In cancer care, symptom monitoring during treatment results in improved clinical outcomes such as improved quality of life, longer survival, and fewer hospital admissions. However, as the majority of patients with cancer are older and have multimorbidity, they may benefit from monitoring of additional symptoms. The aim of this study was to identify a core set of symptoms to monitor in older patients with multimorbidity treated for cancer, including symptoms caused by treatment side effects, destabilization of comorbidities, and functional decline.
During a scoping literature search, 17 quality of life questionnaires were used to select 53 possible symptoms to monitor. An expert panel of cancer and geriatrics specialists was asked to participate in multiple online surveys to indicate whether these symptoms were not relevant to monitor, only relevant to monitor in a specific patient group, or relevant to monitor in all patients. In a subsequent round the list was reduced and the panel indicated how frequently these symptoms should be monitored during cancer treatment and after cancer treatment completion. Finally, a digital consensus meeting was organised to decide when symptoms had to trigger a recommendation to the patient to get in touch with their medical team.
In total, 30 healthcare professionals participated in the online surveys. After two rounds, a dataset of 19 symptoms related to cancer, cancer treatment, functional decline, and destabilization of comorbidities was agreed upon for monitoring. Five symptoms were selected for daily monitoring during treatment, seven for weekly, and seven for monthly. After treatment completion, the panel agreed upon less frequent reporting. Additionally, nine symptoms to be monitored only in patients with specific cancer types or treatment types were chosen, such as \"cough up blood\" in lung cancer.
This study is the first to identify a core set of symptoms to monitor in older patients with multimorbidity treated for cancer. Future research is needed to investigate whether the monitoring of these symptoms is feasible and improves clinical outcomes in older patients with multimorbidity treated for cancer.

Pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) mainly occurs in older adults. Since randomized clinical trials (RCTs) provide the highest-quality evidence incorporated in NCCN recommendations, the underrepresentation of older patients in RCTs challenges guidelines\' external validity and limits the solidity of evidence in this specific population.
The study aimed to investigate external validity of NCCN guidelines for PDCA and the impact of reference studies eligibility on overall survival (OS) in a real-world older population. We retrieved RCTs supporting NCCN recommendations for management of PDAC and identified ten topics. We matched a cohort of 707 PDAC patients aged ≥70 years from the Moffitt Cancer Center database with eligibility criteria of 96 reference RCTs to check the proportion of patients eligible for at least two RCTs. Eligibility >60% was rated full validity, 30%-60% partial validity and < 30% limited validity. We also performed log-rank test to assessed whether \"eligibility\" status affects OS, stratifying by age (70-74; 75-79; ≥80).
We found full validity for neoadjuvant (57/73 patients; 69.86%), locally advanced (28/39; 71.79%) and second line (88/110; 80%) treatment, while lowest validity was found for adjuvant chemotherapy (37/86; 43%). Eligible status was correlated with a significant OS benefit for adjuvant chemoradiation (p = 0.002) in all-comers and for first-line polychemotherapy in patients aged ≥80 (p = 0.01). Our analysis supports the limitation of guidelines\' external validity in older patients, and hints at possible correlations with survival, although no definitive conclusions can be drawn at this stage. Renewing RCT design with broader eligibility criteria might help increase inclusion of older and thus strengthen the evidence.

There are no guidelines available for what assessment tools to use in a patient\'s self-completed online geriatric assessment (GA) with management recommendations. Therefore, we used a modified Delphi approach with Canadian expert clinicians to develop a consensus online GA plus recommendations tool.
The panel consisted of experts in geriatrics, oncology, nursing, and pharmacy. Experts were asked to rate the importance and feasibility of assessments and interventions to be included in an online GA for patients. The items included in the first round were based on guidelines for in-person GA and literature review. The first two rounds were conducted using an online survey. A virtual 2 h meeting was held to discuss the items where no consensus was reached and then voted on in the final round.
34 experts were invited, and 32 agreed to participate. In round 1, there were 85 items; in round 2, 50 items; and in round 3, 25 items. The final tool consists of fall history, assistive device use, weight loss, medication review, need help taking medication, social supports, depressive symptoms, self-reported vision and hearing, and current smoking status and alcohol use.
This first multidisciplinary consensus on online GA will benefit research and clinical care for older adults with cancer.

Most oncology trainees are not taught about the needs of older patients, who make up the majority of patients with cancer. Training of health care providers is critical to improve the care of older adults with cancer. There is no consensus about which geriatric oncology (GO) competencies are important for medical oncology trainees. Our objective was to identify GO competencies medical oncology trainees should acquire during training.
A modified Delphi consensus of experts in oncology medical education and GO was conducted. Experts categorized at what training stage proposed competencies should be attained: internal medicine, oncology, or GO training. Consensus was obtained if two thirds of experts agreed on the training stage at which the competency should be attained.
A total of 78 potential competencies were identified, of which 35 (44.9%) proposed competencies were felt to be appropriate to be acquired during oncology training. The majority of the identified competencies pertained to prescribing of systemic therapy (n = 12) and psychosocial and supportive care (n = 13). No competencies related to geriatric assessment were identified for acquisition during oncology training.
Experts in oncology education and geriatric oncology agreed upon a set of GO competencies appropriate for oncology trainees. These results provide the foundation for developing a GO curriculum for medical oncology trainees and will hopefully lead to better care of older adults with cancer.
The aging population will drive the projected rise in cancer incidence. Although aging patients make up the majority of patients diagnosed with cancer, oncologists rarely receive training on how to care for them. Training of health care providers is critical to improving the care of older adults with cancer. The results of this study will help form the foundation of developing a geriatric oncology curriculum for medical oncology trainees.

Non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) is a disease of the elderly, who are under-represented in clinical trials. This challenges the external validity of the evidence base for its management and of current guidelines, that we evaluated in a population of older patients. We retrieved randomized clinical trials (RCTs) supporting the guidelines and identified 18 relevant topics. We matched a cohort of NSCLC patients aged older than 80 years from the Moffitt Cancer Center database with the studies\' eligibility criteria to check their qualification for at least 2 studies. Eligibility > 60% was rated full validity, 30% to 60% partial validity, and < 30% limited validity. We obtained data from 760 elderly patients in stage-adjusted groups and collected 244 RCTs from the National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN) and 148 from the European Society for Medical Oncology (ESMO) guidelines. External validity was deemed insufficient for neoadjuvant chemotherapy in stage III disease (27.37% and 25.26% of patients eligible for NCCN and ESMO guidelines, respectively) and use of bevacizumab (13.86% and 16.27% of patients eligible). For ESMO guidelines, it was inadequate regarding double-agent chemotherapy (25.90% of patients eligible), its duration (24.10%) and therapy for Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status 2 patients (17.74%). For NCCN guidelines external validity was lacking for neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy in stage IIIA disease (25.86% of patients eligible). Our analysis highlighted the effect of RCT eligibility criteria on guidelines\' external validity in elderly patients. Eligibility criteria should be carefully considered in trial design and more studies that do not exclude elderly patients should be included in guidelines.