Purpose: Glioblastoma (GBM) is the most common aggressive primary malignant brain tumor in adults with a median age of onset of 68 to 70 years old. Although advanced age is often associated with poorer GBM patient survival, the predominant source(s) of maladaptive aging effects remains to be established. Here, we studied intratumoral and extratumoral relationships between adult patients with GBM and mice with brain tumors across the lifespan. Experimental Design: Electronic health records at Northwestern Medicine and the NCI SEER databases were evaluated for GBM patient age and overall survival. The commercial Tempus and Caris databases, as well as The Cancer Genome Atlas were profiled for gene expression, DNA methylation, and mutational changes with varying GBM patient age. In addition, gene expression analysis was performed on the extratumoral brain of younger and older adult mice with or without a brain tumor. The survival of young and old wild-type or transgenic (INK-ATTAC) mice with a brain tumor was evaluated after treatment with or without senolytics and/or immunotherapy. Results: Human patients with GBM ≥65 years of age had a significantly decreased survival compared with their younger counterparts. While the intra-GBM molecular profiles were similar between younger and older patients with GBM, non-tumor brain tissue had a significantly different gene expression profile between young and old mice with a brain tumor and the eradication of senescent cells improved immunotherapy-dependent survival of old but not young mice. Conclusions: This work suggests a potential benefit for combining senolytics with immunotherapy in older patients with GBM.

Introduction: Distress is common among cancer patients, especially those undergoing surgery. However, no study has systematically analyzed distress trends in this population. The purpose of this study was to systematically review perioperative rates of distress, as well as differences across cancer types, in cancer patients undergoing surgical intervention.Methods: A systematic review was conducted using PubMed, EMBASE, Scopus, and APA PsycINFO (searched until July 17, 2023). Included studies were clinical studies of cancer patients undergoing surgery reporting distress measured by the National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN) distress thermometer (DT). Data on study and patient characteristics, and preoperative and postoperative distress rates were extracted. Results were pooled, and overall distress rates were calculated as weighted means. Subanalysis by cancer type was performed. Three meta‐analyses were conducted: (1) preoperative distress, (2) postoperative distress, and (3) change in distress.Results: Fifty‐seven studies including 13,410 cancer patients were reviewed. Most patients were female (67.4%), White (77.8%), and married/partnered (72.2%), with an average age of 59.2 years. The most common cancers were breast (14 studies), brain (8), and colorectal (7). Weighted mean pre‐ and postoperative distress scores were 5.1 and 4.5, respectively. Distress remained high through 30 days postoperatively, then declined thereafter. Brain cancer patients reported the highest postoperative distress (5.1), followed by breast cancer patients (4.9).Conclusion: The perioperative phase is a critical period of elevated distress in cancer patients. Preoperatively, patients experience moderate to severe levels of distress, which persist throughout the early postoperative phase, gradually declining from the 1‐month postoperative mark onwards.

Aim: Central neurocytoma (CN) is a rare WHO grade II central nervous system (CNS) tumor. This is an update on chemotherapeutic agents used in its treatment. Patients & methods: An institutional rev...

For three years, COVID-19 has circulated among our communities and around the world, fundamentally changing social interactions, health care systems, and service delivery. For people living with (and receiving treatment for) cancer, pandemic conditions presented significant additional hurdles in an already unstable and shifting environment, including disrupted personal contact with care providers, interrupted access to clinical trials, distanced therapeutic encounters, multiple immune vulnerabilities, and new forms of financial precarity. In a 2020 perspective in this journal, we examined how COVID-19 was reshaping cancer care in the early stages of the pandemic and how these changes might endure into the future. Three years later, and in light of a series of interviews with patients and their caregivers from the United States and Australia conducted during the pandemic, we return to consider the potential legacy effects of the pandemic on cancer care. While some challenges to care provision and survivorship were unforeseen, others accentuated and amplified existing problems experienced by patients, caregivers, and health care providers. Both are likely to have enduring effects in the “post-pandemic” world, raising the importance of focusing on lessons that can be learned for the future.