OBJECTIVES: To identify patient characteristics associated with polypharmacy and inappropriate medication (PIM) use among older patients with newly diagnosed cancer. DESIGN: Cross-Sectional Study. SETTING: Ambulatory oncology clinics at an academic medical center. PARTICIPANTS: 117 patients aged ≥ 65 years with newly diagnosed histologically confirmed stage I-IV cancer were enrolled between April 2008 and September 2009. MEASUREMENTS: Medication review, included patient self-report and medical records. Polypharmacy was defined as the concurrent use of ≥ five medications, (Yes/No). PIM use was defined as use of ≥ one medication included in the 2003 update of Beers Criteria, (Yes/No). RESULTS: The prevalence of polypharmacy and PIM use were 80% and 41%, respectively. Three independent correlates of medication use were identified. An increase in comorbidity count by one, ECOG-PS score by one, and PIM use by one, was associated with an increase in medication use by 0.48 (P=0.0002), 0.79 (P=0.01) and 1.22 (P=0.006), respectively. Two independent correlates of PIM use were identified. The odds of using PIMs decreased by 10% for one unit increase in Body Mass Index [Odds Ratio (OR) 0.90, 95% CI = (0.84, 0.97)], and increased by 18% for each increase in medication count by one [OR 1.18, 95% CI = (1.04, 1.34)]. CONCLUSION: There was a high prevalence of polypharmacy and PIM use in older patients with newly diagnosed cancer. Given the co-occurrence of polypharmacy with poor performance status and multi-morbidity, multi-dimensional interventions are needed in the geriatric-oncology population to improve health and cancer outcomes.
OBJECTIVES: To identify patient characteristics associated with polypharmacy and inappropriate medication (PIM) use among older patients with newly diagnosed cancer. DESIGN: Cross-Sectional Study. SETTING: Ambulatory oncology clinics at an academic medical center. PARTICIPANTS: 117 patients aged ≥ 65 years with newly diagnosed histologically confirmed stage I-IV cancer were enrolled between April 2008 and September 2009. MEASUREMENTS: Medication review, included patient self-report and medical records. Polypharmacy was defined as the concurrent use of ≥ five medications, (Yes/No). PIM use was defined as use of ≥ one medication included in the 2003 update of Beers Criteria, (Yes/No). RESULTS: The prevalence of polypharmacy and PIM use were 80% and 41%, respectively. Three independent correlates of medication use were identified. An increase in comorbidity count by one, ECOG-PS score by one, and PIM use by one, was associated with an increase in medication use by 0.48 (P=0.0002), 0.79 (P=0.01) and 1.22 (P=0.006), respectively. Two independent correlates of PIM use were identified. The odds of using PIMs decreased by 10% for one unit increase in Body Mass Index [Odds Ratio (OR) 0.90, 95% CI = (0.84, 0.97)], and increased by 18% for each increase in medication count by one [OR 1.18, 95% CI = (1.04, 1.34)]. CONCLUSION: There was a high prevalence of polypharmacy and PIM use in older patients with newly diagnosed cancer. Given the co-occurrence of polypharmacy with poor performance status and multi-morbidity, multi-dimensional interventions are needed in the geriatric-oncology population to improve health and cancer outcomes.
Authors: L P Fried; C M Tangen; J Walston; A B Newman; C Hirsch; J Gottdiener; T Seeman; R Tracy; W J Kop; G Burke; M A McBurnie Journal: J Gerontol A Biol Sci Med Sci Date: 2001-03 Impact factor: 6.053
Authors: Michael A Steinman; C Seth Landefeld; Gary E Rosenthal; Daniel Berthenthal; Saunak Sen; Peter J Kaboli Journal: J Am Geriatr Soc Date: 2006-10 Impact factor: 5.562
Authors: Gerda G Fillenbaum; Joseph T Hanlon; Lawrence R Landerman; Margaret B Artz; Heidi O'Connor; Bryan Dowd; Cynthia R Gross; Chad Boult; Judith Garrard; Kenneth E Schmader Journal: Am J Geriatr Pharmacother Date: 2004-06
Authors: Elizabeth A Chrischilles; Rachel VanGilder; Kara Wright; Michael Kelly; Robert B Wallace Journal: J Am Geriatr Soc Date: 2009-06 Impact factor: 5.562
Authors: J T Hanlon; M Weinberger; G P Samsa; K E Schmader; K M Uttech; I K Lewis; P A Cowper; P B Landsman; H J Cohen; J R Feussner Journal: Am J Med Date: 1996-04 Impact factor: 4.965
Authors: Joanna E Klopotowska; Peter C Wierenga; Sophia E de Rooij; Clementine C Stuijt; Lambertus Arisz; Paul F Kuks; Marcel G Dijkgraaf; Loraine Lie-A-Huen; Susanne M Smorenburg Journal: BMC Health Serv Res Date: 2011-05-25 Impact factor: 2.655
Authors: Kathleen Elliot; Janet A Tooze; Rachel Geller; Bayard L Powell; Timothy S Pardee; Ellen Ritchie; LeAnne Kennedy; Kathryn E Callahan; Heidi D Klepin Journal: Leuk Res Date: 2014-07-07 Impact factor: 3.156
Authors: A Schwandt; P J Harris; S Hunsberger; A Deleporte; G L Smith; D Vulih; B D Anderson; S P Ivy Journal: Clin Cancer Res Date: 2014-07-15 Impact factor: 12.531
Authors: Justin P Turner; Sepehr Shakib; Nimit Singhal; Jonathon Hogan-Doran; Robert Prowse; Sally Johns; J Simon Bell Journal: Support Care Cancer Date: 2014-03-02 Impact factor: 3.603