PURPOSE: American Society of Clinical Oncology recommends that older adults with cancer being considered for chemotherapy receive geriatric assessment (GA) and management (GAM), but few randomized controlled trials have examined its impact on quality of life (QOL). PATIENTS AND METHODS: The 5C study was a two-group parallel 1:1 single-blind multicenter randomized controlled trial of GAM for 6 months versus usual oncologic care. Eligible patients were age 70+ years, diagnosed with a solid tumor, lymphoma, or myeloma, referred for first-/second-line chemotherapy or immunotherapy or targeted therapy, and had an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 0-2. The primary outcome QOL was measured with the global health scale of the European Organisation for the Research and Treatment of Cancer QOL questionnaire and analyzed with a pattern mixture model using an intent-to-treat approach (at 6 and 12 months). Secondary outcomes included functional status, grade 3-5 treatment toxicity; health care use; satisfaction; cancer treatment plan modification; and overall survival. RESULTS: From March 2018 to March 2020, 350 participants were enrolled. Mean age was 76 years and 40.3% were female. Fifty-four percent started treatment with palliative intent. Eighty-one (23.1%) patients died. GAM did not improve QOL (global QOL of 4.4 points [95% CI, 0.9 to 8.0] favoring the control arm). There was also no difference in survival, change in treatment plan, unplanned hospitalization/emergency department visits, and treatment toxicity between groups. CONCLUSION: GAM did not improve QOL. Most intervention group participants received GA on or after treatment initiation per patient request. Considering recent completed trials, GA may have benefit if completed before treatment selection. The COVID-19 pandemic may have affected our QOL outcome and intervention delivery for some participants.

PURPOSE: Ipilimumab is an effective treatment for melanoma; however, toxicity rates remain high. The objective of this study was to describe the rates of adverse events (AEs), emergency room (ER) visits, hospitalizations, and nursing resource utilization for patients enrolled in a nurse-led telephone toxicity monitoring program. METHODS: Patients received weekly telephone calls from nursing to review a toxicity checklist during ipilimumab treatment and for 8 weeks after completion. To evaluate this program, a single-center retrospective review was performed for patients treated between July 2012 and September 2017 with single agent ipilimumab for advanced melanoma. Data were collected up to 3 months post-ipilimumab. RESULTS: A total of 67 patients were included, with a mean (standard deviation) age of 61 (14.6) years. Thirty-three (49%) patients received four doses of ipilimumab, and 17 (25%) had one dose delay. The median (IQR) of any AEs reported per patient was 11 (8-17). There were 44 (66%) patients with AEs deemed to be definitely or probably related to ipilimumab, and of those, 3 (4%) experienced a grade 3 AE, whereas 4 (6%) experienced grade 4 AEs. Twenty patients (30%) had ER visits, and 31 (46%) were hospitalized during follow-up (9% ER visits and 6% hospitalizations were related to drug toxicity). CONCLUSION: Ipilimumab is associated with high rates of toxicity; however, a proactive nurse-led monitoring program was feasible and patients had low rates of grade 3-4 toxicity. Hospitalization rates and ER visits remained high; however, the minority of those were related to drug toxicity.

Background and purpose: This study aimed to summarize the clinical outcomes of patients with metastatic melanoma who received high‐dose radiation prior to or during systemic therapy at a single academic institution.Methods: We identified patients with metastatic melanoma who underwent high‐dose radiation therapy (HDRT) for extracranial metastases prior to or during systemic therapy from 2010 to 2018. Treatment indications included oligometastases, oligoprogression, and local control. Using the Kaplan‐Meier method, we plotted overall survival (OS), progression‐free survival‐1 (PFS1), and PFS2. Competing risk analysis determined the cumulative incidence of local failure (LF) and the time to start or change systemic therapy (SCST). Univariate and multivariable analyses were used to identify predictive factors.Results: We analyzed 34 patients with 79 lesions, with a median follow‐up of 17.4 months. Sixty‐eight percent of patients received systemic therapy after the first HDRT. The median OS was 22 months, with brain metastases before HDRT being a significant predictor in multivariable analysis. The median PFS1 for first‐line HDRT was 4.1 months, and the median PFS2 was 3.9 months. Rates of LF were 10.3% at 12 months and 11.7% at 24 months. The incidence of SCST following HDRT was 59.8% at 12 months and 76.1% at 24 months, with radiation targeted at the lung associated with a lower incidence of SCST.Conclusion: HDRT for treating metastatic lesions in melanoma demonstrated excellent local control and may play a role in delaying SCST. Additional courses of HDRT may provide cumulative benefits.

Purpose of review: To provide an overview of the recent advancements in predicting toxicity associated with cancer treatment in older patients. Recent findings: Various screening tools and validated risk calculators have been shown to help predict toxicity from surgery and chemotherapy. Radiation therapy has been more challenging to select the appropriate tool to reliably predict patients at risk for toxicity and noncompliance. Ongoing work on electronic geriatric assessment tools is showing promise in making comprehensive assessment more feasible. Summary: Selecting appropriate cancer therapy is particularly important in older patients, and validated tools have been developed to guide clinicians for surgery and chemotherapy; however, radiotherapy toxicity remains an area for further development, as does the uptake of existing tools into routine oncology practice.

Purpose of the review: The aim of this review is to describe the clinical use and tolerability of immune checkpoint inhibitors in older adults with solid tumors, where there is an abundance of evidence with recent updates including subgroups of older patients. Recent findings: Studies with updated analyses and subgroups of older patients show that in general older patients benefit as well as younger patients and tolerate immunotherapy very well. However, in some instances of combination therapies which may expose patients to more toxicity, the benefits are reduced, and careful selection of older patients, including adjunctive assessments such as geriatric assessment, can help to identify the appropriate treatment for an individual patient. Summary: Older adults remain underrepresented in clinical trials, including those involving immunotherapy. Therefore, efforts must be made to include more older patients in trials and to assess real-world evidence to inform decision-making.