Browsing by Subject "Older patients"

Now showing 1 - 2 of 2
  • Thumbnail Image
    Item
    Applying a Life Course Biological Age Framework to Improving the Care of Individuals with Adult Cancers: Review and Research Recommendations
    (American Medical Association, 2021) Mandelblatt, Jeanne S.; Ahles, Tim A.; Lippman, Marc E.; Isaacs, Claudine; Adams-Campbell, Lucile; Saykin, Andrew J.; Cohen, Harvey J.; Carroll, Judith; Radiology and Imaging Sciences, School of Medicine
    Importance: The practice of oncology will increasingly involve the care of a growing population of individuals with midlife and late-life cancers. Managing cancer in these individuals is complex, based on differences in biological age at diagnosis. Biological age is a measure of accumulated life course damage to biological systems, loss of reserve, and vulnerability to functional deterioration and death. Biological age is important because it affects the ability to manage the rigors of cancer therapy, survivors' function, and cancer progression. However, biological age is not always clinically apparent. This review presents a conceptual framework of life course biological aging, summarizes candidate measures, and describes a research agenda to facilitate clinical translation to oncology practice. Observations: Midlife and late-life cancers are chronic diseases that may arise from cumulative patterns of biological aging occurring over the life course. Before diagnosis, each new patient was on a distinct course of biological aging related to past exposures, life experiences, genetics, and noncancer chronic disease. Cancer and its treatments may also be associated with biological aging. Several measures of biological age, including p16INK4a, epigenetic age, telomere length, and inflammatory and body composition markers, have been used in oncology research. One or more of these measures may be useful in cancer care, either alone or in combination with clinical history and geriatric assessments. However, further research will be needed before biological age assessment can be recommended in routine practice, including determination of situations in which knowledge about biological age would change treatment, ascertaining whether treatment effects on biological aging are short-lived or persistent, and testing interventions to modify biological age, decrease treatment toxic effects, and maintain functional abilities. Conclusions and relevance: Understanding differences in biological aging could ultimately allow clinicians to better personalize treatment and supportive care, develop tailored survivorship care plans, and prescribe preventive or ameliorative therapies and behaviors informed by aging mechanisms.
  • Thumbnail Image
    Item
    Symptom burden among older breast cancer survivors: The Thinking and Living With Cancer (TLC) study
    (Wiley, 2020-03-15) Mandelblatt, Jeanne S.; Zhai, Wanting; Ahn, Jaeil; Small, Brent J.; Ahles, Tim A.; Carroll, Judith E.; Denduluri, Neelima; Dilawari, Asma; Extermann, Martine; Graham, Deena; Hurria, Arti; Isaacs, Claudine; Jacobsen, Paul B.; Jim, Heather S. L.; Luta, George; McDonald, Brenna C.; Patel, Sunita K.; Root, James C.; Saykin, Andrew J.; Tometich, Danielle B.; Zhou, Xingtao; Cohen, Harvey J.; Radiology and Imaging Sciences, School of Medicine
    Background: Little is known about longitudinal symptom burden and its consequences for well-being, and if lifestyle moderates burden in older survivors. Methods: We report on 36-month data from survivors 60+ with newly diagnosed non-metastatic breast cancer and non-cancer controls recruited August 2010-June 2016. Symptom burden was a sum of self-reported symptoms/diseases: pain (yes/no), fatigue (FACT-fatigue), cognitive (FACT-cog), sleep problems (yes/no), depression (CES-D), anxiety (STAI), and cardiac problems and neuropathy (yes/no). Well-being was measured using the FACT-G, scaled from 0–100. Lifestyle included smoking, alcohol use, BMI, physical activity, and leisure activities. Mixed models assessed relationships between treatment group (chemotherapy +/− hormonal, hormonal only, control) and symptom burden, lifestyle, and covariates. Separate models tested the effects of fluctuations in symptom burden and lifestyle on function. Results: All groups reported high baseline symptoms, and levels remained high over time; survivor-control differences were most notable for cognitive and sleep problems, anxiety, and neuropathy. The adjusted burden score was highest among chemotherapy-exposed survivors, followed by hormonal therapy vs. controls (p<.001). Burden score was related to physical, emotional, and functional well-being (e.g., survivors with lower vs. higher burden scores had 12.4-point higher physical well-being score). The composite lifestyle score was not related to symptom burden or well-being, but physical activity was significantly associated with each outcome (<.005). Conclusions: Cancer and its treatments are associated with a higher level of actionable symptoms and greater loss of well-being over time in older breast cancer survivors than comparable non-cancer populations, suggesting the need for surveillance and opportunities for intervention.