Tyler R Chesney1, Barbara Haas1,2,3,4,5,6, Natalie G Coburn1,2,3,4, Alyson L Mahar7, Victoria Zuk3, Haoyu Zhao4, Frances C Wright1,2,3, Amy T Hsu8,9, Julie Hallet1,2,3,4. 1. Department of Surgery, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada. 2. Division of General Surgery, Sunnybrook Health Sciences Centre-Odette Cancer Centre, Toronto, Ontario, Canada. 3. Sunnybrook Research Institute, Toronto, Ontario, Canada. 4. ICES, Toronto, Ontario, Canada. 5. Interdepartmental Division of Critical Care Medicine, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada. 6. Department of Critical Care Medicine, Sunnybrook Health Sciences Centre, Toronto, Ontario, Canada. 7. Department of Community Health Sciences, University of Manitoba, Winnipeg, Manitoba, Canada. 8. Ottawa Hospital Research Institute, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada. 9. Bruyère Research Institute, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada.
Abstract
Importance: Functional outcomes are central to cancer care decision-making by older adults. Objective: To assess the long-term functional outcomes of older adults after a resection for cancer using time at home as the measure. Design, Setting, and Participants: This population-based cohort study was conducted in Ontario, Canada, using the administrative databases stored at ICES (formerly the Institute for Clinical Evaluative Sciences). The analysis included adults 70 years or older with a new diagnosis of cancer between January 1, 2007, and December 31, 2017, who underwent a resection 90 days to 180 days after the diagnosis. Patients were followed up until and censored at the date of death, date of last contact, or December 31, 2018. Main Outcomes and Measures: The main outcome was time at home, dichotomized as high time at home (defined as ≤14 institution days annually) and low time at home (defined as >14 institution days) during the 5 years after surgical cancer treatment. Time-to-event analyses with Kaplan-Meier methods and multivariable Cox proportional hazards regression models were used. Results: A total of 82 037 patients were included, with a median (interquartile range) follow-up of 46 (23-80) months. Of these patients, 52 119 were women (63.5%) and the mean (SD) age was 77.5 (5.7) years. The median (interquartile range) number of days at home per days alive per patient was high, at 0.98 (0.94-0.99) in postoperative year 1, 0.99 (0.97-1.00) in year 2, 0.99 (0.96-1.00) in year 3, 0.99 (0.96-1.00) in year 4, and 0.99 (0.96-1.00) in year 5. The probability of high time at home was 70.3% (95% CI, 70.0%-70.6%) at postoperative year 1 and 53.2% (95% CI, 52.8%-53.5%) at postoperative year 5. Advancing age (≥85 years: hazard ratio [HR], 2.11; 95% CI, 2.04-2.18); preoperative frailty (HR, 1.74; 95% CI, 1.68-1.80); high material deprivation (5th quintile: HR, 1.25; 95% CI, 1.20-1.29); rural residency (HR, 1.14; 95% CI, 1.10-1.18); high-intensity surgical procedure (HR, 2.04; 95% CI, 1.84-2.25); and gastrointestinal (HR, 1.23; 95% CI, 1.18-1.27), gynecologic (HR, 1.31; 95% CI, 1.18-1.45), and oropharyngeal (HR, 1.05; 95% CI, 0.95-1.16) cancers were associated with low time at home. Inpatient acute care was responsible for 76.0% and long-term care was responsible for 2.0% of institution days in postoperative year 1. Inpatient days decreased to 31.0% by year 3, but days in long-term care increased over time. Conclusions and Relevance: This study found that older adults predominantly experienced high time at home after resection for cancer, reflecting the overall favorable functional outcomes in this population. The oldest adults and those with preoperative frailty and material deprivation appeared to be the most vulnerable to low time at home, and efforts to optimize and manage expectations about surgical outcomes can be targeted for this population; this information is important for patient counseling regarding surgical cancer treatment and for preparation for postoperative recovery.
Importance: Functional outcomes are central to cancer care decision-making by older adults. Objective: To assess the long-term functional outcomes of older adults after a resection for cancer using time at home as the measure. Design, Setting, and Participants: This population-based cohort study was conducted in Ontario, Canada, using the administrative databases stored at ICES (formerly the Institute for Clinical Evaluative Sciences). The analysis included adults 70 years or older with a new diagnosis of cancer between January 1, 2007, and December 31, 2017, who underwent a resection 90 days to 180 days after the diagnosis. Patients were followed up until and censored at the date of death, date of last contact, or December 31, 2018. Main Outcomes and Measures: The main outcome was time at home, dichotomized as high time at home (defined as ≤14 institution days annually) and low time at home (defined as >14 institution days) during the 5 years after surgical cancer treatment. Time-to-event analyses with Kaplan-Meier methods and multivariable Cox proportional hazards regression models were used. Results: A total of 82 037 patients were included, with a median (interquartile range) follow-up of 46 (23-80) months. Of these patients, 52 119 were women (63.5%) and the mean (SD) age was 77.5 (5.7) years. The median (interquartile range) number of days at home per days alive per patient was high, at 0.98 (0.94-0.99) in postoperative year 1, 0.99 (0.97-1.00) in year 2, 0.99 (0.96-1.00) in year 3, 0.99 (0.96-1.00) in year 4, and 0.99 (0.96-1.00) in year 5. The probability of high time at home was 70.3% (95% CI, 70.0%-70.6%) at postoperative year 1 and 53.2% (95% CI, 52.8%-53.5%) at postoperative year 5. Advancing age (≥85 years: hazard ratio [HR], 2.11; 95% CI, 2.04-2.18); preoperative frailty (HR, 1.74; 95% CI, 1.68-1.80); high material deprivation (5th quintile: HR, 1.25; 95% CI, 1.20-1.29); rural residency (HR, 1.14; 95% CI, 1.10-1.18); high-intensity surgical procedure (HR, 2.04; 95% CI, 1.84-2.25); and gastrointestinal (HR, 1.23; 95% CI, 1.18-1.27), gynecologic (HR, 1.31; 95% CI, 1.18-1.45), and oropharyngeal (HR, 1.05; 95% CI, 0.95-1.16) cancers were associated with low time at home. Inpatient acute care was responsible for 76.0% and long-term care was responsible for 2.0% of institution days in postoperative year 1. Inpatient days decreased to 31.0% by year 3, but days in long-term care increased over time. Conclusions and Relevance: This study found that older adults predominantly experienced high time at home after resection for cancer, reflecting the overall favorable functional outcomes in this population. The oldest adults and those with preoperative frailty and material deprivation appeared to be the most vulnerable to low time at home, and efforts to optimize and manage expectations about surgical outcomes can be targeted for this population; this information is important for patient counseling regarding surgical cancer treatment and for preparation for postoperative recovery.
Authors: Julia R Berian; Sanjay Mohanty; Clifford Y Ko; Ronnie A Rosenthal; Thomas N Robinson Journal: JAMA Surg Date: 2016-09-21 Impact factor: 14.766
Authors: Heather B Neuman; Jennifer M Weiss; Glen Leverson; Erin S O'Connor; David Y Greenblatt; Noelle K Loconte; Caprice C Greenberg; Maureen A Smith Journal: Ann Surg Oncol Date: 2013-01-05 Impact factor: 5.344
Authors: Nishant K Mishra; Ashfaq Shuaib; Patrick Lyden; Hans-Christoph Diener; James Grotta; Stephen Davis; Antoni Davalos; Tim Ashwood; Warren Wasiewski; Kennedy R Lees Journal: Stroke Date: 2011-02-24 Impact factor: 7.914
Authors: Beatrice J Edwards; Xiaotao Zhang; Ming Sun; Juhee Song; Peter Khalil; Meghan Sri Karuturi; Linda Pang; Yunlong Geng; Colin P Dinney; Vicente Valero; Richard E Champlin; Debasish Tripathy Journal: BMJ Support Palliat Care Date: 2018-09-22 Impact factor: 3.568
Authors: Shelley A Sternberg; Netta Bentur; Chad Abrams; Tal Spalter; Tomas Karpati; John Lemberger; Anthony D Heymann Journal: Am J Manag Care Date: 2012-10-01 Impact factor: 2.229
Authors: Julie Hallet; Jesse Zuckerman; Matthew P Guttman; Tyler R Chesney; Barbara Haas; Alyson Mahar; Antoine Eskander; Wing C Chan; Amy Hsu; Victoria Barabash; Natalie Coburn Journal: Ann Surg Oncol Date: 2022-09-06 Impact factor: 4.339
Authors: Ryan D Nipp; Carolyn L Qian; Helen P Knight; Cristina R Ferrone; Hiroko Kunitake; Carlos Fernandez-Del Castillo; Michael Lanuti; Motaz Qadan; Rocco Ricciardi; Keith D Lillemoe; Brandon Temel; Ardeshir Z Hashmi; Erin Scott; Erin Stevens; Grant R Williams; Zhi Ven Fong; Terrence A O'Malley; Esteban Franco-Garcia; Nora K Horick; Vicki A Jackson; Joseph A Greer; Areej El-Jawahri; Jennifer S Temel Journal: J Geriatr Oncol Date: 2022-01-21 Impact factor: 3.929
Authors: Isacco Montroni; Giampaolo Ugolini; Nicole M Saur; Siri Rostoft; Antonino Spinelli; Barbara L Van Leeuwen; Nicola De Liguori Carino; Federico Ghignone; Michael T Jaklitsch; Ponnandai Somasundar; Anna Garutti; Chiara Zingaretti; Flavia Foca; Bernadette Vertogen; Oriana Nanni; Steven D Wexner; Riccardo A Audisio Journal: J Natl Cancer Inst Date: 2022-07-11 Impact factor: 11.816
Authors: Changseok Lee; David Forner; Christopher W Noel; Victoria Taylor; Colin MacKay; Matthew H Rigby; Martin Corsten; Jonathan R Trites; S Mark Taylor Journal: OTO Open Date: 2021-09-29
Authors: Rosanne C Schoonbeek; Suzanne Festen; Roza Rashid; Boukje A C van Dijk; György B Halmos; Lilly-Ann van der Velden Journal: Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg Date: 2022-01-19 Impact factor: 5.591