The COVID-19 pandemic poses a barrier to equal and evidence-based management of cancer in older adults. The International Society of Geriatric Oncology (SIOG) formed a panel of experts to develop consensus recommendations on the implications of the pandemic on several aspects of cancer care in this age group including geriatric assessment (GA), surgery, radiotherapy, systemic treatment, palliative care and research. Age and cancer diagnosis are significant predictors of adverse outcomes of the COVID-19 infection. In this setting, GA is particularly valuable to drive decision-making. GA may aid estimating physiologic reserve and adaptive capability, assessing risk-benefits of either providing or temporarily withholding treatments, and determining patient preferences to help inform treatment decisions. In a resource-constrained setting, geriatric screening tools may be administered remotely to identify patients requiring comprehensive GA. Tele-health is also crucial to ensure adequate continuity of care and minimize the risk of infection exposure. In general, therapeutic decisions should favor the most effective and least invasive approach with the lowest risk of adverse outcomes. In selected cases, this might require deferring or omitting surgery, radiotherapy or systemic treatments especially where benefits are marginal and alternative safe therapeutic options are available. Ongoing research is necessary to expand knowledge of the management of cancer in older adults. However, the pandemic presents a significant barrier and efforts should be made to ensure equitable access to clinical trials and prospective data collection to elucidate the outcomes of COVID-19 in this population.

Geriatric syndromes are multifactorial conditions that are prevalent in older adults. Geriatric syndromes are believed to develop when an individual experiences accumulated impairments in multiple systems that compromise their compensatory ability. In older adults with cancer, the presence of a geriatric syndrome is common and may increase the complexity of cancer treatment. In addition, the physiologic stress of cancer and cancer treatment may precipitate or exacerbate geriatric syndromes. Common geriatric syndromes include falls, cognitive syndromes and delirium, depression, and polypharmacy. In the oncology setting, the presence of geriatric syndromes is relevant; falls and cognitive problems have been shown to be predictive of chemotherapy toxicity and overall survival. Polypharmacy and depression are more common in older adults with cancer compared with the general geriatric population. Multiple screening tools exist to identify falls, cognitive problems, polypharmacy, and depression in older adults and can be applied to the oncology setting to identify patients at risk. When recognized, several interventions exist that could be considered for this vulnerable population. We review the available evidence of four geriatric syndromes in the oncology setting, including clinical implications, validated screening tools, potential supportive care, and therapeutic interventions.

PurposeAlthough comorbidities, frailty, and functional impairment are common in older adults (OA) with cancer, little is known about how these factors are considered during the treatment decision-making process by OAs, their families, and health care providers. Our aim was to better understand the treatment decision process from all these perspectives.MethodsA mixed methods multi-perspective longitudinal study using semi-structured interviews and surveys with 29 OAs aged ≥70 years with advanced prostate, breast, colorectal, or lung cancer, 24 of their family members,13 oncologists, and 15 family physicians was conducted. The sample was stratified on age (70–79 and 80+). All interviews were analyzed using thematic analysis.ResultsThere was no difference in the treatment decision-making experience based on age. Most OAs felt that they should have the final say in the treatment decision, but strongly valued their oncologists’ opinion. “Trust in my oncologist” and “chemotherapy as the last resort to prolong life” were the most important reasons to accept treatment. Families indicated a need to improve communication between them, the patient and the specialist, particularly around goals of treatment. Comorbidity and potential side-effects did not play a major role in the treatment decision-making for patients, families, or oncologists. Family physicians reported no involvement in decisions but desired to be more involved.ConclusionThis first study using multiple perspectives showed neither frailty nor comorbidity played a role in the treatment decision-making process. Efforts to improve communication were identified as an opportunity that may enhance quality of care.Condensed abstractIn a mixed methods study multiple perspective study with older adults with cancer, their family members, their oncologist and their family physician we explored the treatment decision making process and found that most older adults were satisfied with their decision. Comorbidity, functional status and frailty did not impact the older adult’s or their family members’ decision.Electronic supplementary materialThe online version of this article (doi:10.1007/s00520-016-3476-8) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Cancer is a disease that mostly affects older adults. Other health conditions, changes in functional status, and use of multiple medications change the risks and benefits of cancer treatment for older adults. Several international organizations, such as the International Society of Geriatric Oncology, the European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer, recommend the conduct of a geriatric assessment (GA) for older adults with cancer to help select the most appropriate treatment and identify any underlying undetected medical, functional, and psychosocial issues that can interfere with treatment. The aim of this review is to describe what a GA is and how to implement it in daily clinical practice for older adults with cancer in the oncology setting. We provide an overview of commonly used tools. Key considerations in performing the GA include the resources available (staff, space, and time), patient population (who will be assessed), what GA tools to use, and clinical follow‐up (who will be responsible for using the GA results for developing care plans and who will provide follow‐up care). Important challenges in implementing GA in clinical practice include not having easy and timely access to geriatric expertise, patient burden of the additional hospital visits, and establishing collaboration between the GA team and oncologists regarding expectations of the population referred for GA and expected outcomes of the GA. Finally, we provide some possible interventions for problems identified during the GA.

No abstract