Tullika Garg1, Alicia Johns2, Amanda J Young2, Matthew E Nielsen3, Hung-Jui Tan4, Carmit K McMullen5, H Lester Kirchner2, Harvey J Cohen6, Terrence E Murphy7. 1. Department of Urology, Geisinger, Danville, PA, United States of America; Department of Population Health Sciences, Geisinger, Danville, PA, United States of America. Electronic address: tgarg@geisinger.edu. 2. Department of Population Health Sciences, Geisinger, Danville, PA, United States of America; Biostatistics Core, Geisinger, Danville, PA, United States of America. 3. Department of Urology, University of North Carolina School of Medicine, Chapel Hill, NC, United States of America; Departments of Epidemiology and Health Policy & Management, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Gillings School of Global Public Health, Chapel Hill, NC, United States of America; Center for Health Research, Kaiser Permanente Northwest, Portland, OR, United States of America. 4. Department of Urology, University of North Carolina School of Medicine, Chapel Hill, NC, United States of America. 5. Center for Health Research, Kaiser Permanente Northwest, Portland, OR, United States of America. 6. Center for the Study of Aging and Human Development, Duke University School of Medicine, Durham, NC, United States of America. 7. Section of Geriatrics, Department of Internal Medicine, Yale University School of Medicine, New Haven, CT, United States of America.
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: Treatment burden is emerging as an important patient-centered outcome for older adults with cancer who concurrently manage geriatric conditions. Our objective was to evaluate the contribution of geriatric conditions to treatment burden in older adults with non-muscle invasive bladder cancer (NMIBC). METHODS: We identified 73,395 Medicare beneficiaries age 66+ diagnosed with NMIBC (Stage <II) in SEER-Medicare (2001-2014). The primary outcome was treatment burden, defined as health system contact days in the year following NMIBC diagnosis. Explanatory variables were the following geriatric conditions: multimorbidity (≥ 2 chronic conditions), functional dependency, falls, depression, cognitive impairment, weight loss, and urinary incontinence. We used negative binomial regression to model the association between individual geriatric conditions and treatment burden while adjusting for covariates. RESULTS: At baseline, 64% had multimorbidity and median 3 conditions (IQR 0-5). Prevalence of other geriatric conditions ranged from 5.9%-15.2%. Adjusted mean health system contact was 8.9 days (95% CI 8.6-9.2). Multimorbidity had the largest effect size (adjusted mean 11.8 contact days (95% CI 8.3-8.8)). Each additional chronic condition conferred a 13% increased average number of health system contact (adjusted IRR 1.132, 95% CI 1.129-1.135). Regardless of number of chronic conditions, rural patients consistently had more treatment burden than urban counterparts. DISCUSSION: In this population-based cohort of older NMIBC patients, multimorbidity and rurality were strongly associated with treatment burden in the year following NMIBC diagnosis. These findings highlight the need for interventions that reduce treatment burden due to geriatric conditions among the growing population of older adults with cancer, particularly in rural areas.
INTRODUCTION: Treatment burden is emerging as an important patient-centered outcome for older adults with cancer who concurrently manage geriatric conditions. Our objective was to evaluate the contribution of geriatric conditions to treatment burden in older adults with non-muscle invasive bladder cancer (NMIBC). METHODS: We identified 73,395 Medicare beneficiaries age 66+ diagnosed with NMIBC (Stage <II) in SEER-Medicare (2001-2014). The primary outcome was treatment burden, defined as health system contact days in the year following NMIBC diagnosis. Explanatory variables were the following geriatric conditions: multimorbidity (≥ 2 chronic conditions), functional dependency, falls, depression, cognitive impairment, weight loss, and urinary incontinence. We used negative binomial regression to model the association between individual geriatric conditions and treatment burden while adjusting for covariates. RESULTS: At baseline, 64% had multimorbidity and median 3 conditions (IQR 0-5). Prevalence of other geriatric conditions ranged from 5.9%-15.2%. Adjusted mean health system contact was 8.9 days (95% CI 8.6-9.2). Multimorbidity had the largest effect size (adjusted mean 11.8 contact days (95% CI 8.3-8.8)). Each additional chronic condition conferred a 13% increased average number of health system contact (adjusted IRR 1.132, 95% CI 1.129-1.135). Regardless of number of chronic conditions, rural patients consistently had more treatment burden than urban counterparts. DISCUSSION: In this population-based cohort of older NMIBC patients, multimorbidity and rurality were strongly associated with treatment burden in the year following NMIBC diagnosis. These findings highlight the need for interventions that reduce treatment burden due to geriatric conditions among the growing population of older adults with cancer, particularly in rural areas.
Authors: Elizabeth Chrischilles; Kathleen Schneider; June Wilwert; Gregory Lessman; Brian O'Donnell; Brian Gryzlak; Kara Wright; Robert Wallace Journal: Med Care Date: 2014-03 Impact factor: 2.983
Authors: Eric A Engels; Ruth M Pfeiffer; Winnie Ricker; William Wheeler; Ruth Parsons; Joan L Warren Journal: Am J Epidemiol Date: 2011-08-04 Impact factor: 4.897
Authors: Jennifer M Reckrey; Abraham A Brody; Elizabeth T McCormick; Linda V DeCherrie; Carolyn W Zhu; Christine S Ritchie; Albert L Siu; Natalia N Egorova; Alex D Federman Journal: Contemp Clin Trials Date: 2018-03-26 Impact factor: 2.226
Authors: Thomas L Jang; Neal Patel; Izak Faiena; Kushan D Radadia; Dirk F Moore; Sammy E Elsamra; Eric A Singer; Mark N Stein; James A Eastham; Peter T Scardino; Yong Lin; Isaac Y Kim; Grace L Lu-Yao Journal: Cancer Date: 2018-09-25 Impact factor: 6.860
Authors: Sam S Chang; Stephen A Boorjian; Roger Chou; Peter E Clark; Siamak Daneshmand; Badrinath R Konety; Raj Pruthi; Diane Z Quale; Chad R Ritch; John D Seigne; Eila Curlee Skinner; Norm D Smith; James M McKiernan Journal: J Urol Date: 2016-06-16 Impact factor: 7.450
Authors: Eveline A M Heijnsdijk; Daan Nieboer; Tullika Garg; Iris Lansdorp-Vogelaar; Harry J de Koning; Matthew E Nielsen Journal: BJU Int Date: 2018-08-27 Impact factor: 5.588
Authors: Alexandra Junn; Neha R Shukla; Lily Morrison; Meghan Halley; Mary-Margaret Chren; Louise C Walter; Dominick L Frosch; Dan Matlock; Jeanette S Torres; Eleni Linos Journal: BMC Med Inform Decis Mak Date: 2020-04-29 Impact factor: 2.796
Authors: Kyle A Richards; Shih-Wen Lin; Ching-Yi Chuo; Christina L Derleth; Jingbo Yi; Marko Zivkovic; Sarika Ogale; Sandip Prasad; G Joel Decastro; Gary D Steinberg Journal: Urology Date: 2020-07-24 Impact factor: 2.649
Authors: Smita Bhatia; Wendy Landier; Electra D Paskett; Katherine B Peters; Janette K Merrill; Jonathan Phillips; Raymond U Osarogiagbon Journal: J Natl Cancer Inst Date: 2022-07-11 Impact factor: 11.816