11 were excluded. Utilizing cut-points for older adults, we considered moderate BOMC scores (5-10) as potential CI. Logistic regression was used for analysis. Results Patient baseline characteristics included: mean age 73; 85% white; 63% college or higher education; 250 (36%) potential CI; 385 (55%) severe toxicity. Patients with potential CI were more likely non-white (p ≤ 0.01) and to have high school or lower education (p ≤ 0.01) and high CARG score (p = 0.04). Potential CI was associated with increased severe toxicity risk (OR = 1.54, p ≤ 0.01). After adjusting for CARG score, this association became nonsignificant (OR = 1.35; p = 0.08). Among patients with lower education (n = 258; 36.7%), potential CI remained associated with severe toxicity, even after adjusting for CARG score (OR = 1.87, p = 0.03). Conclusions Our findings suggest potential cognitive impairment, defined by BOMC score 5–10, in older adults with cancer and lower education is associated with increased severe toxicity risk. Future studies are needed to validate these findings. Healthcare providers should consider cognitive testing before treatment for these vulnerable patients.

PURPOSE: Geriatric assessment (GA) results predict toxicity/survival in older adults, yet GA is not routinely used in care for patients with multiple myeloma (MM). We tested a tablet-based modified GA (mGA) providing real-time results to clinicians. METHODS: One hundred sixty-five patients with MM aged ≥ 65 years facing a treatment decision from 4 sites completed a tablet-based mGA with Katz Activities of Daily Living (ADL), Lawton Instrumental ADL, Charlson Comorbidity Index, and variables from the Cancer and Aging Research Group’s Chemotherapy Toxicity Calculator. Providers reviewed the assessment results at the treatment visit. RESULTS: Patients were white (72%; n = 86), mean age was 72 years (range, 65-85 years), and averaged 7.71 minutes (range, 2-17 minutes) for survey completion. Providers averaged 3.2 minutes (range, 1-10 minutes) to review mGA results. Using International Myeloma Working Group frailty score, patients were fit (39%; n = 64), intermediate fit (33%; n = 55), or frail (28%; n = 46). Providers selected more aggressive treatments in 16.3% of patients and decreased treatment intensity in 34% of patients; treatment intensification was more common for fit patients and milder treatments for frail patients (χ2 = 20.02; P < .0001). Transplant eligibility significantly correlated with fit status and transplant ineligibility with frail status ( P = .004). Outcomes on 144 patients 3 months post study visit showed 19.4% (n = 28) had grade ≥ 3 hematologic toxicities, 38.9% (n = 56) had dose modifications, and 18% (n = 26) had early therapy cessation. CONCLUSION: Limited patient time required for survey completion and provider time for results review show mGA can be easily incorporated into clinical workflow. Real-time mGA results indicating fit/frailty status influenced treatment decisions.

A poor prognostic understanding regarding curability is associated with lower odds of hospice use among patients with cancer. However, the association between poor prognostic understanding or prognostic discordance and health care use among older adults with advanced incurable cancers is not well characterized.To evaluate the association of poor prognostic understanding and patient-oncologist prognostic discordance with hospitalization and hospice use among older adults with advanced cancers.This was a post hoc secondary analysis of a cluster randomized clinical trial that recruited patients from October 29, 2014, to April 28, 2017. Data were collected from community oncology practices affiliated with the University of Rochester Cancer Center National Cancer Institute Community Oncology Research Program. The parent trial enrolled 541 patients who were aged 70 years or older and were receiving or considering any line of cancer treatment for incurable solid tumors or lymphomas; the patients' oncologists and caregivers (if available) were also enrolled. Patients were followed up for at least 1 year. Data were analyzed from January 3 to 16, 2021.At enrollment, patients and oncologists were asked about their beliefs regarding cancer curability (100%,50%, 50%,50%, and 0%; answers other than 0% reflected poor prognostic understanding) and life expectancy (≤6 months, 7-12 months, 1-2 years, 2-5 years, and5 years; answers of5 years reflected poor prognostic understanding). Any difference between oncologist and patient in response options was considered discordant. Outcomes were any hospitalization and hospice use at 6 months captured by the clinical research associates.Among the 541 patients, the mean (SD) age was 76.6 (5.2) years, 264 of 540 (49%) were female, and 486 of 540 (90%) were White. Poor prognostic understanding regarding curability was reported for 59% (206 of 348) of patients, and poor prognostic understanding regarding life expectancy estimates was reported for 41% (205 of 496) of patients. Approximately 60% (202 of 336) of patient-oncologist dyads were discordant regarding curability, and 72% (356 of 492) of patient-oncologist dyads were discordant regarding life expectancy estimates. Poor prognostic understanding regarding life expectancy estimates was associated with lower odds of hospice use (adjusted odds ratio, 0.30; 95% CI, 0.16-0.59). Discordance regarding life expectancy estimates was associated with greater odds of hospitalization (adjusted odds ratio, 1.64; 95% CI, 1.01-2.66).This study highlights different constructs of prognostic understanding and the need to better understand the association between prognostic understanding and health care use among older adult patients with advanced cancer.ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02107443.

BACKGROUND: Shared decision making (SDM) is especially important for older adults with cancer given the risks of over- and undertreatment, uncertainty regarding benefits/harms worsened by research underrepresentation, and individual preferences. We aimed to adapt the Best Case/Worst Case (BC/WC) communication tool, which improves SDM in geriatric surgery, to geriatric oncology. METHODS: We conducted focus groups with 40 stakeholders (fourteen older adults with lung cancer, twelve caregivers, fourteen medical oncologists) to elicit perspectives on using the BC/WC tool for geriatric oncology and to identify components needing refinement. During each focus group, participants viewed a BC/WC demonstration video and answered questions modified from the Decision Aid Acceptability Scale. We analyzed transcripts using deductive and inductive thematic analyses. DISCUSSION: Participants believed that the BC/WC tool could help patients understand their cancer care choices, explore tradeoffs and picture potential outcomes, and deliberate about decisions based on their goals, preferences, and values. Oncologists also reported the tool could guide conversations to address points that may frequently be skipped (e.g., alternative options, treatment goals). Participant preferences varied widely regarding discussion of the worst-case scenario and desire for statistical information. CONCLUSION: The BC/WC tool is a promising strategy that may improve SDM in geriatric oncology and patient understanding of alternative options and treatment goals. Based on participant input, adaptations will include framing cancer care as a series of decisions, eliciting patient preferences and asking permission before offering the worst-case scenario, and selection of the two most relevant options to present if multiple exist.

Many older patients with myeloid neoplasms experience treatment-related toxicities. We previously demonstrated that a home-based, progressive aerobic walking and resistance exercise program (EXCAP) improved physical and psychological outcomes in patients with cancer. However, older patients have more difficulty adhering to exercise than younger patients. Reasons may include low motivation, difficulty with transportation, and limited access to exercise professionals. To improve exercise adherence, we integrated a mobile app with EXCAP (GO-EXCAP) and assessed its feasibility and usability in a single-arm pilot study among older patients with myeloid neoplasms undergoing outpatient chemotherapy. GO-EXCAP intervention lasts for 2 cycles of treatment, and the primary feasibility metric was data reporting on the app. Usability was evaluated via the system usability scale (SUS). Patients were interviewed at mid and postintervention to elicit their feedback, and deductive thematic analysis was applied to the transcripts. Twenty-five patients (mean age, 72 years) were recruited. Recruitment and retention rates were 64% and 88%, respectively. Eighty-two percent (18/22) of patients entered some exercise data on the app at least half of the study days, excluding hospitalization (a priori, we considered 70% as feasible). Averaged daily steps were 2848 and 3184 at baseline and after intervention, respectively. Patients also performed resistance exercises 26.2 minutes per day, 2.9 days per week at low intensity (rate of perceived exertion 3.8/10). Usability was above average (SUS, 70.3). In qualitative analyses, 3 themes were identified, including positive experience with the intervention, social interactions, and flexibility. The GO-EXCAP intervention is feasible and usable for older patients with myeloid neoplasms undergoing outpatient chemotherapy. This trial was registered at www.clinicaltrials.gov as #NCT04035499.

Informed treatment decision-making necessitates accurate prognostication, including predictions about quality of life.We examined whether oncologists, patients with advanced cancer, and caregivers accurately predict patients' future quality of life and whether these predictions are prospectively associated with end-of-life care and bereavement.We conducted secondary analyses of clinical trial data. Patients with advanced cancer (n = 156), caregivers (n = 156), and oncologists (n = 38) predicted patient quality of life 3 months into the future. Patients subsequently rated their quality of life 3 months later. Medical record data documented chemotherapy and emergency department (ED)/inpatient visits in the 30 days before death (n = 79 decedents). Caregivers self-reported on depression, anxiety, grief, purpose, and regret 7-months post-mortem. In mixed-effects models, patient, caregiver, and oncologist quality-of-life predictions at study entry were used to predict end-of-life care and caregiver outcomes, controlling for patients' quality of life at 3-month follow-up, demographic and clinical characteristics, and nesting within oncologists.Caregivers (P0.0001) and oncologists (P = 0.001) predicted lower quality of life than what patients actually experienced. Among decedents, 24.0% received chemotherapy and 54.5% had an ED/inpatient visit. When caregivers' predictions were more negative, patients were less likely to receive chemotherapy (P = 0.028) or have an ED/inpatient visit (P = 0.033), and caregivers reported worse depression (P = 0.002), anxiety (P = 0.019), and grief (P = 0.028) and less purpose in life (P 0.001) 7-months post-mortem.When caregivers have more negative expectations about patients' quality of life, patients receive less intensive end-of-life care, and caregivers report worse bereavement outcomes.

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

Background Older adults (≥65 years) with gastrointestinal (GI) cancers who receive chemotherapy are at increased risk of hospitalization caused by treatment-related toxicity. Geriatric assessment (GA) has been previously shown to predict risk of toxicity in older adults undergoing chemotherapy. However, studies incorporating the GA specifically in older adults with GI cancers have been limited. This study sought to identify GA-based risk factors for chemotherapy toxicity–related hospitalization among older adults with GI cancers. Patients and Methods We performed a secondary post hoc subgroup analysis of two prospective studies used to develop and validate a GA-based chemotherapy toxicity score. The incidence of unplanned hospitalizations during the course of chemotherapy treatment was determined. Results This analysis included 199 patients aged ≥65 years with a diagnosis of GI cancer (85 colorectal, 51 gastric/esophageal, and 63 pancreatic/hepatobiliary). Sixty-five (32.7%) patients had ≥1 hospitalization. Univariate analysis identified sex (female), cardiac comorbidity, stage IV disease, low serum albumin, cancer type (gastric/esophageal), hearing deficits, and polypharmacy as risk factors for hospitalization. Multivariable analyses found that patients who had cardiac comorbidity (OR 2.48, 95% CI 1.13-5.42) were significantly more likely to be hospitalized. Conclusion Cardiac comorbidity may be a risk factor for hospitalization in older adults with GI cancers receiving chemotherapy. Further studies with larger sample sizes are warranted to examine the relationship between GA measures and hospitalization in this vulnerable population.

PURPOSE: Older patients with advanced cancer often have comorbidities that can worsen their cancer and treatment outcomes. We assessed how a geriatric assessment (GA)–guided intervention can guide conversations about comorbidities among patients, oncologists, and caregivers. METHODS: This secondary analysis arose from a nationwide, multisite cluster-randomized trial (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT02107443 ). Eligible patients were ≥ 70 years, had advanced cancer (solid tumors or lymphoma), and had impairment in at least one GA domain (not including polypharmacy). Oncology practices (n = 30) were randomly assigned to usual care or intervention. All patients completed a GA; in the intervention arm, a GA summary with recommendations was provided to their oncologist. Patients completed an Older Americans Resources and Services Comorbidity questionnaire at screening. The clinical encounter following GA was audio-recorded, transcribed, and coded for topics related to comorbidities. Linear mixed models examined the effect of the intervention on the outcomes adjusting for practice site as a random effect. RESULTS: Patients (N = 541) were 76.6 ± 5.2 years old; 94.6% of patients had at least one comorbidity with an average of 3.2 ± 1.9. The intervention increased the average number of conversations regarding comorbidities per patient from 0.52 to 0.99 ( P < .01). Moreover, there were a greater number of concerns acknowledged (0.52 v 0.32; P = .03) and there was a 2.4-times higher odds of having comorbidity concerns addressed via referral, handout, or other modes (95% CI, 1.3 to 4.3; P = .004). Most oncologists in the intervention arm (76%) discussed comorbidities in light of the treatment plan, and 41% tailored treatment plans. CONCLUSION: Providing oncologists with a GA-guided intervention enhanced communication regarding comorbidities.

PURPOSE: Chemotherapy-induced peripheral neuropathy (CIPN) is a disabling complication of many chemotherapies. We investigated the feasibility of using health plan claims and administrative data to identify CIPN occurrence by comparing patients who received neurotoxic and non-neurotoxic chemotherapies. METHODS: The sample included over 53,000,000 patients from two regional and one national insurer in the U.S. (>400,000 exposed to chemotherapy). Peripheral neuropathy was identified using a broad definition (Definition 1) and a specific definition (i.e., drug-induced polyneuropathy code) (Definition 2). RESULTS: CIPN incidence as measured by Definition 1 within 6 months of chemotherapy initiation was 18.1% and 6.2% for patients who received neurotoxic and non-neurotoxic chemotherapy, respectively (relative risk neurotoxic vs. non-neurotoxic (RR): 2.93 (95% CI: 2.87-2.98)). For Definition 2, these incidences were 3.6% and 0.1% (RR: 25.2 (95% CI: 22.8-27.8)). The incidences of new analgesic prescriptions for neurotoxic and non-neurotoxic groups were as follows: gabapentin, 7.1%/1.7%; pregabalin, 0.69%/0.31%; and duloxetine, 0.78%/0.76%. The incidence of CIPN as defined by Definitions 1 and 2 was low compared to that of published research studies, but the relative risk of CIPN among patients who received neurotoxic chemotherapies compared to those who received non-neurotoxic chemotherapies was high using Definition 2. CONCLUSIONS: These data suggest that as used currently by clinicians, administrative codes likely underestimate CIPN incidence. Thus, studies using administrative data to estimate CIPN incidence are not currently feasible. However, the drug-induced polyneuropathy code is a specific indicator of CIPN in administrative data and may be useful for investigating predictors or potentially preventive therapies of CIPN.