Potentially inappropriate medications defined by STOPP criteria in older patients with breast and colorectal cancer

A Tool for Deprescribing Antithrombotic Medication in Palliative Cancer Patients: A Retrospective Evaluation

Treating palliative cancer patients with antithrombotics is challenging because of the higher risk for both venous thromboembolism and major bleeding. There is a lack of available guidelines on deprescribing potentially inappropriate antithrombotics. We have therefore created an antithrombotics scheme to aid in (de)prescribing antithrombotics. A retrospective single-center clinical cohort observational study was performed to evaluate it. Patients with solid tumors with a life expectancy of less than 3 months seen by the palliative team were included. Comparisons were made between patients who were treated according to the antithrombotics scheme and those who were not. 47.6% of patients used antithrombotics. One hundred and eleven patients were included for analysis. Most patients used antithrombotics according to the scheme (n = 80, 72.1%). Eleven patients experienced a clinical event, seven patients in the scheme adherence group (9.9%) and four in the no scheme adherence group (13.8%), which was not statistically significant (p = 0.726). The higher frequency of clinical events in the group without scheme adherence suggests that (de)prescribing antithrombotics according to the antithrombotics scheme is safe. The results of this study suggest that the antithrombotics scheme could aid healthcare professionals identifying possible inappropriate antithrombotics in palliative cancer patients. Further prospective research is needed to investigate this tool.

Effects of Potentially Inappropriate Medications in Older Patients with Gastrointestinal System Cancer

Objective

Potentially inappropriate medications (PIM) is a crucial problem in the geriatric population. The amount of prescription and unadherence increase because of the different problems encountered in cancer patients. Our aim was to evaluate the effects of PIM in patients with gastrointestinal system cancer and to investigate its relationship with chemotherapy side effects, mortality, and progression.

Methods

This retrospective cohort study assessed 154 patients with gastrointestinal system cancer. Demographics and disease features, the presence of PIM according to the "TIME-to-STOP" criteria and baseline laboratory parameters were recorded. The effects of PIM on survival and adverse treatment events were evaluated.

Results

66.9% of the cases were male and 33.1% were female. The mean age was 71.9±6.4 years. The most common side effects of chemotherapy are nausea, vomiting, kidney injury, and pain. The most frequently used prescriptions among the 98 PIMs were gliclazide, hyoscine N-butylbromide, simethicone, diphenoxylate atropine, and thiocolchicoside. PIM was detected in 68.1% of the participants. Chemotherapy side effects were more common in PIM group (p<0.001, odds ratio =5.6). PIM had no effect on mortality. Factors associated with mortality were age, stage, albumin, creatinine, operation history, and progression. A significant relationship was found between age, cancer stage, albumin, creatinine, operation history, and PIM in the regression model. There was no relationship between PIM and progression-free survival.

Conclusion

Chemotherapy toxicity may increase with PIM detected on diagnosis. We suggest that PIM is an important factor in predicting the side effects of chemotherapy and minimizing the adverse effects.

Prevalence and Associated Predictors of Inappropriate and Omitted Medications Prescribing in Older Patients with Advanced Cancer: A Cross-Sectional Study

Aims of the Study

This study aimed to identify the prevalence and significant predictors of both potentially inappropriate medications (PIMs) and potentially omitted medications (POMs) events among geriatric patients with advanced cancer using the STOPP (Screening Tool of Older Persons' Prescriptions) and START (Screening Tool to Alert to Right Treatment) criteria.

Methods

This retrospective cross-sectional study included patients aged ≥65 years who were diagnosed and treated for advanced stage of cancer. Patients' medical charts were evaluated to identify polypharmacy (≥5 medications) prevalence as well as potential PIMs and POMs incidents and their associated predictors. SPSS software was used to perform the analysis. Multivariate logistic regression models were used to identify factors associated with dependent variables including PIMs use and POMs.

Results

Electronic medication charts of 510 patients were evaluated. The average age of the patients was 73.25 years, and 264 (51.8%) patients were males. The average number of medications prescribed per patient was 10.3 (range-2-26). Polypharmacy was present in 85.9% of patients, while excessive polypharmacy prevalence was 52.2%. At least one PIM was encountered in 253 patients (49.6%), while at least one POM was encountered in all patients owing to the omission of pneumococcal vaccines. The most common PIMs were opioid analgesics, followed by benzodiazepines, and hypnotics. Additionally, the most omitted medications, excluding vaccinations, were cardiovascular agents and laxatives in patients on regular opioid analgesics. Polypharmacy and diagnosis with solid cancer compared to hematological cancer were associated with increased odds for PIMs occurrence (ORs = 1.293 (p < 0.001) and 3.022 (p = 0.03), respectively), while coexistence of hypertension diagnosis in cancer patients was associated with increased the odds for POMs events (OR = 2.286 (p = 0.007)).

Conclusion

Polypharmacy, PIMs, and POMs were highly prevalent among older cancer patients based on the polypharmacy definition and STOPP/START Criteria.

TOP-PIC: a new tool to optimize pharmacotherapy and reduce polypharmacy in patients with incurable cancer

PURPOSE

Polypharmacy is a significant problem in patients with incurable cancer and a method to optimize pharmacotherapy in this patient group is lacking. Therefore, a drug optimization tool was developed and tested in a pilot test.

METHODS

A multidisciplinary team of health professionals developed a "Tool to Optimize Pharmacotherapy in Patients with Incurable Cancer" (TOP-PIC) for patients with a limited life expectancy. The tool consists of five sequential steps to optimize medications, including medication history, screening for medication appropriateness and drug interactions, a benefit-risk assessment using the TOP-PIC Disease-based list, and shared decision-making with the patient. For pilot testing of the tool, 8 patient cases with polypharmacy were analyzed by 11 oncologists before and after training with the TOP-PIC tool.

RESULTS

TOP-PIC was considered helpful by all oncologists during the pilot test. The median additional time required to administer the tool was 2 min per patient (P < 0.001). For 17.4% of all medications, different decisions were made by using TOP-PIC. Among possible treatment decisions (discontinuation, reduction, increase, replacement, or addition of a drug), discontinuation of medications was the most common. Without TOP-PIC, physicians were uncertain in 9.3% of medication changes, compared with only 4.8% after using TOP-PIC (P = 0.001). The TOP-PIC Disease-based list was considered helpful by 94.5% of oncologists.

CONCLUSIONS

TOP-PIC provides a detailed, disease-based benefit-risk assessment with recommendations specific for cancer patients with limited life expectancy. Based on the results of the pilot study, the tool seems practicable for day-to-day clinical decision-making and provides evidence-based facts to optimize pharmacotherapy.

Potentially inappropriate medication use based on two deprescribing criteria and related factors in patients with terminal cancer: A cross-sectional study

INTRODUCTION

We aimed to estimate the nationwide prevalence of potentially inappropriate medication (PIM) use in patients with terminal cancer according to two deprescribing criteria for patients with a limited lifespan.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

This cross-sectional study evaluated the prevalence of PIM use using two datasets: national claims data and single-tertiary hospital data. In the claims data, patients with terminal cancer were defined as patients with cancers who died between April and June 2018 and were prescribed opioid analgesics or megestrol or were hospitalized for >90 days before the date of death. Using hospital data, patients who were enrolled in hospice care in 2019 were identified. PIM was defined according to the adjusted criteria from the Screening Tool for Older Persons' Prescriptions in frail adults with limited life expectancy (STOPPFrail) versions 1 and 2 and oncological palliative care deprescribing guidelines (OncPal) guidelines.

RESULTS

From the national claims data and single-tertiary hospital data, 1,558 patients and 1,243 patients were included in the analysis, respectively. In both datasets, over 60% of patients used five or more medications (claims data: 67.7%; hospital data: 63.9%), and approximately half of them used at least one PIM (claims data: 51.5%; hospital data: 43.2%). Lipid-lowering agents, acid suppressors, and hypoglycemics were common PIMs. Polypharmacy, age, and comorbid conditions, including diabetes, were associated with PIM use.

DISCUSSION

Approximately two-thirds and half of the patients with terminal cancer were exposed to polypharmacy and at least one PIM based on the STOPPFrail and OncPal criteria, respectively; therefore, deprescribing PIM in patients with terminal cancer is an urgent issue.

Medication risks in older patients (70 +) with cancer and their association with therapy-related toxicity

Background

To evaluate medication-related risks in older patients with cancer and their association with severe toxicity during antineoplastic therapy.

Methods

This is a secondary analysis of two prospective, single-center observational studies which included patients ≥ 70 years with cancer. The patients’ medication lists were investigated regarding possible risks: polymedication (defined as the use of ≥ 5 drugs), potentially inappropriate medication (PIM), and relevant potential drug-drug interactions (rPDDI). The risks were analyzed before and after start of cancer therapy. Severe toxicity during antineoplastic therapy was captured from medical records according to the Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (CTCAE). The association between grade ≥ 3 toxicity and medication risks was evaluated by univariate as well as multivariate regression adjusted by ECOG and age.

Results

The study cohort comprised 136 patients (50% female, mean age 77 years, 42% hematological malignancies). Before the start of cancer therapy, patients took on average 5 drugs as long-term medication and 52% of patients were exposed to polymedication. More than half of patients used at least one PIM. Approximately one third of patients exhibited rPDDI. The prevalence of medication risks increased after start of cancer therapy. rPDDI were significantly associated with severe overall toxicity (OR, 5.07; p = 0.036; 95% Confidence Interval (CI) 1.11–23.14; toxicity in patients with rPDDI 94.1% (32/34) vs 75.9% (60/79) in patients without rPDDI) and hematological toxicity (OR, 3.95; p = 0.010; 95% CI 1.38–11.29; hematological toxicity in patients with rPDDI 85.3% (29/34) vs 59.5% (47/79) in patients without rPDDI). In the multivariate analysis adjusted by ECOG and age, only the association for rPDDI with hematological toxicity remained statistically significant (OR, 4.51; p = 0.007; 95% CI 1.52–13.38). These findings should be further investigated in larger studies.

Conclusion

Medication risks are common in older patients with cancer and might be associated with toxicity. This raises the need for tailored interventions to ensure medication safety in this patient cohort.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12877-022-03390-z.

Association of Polypharmacy and Potentially Inappropriate Medications With Frailty Among Older Adults With Blood Cancers

BACKGROUND

Polypharmacy and potentially inappropriate medications (PIMs) are common among older adults with blood cancers, but their association with frailty and how to manage them optimally remain unclear.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

From 2015 to 2019, patients aged ≥75 years presenting for initial oncology consult underwent screening geriatric assessment. Patients were determined to be robust, prefrail, or frail via deficit accumulation and phenotypic approaches. We quantified each patient's total number of medications and PIMs using the Anticholinergic Risk Scale (ARS) and a scale we generated using the NCCN Medications of Concern called the Geriatric Oncology Potentially Inappropriate Medications (GO-PIM) scale. We assessed cross-sectional associations of PIMs with frailty in multivariable regression models adjusting for age, gender, and comorbidity.

RESULTS

Of 785 patients assessed, 603 (77%) were taking ≥5 medications and 421 (54%) were taking ≥8 medications; 201 (25%) were taking at least 1 PIM based on the ARS and 343 (44%) at least 1 PIM based on the GO-PIM scale. Among the 468 (60%) patients on active cancer treatment, taking ≥8 medications was associated with frailty (adjusted odds ratio [aOR], 2.82; 95% CI, 1.92-4.17). With each additional medication, the odds of being prefrail or frail increased 8% (aOR, 1.08; 95% CI, 1.04-1.12). With each 1-point increase on the ARS, the odds of being prefrail or frail increased 19% (aOR, 1.19; 95% CI, 1.03-1.39); with each additional PIM based on the GO-PIM scale, the odds increased 65% (aOR, 1.65; 95% CI, 1.34-2.04).

CONCLUSIONS

Polypharmacy and PIMs are prevalent among older patients with blood cancers; taking ≥8 medications is strongly associated with frailty. These data suggest careful medication reconciliation for this population may be helpful, and deprescribing when possible is high-yield, especially for PIMs on the GO-PIM scale.

Deprescribing in palliative patients with cancer: a concise review of tools and guidelines

Purpose

Palliative cancer patients can benefit from deprescribing of potentially inappropriate medications (PIMs). Tools and guidelines developed for the geriatric population are mainly available. This systematic review gives an overview of available guidelines and tools to deprescribe for palliative cancer patients.

Methods

A systematic search was carried out using the databases SCOPUS and PubMed. Studies focused on palliative cancer patients were included.

Results

The search identified 137 studies of which 15 studies were included in this systematic review. Six of the included tools were developed specifically for cancer patients. One of these tools was externally validated and applied in several studies and settings. Guidelines or tools that were not specifically developed for cancer patients but that were applied on cohorts of palliative cancer patients were also included.

Conclusion

Tools developed for geriatric patients contain drugs that are not inappropriate when used in the palliative cancer care setting. Tools developed for cancer patients are more suitable and can be applied in combination with stepwise methods to individualize deprescribing per patient. The tools and guidelines described in this systematic review can be used to further implement deprescribing in the clinical routine for palliative cancer patients.

Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis on the Associations of Polypharmacy and Potentially Inappropriate Medication With Adverse Outcomes in Older Cancer Patients

BACKGROUND

Both polypharmacy and potentially inappropriate medication (PIM) intake are highly prevailing in older cancer patients. However, only studies on the association of polypharmacy and postoperative complications have been meta-analyzed previously.

METHODS

A systematic review and a meta-analysis of prospective/retrospective observational studies reporting associations of polypharmacy or PIM with at least one out of five predefined adverse health outcomes in a population of older cancer patients (≥60 years) were carried out. PubMed and Web of Science were used to search for relevant studies published between January 1991 and March 2020. Data were pooled by adopting a random-effects model.

RESULTS

Overall, 42 publications were included in the systematic review. Meta-analyses could be performed on 39 studies about polypharmacy and 13 studies about PIM. Polypharmacy was found to be statistically significantly associated with all-cause mortality (risk ratio [95% confidence interval]: 1.37 [1.25-1.50]), hospitalization (1.53 [1.37-1.71]), treatment-related toxicity (1.22 [1.01-1.47]), and postoperative complications (1.73 [1.36-2.20]). The association of polypharmacy with prolongation of hospitalization was not statistically significant at the p < .05 significance level (1.62 [0.98-2.66]). With respect to PIM, a statistically significant association with all-cause mortality (1.43 [1.08-1.88]) was observed but not with other adverse outcomes.

CONCLUSIONS

Polypharmacy was found to be associated with several adverse outcomes and PIM use with all-cause mortality in older cancer patients. However, these results should be interpreted with caution because about three-quarters of the studies identified did not adjust for comorbidity and are prone to confounding by indication.

Association of Polypharmacy with Colorectal Cancer Survival Among Older Patients

Background

In geriatric oncology, polypharmacy is often assessed during a comprehensive geriatric assessment. Previous studies about its association with survival among patients with colorectal cancer (CRC) were inconclusive and had high risk for indication bias.

Patients and Methods

A cohort study was conducted with 3,239 patients with CRC, aged ≥65 years, who were recruited in Germany between 2003 and 2016, while being hospitalized for CRC surgery. We defined polypharmacy as the concurrent use of five or more drugs, and excessive polypharmacy (EPP) as concurrent use of eight or more drugs. Cox proportional hazards regression models were performed to assess the associations of polypharmacy with 5‐year overall (OS), CRC‐specific (CSS), and non‐cancer‐specific survival (NCS) with rigorous adjustment for morbidity to minimize indication bias (e.g., for cancer stage, functional status, and 13 common diseases/conditions).

Results

The prevalence of polypharmacy was 54.7% and that of EPP was 24.2%. During up to 5 years of follow‐up, 1,070 participants died, among whom 615 died of CRC and 296 died of other causes than cancer. EPP was statistically significantly associated with poorer up‐to‐5‐year OS (hazard ratio [HR], 1.23; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.02–1.47) and CSS (HR, 1.31; 95% CI, 1.03–1.68). HR point estimate for NCS was higher than 1 (1.22) but not statistically significant.

Conclusion

Polypharmacy was very common and EPP was a weak risk factor for mortality in this large cohort of older patients with CRC. Clinical trials are needed to address the causality of this relationship because older patients with CRC might benefit from deprescribing drugs without an indication.

Implications for Practice

The results of this study support the hypothesis that excessive polypharmacy, defined as use of eight or more concurrently used active substances, has a negative impact on the prognosis of older patients with colorectal cancer (CRC). This study suggests to oncologists that performing a medication review for older patients with CRC with eight drugs or more is indicated (especially when a broader comprehensive geriatric assessment is being performed). Such a medication review should not only focus on reducing the number of medications (by deprescribing drugs without an indication) but also check the appropriateness of indicated drugs for older patients with cancer.

Excessive polypharmacy, defined as the concurrent use of eight or more drugs, is becoming more common, especially in the older population. This article evaluates the association of polypharmacy with overall survival in large cohort patients with colorectal cancer.

Association of co-medication quality with chemotherapy-related adverse drug reactions and survival in older colorectal cancer patients

BACKGROUND

Evidence about the clinical relevance of appropriate co-medication among older colorectal cancer (CRC) patients is sparse.

METHODS

A cohort study was conducted with 3,239 CRC patients aged 65 years and older. To assess co-medication quality, we calculated the total Fit fOR The Aged (FORTA) score and its sub-scores for medication overuse, underuse, and potentially inappropriate medication use. Multivariable Cox proportional hazards or logistic regression models were performed to evaluate the association of co-medication quality with up to 5-year overall survival, CRC-specific survival, and chemotherapy-related adverse drug reactions (ADRs).

RESULTS

Overall, 3,239 and 1,209 participants were included in analyses on survival and ADRs, respectively. The hazard ratios [95%-confidence intervals] for the total FORTA score ≥ 7 vs. 0-1 points were 1.83 [1.40-2.40] and 1.76 [1.22-2.52] for up to 5-year overall and CRC-specific survival, respectively. Worse up to 5-year OS and CSS was also evident for FORTA sub-scores for PIM use and overuse whereas no association was observed for underuse. Although results for the total FORTA and potentially inappropriate medication score were much stronger among patients receiving chemotherapy, no significant associations with chemotherapy-related ADRs were observed. Moreover, associations were particularly strong among men and rectal cancer patients as compared to women and colon cancer patients.

CONCLUSIONS

Poor total co-medication quality was significantly associated with worse up to 5-year overall and CRC-specific survival. Randomized controlled trials are needed to test whether improved cancer co-medication management in older CRC patients prolongs survival.

Living with cancer and multimorbidity: the role of primary care

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

As more people live longer with cancer, the number of patients with cancer and multiple other chronic conditions (multimorbidity) has increased. The presence of multimorbidity impacts on all stages of cancer care, from prevention and early detection through to end of life care, but research into cancer and multimorbidity is in its infancy. This review explores the impact of multimorbidity on adults living with (and beyond) cancer, with particular attention paid to the role of primary care in supporting patients in this situation.

RECENT FINDINGS

Patterns of multimorbidity vary depending on cancer type and stage, as well as population characteristics and available data (e.g. number of conditions assessed). Cancer survivors are at increased risk of developing other chronic conditions, due to a combination of shared risk factors (e.g. smoking and obesity), effects of cancer treatments and psychosocial effects.

SUMMARY

Primary care has a central role to play in supporting multimorbid adults living with cancer, providing holistic care of physical and mental well being, while taking treatment burden and social circumstances into account. New models of person-centred and personalized cancer care include holistic needs assessments, care planning, treatment summaries and cancer care reviews, and depend on improved communication between oncologists and primary care colleagues.

Flurbiprofen suppresses the inflammation, proliferation, invasion and migration of colorectal cancer cells via COX2

Colorectal cancer is an aggressive disease with a poor prognosis and low survival rate at the advanced stage, therefore new innovative targets are urgently required. Flurbiprofen has been reported to exhibit therapeutic effects in other types of cancer, such as esophageal cancer, breast cancer and colorectal cancer. Therefore, the present study aimed to investigate the function of flurbiprofen in colorectal cancer. SW620 colorectal cancer cells were treated with different concentrations of flurbiprofen to determine the optimum concentration. Subsequently, COX2 expression affected by flurbiprofen was tested using western blotting, reverse transcription-quantitative PCR and immunofluorescence. Enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay was used to determine the levels of tumor necrosis factor-α, interleukin (IL)-6 and IL-1β. Cell Counting Kit-8, colony formation and flow cytometry assays were used to assess the proliferation and apoptosis of SW620 cells in various groups. Western blotting was performed to investigate the expression of proliferation-, apoptosis- and migration-related proteins after different treatments. Wound healing and Transwell assays were performed to measure the invasion and migration of colorectal cancer cells, respectively. The results demonstrated that flurbiprofen inhibited colorectal cancer cell proliferation. Furthermore, it was identified that flurbiprofen inhibited the expression of COX2. Notably, flurbiprofen suppressed the expression of inflammatory factors by inhibiting COX2. Moreover, flurbiprofen inhibited the proliferation, invasion and migration of colorectal cancer cells by inhibiting COX2. In conclusion, the present study revealed that flurbiprofen inhibited COX2 expression in colorectal cancer, and affected the proliferation, invasion, migration and apoptosis of colorectal cancer cells. These results expand the understanding of the function of COX2 in colorectal cancer and the effect of flurbiprofen on COX2 expression.

Prevalence and follow-up of potentially inappropriate medication and potentially omitted medication in older patients with cancer - The PIM POM study

OBJECTIVES

To determine the prevalence of Potentially Inappropriate Medication (PIMs) and Potentially Omitted Medication (POMs) in older patients with cancer.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

In this prospective observational study (hospital) pharmacists conducted comprehensive medication reviews in older patients with cancer (aged ≥65 years) receiving parenteral chemotherapy and/or immunotherapy at the Deventer Hospital. PIMs and POMs were identified using the Screening Tool of Older Persons' potentially inappropriate Prescriptions (STOPP), the Screening Tool to Alert doctors to the Right Treatment (START), and pharmacists' expert opinion. Recommendations regarding PIMs and POMs were communicated to the patient's oncologist/haematologist and follow-up was measured. Associations between covariates and the prevalence of PIMs and POMs were statistically analysed.

RESULTS

For the 150 patients included, 180 PIMs and 86 POMs were identified with a prevalence of 78%. Using pharmacists' expert opinion in addition to only STOPP/START criteria contributed to 49% of the PIMs and 23% of the POMs. A follow-up action was required in 73% of the 266 PIMs and POMs. Number of medicines and Charlson Comorbidity Index score were both associated with having at least one PIM and/or POM (p = .031 and p = .016, respectively).

CONCLUSION

The prevalence of PIMs and POMs and subsequent follow-up in older patients with cancer is high. A pharmacist-led comprehensive medication review is a good instrument to identify these PIMs and POMs and to optimize patients' treatment. A complete approach, including pharmacists' expert opinion, is recommended to identify all PIMs and POMs in clinical practice.

Associations of Polypharmacy and Inappropriate Medications with Adverse Outcomes in Older Adults with Cancer: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

BACKGROUND

Polypharmacy (PP) and potentially inappropriate medications (PIM) are highly prevalent in older adults with cancer. This study systematically reviews the associations of PP and/or PIM with outcomes and, through a meta-analysis, obtains estimates of postoperative outcomes associated with PP in this population.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We searched PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, and Cochrane Register of Clinical Trials using standardized terms for concepts of PP, PIM, and cancer. Eligible studies included cohort studies, cross-sectional studies, meta-analyses, and clinical trials which examined outcomes associated with PP and/or PIM and included older adults with cancer. A random effects model included studies in which definitions of PP were consistent to examine the association of PP with postoperative complications.

RESULTS

Forty-seven articles met the inclusion criteria. PP was defined as five or more medications in 57% of the studies. Commonly examined outcomes included chemotherapy toxicities, postoperative complications, functional decline, hospitalization, and overall survival. PP was associated with chemotherapy toxicities (4/9 studies), falls (3/3 studies), functional decline (3/3 studies), and overall survival (2/11 studies). A meta-analysis of four studies indicated an association between PP (≥5 medications) and postoperative complications (overall odds ratio, 1.3; 95% confidence interval [1.3-2.8]). PIM was associated with adverse outcomes in 3 of 11 studies.

CONCLUSION

PP is associated with postoperative complications, chemotherapy toxicities, and physical and functional decline. Only three studies showed an association between PIM and outcomes. However, because of inconsistent definitions, heterogeneous populations, and variable study designs, these associations should be further investigated in prospective studies.

IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE

Polypharmacy and potentially inappropriate medications (PIM) are prevalent in older adults with cancer. This systematic review summarizes the associations of polypharmacy and PIM with health outcomes in older patients with cancer. Polypharmacy and PIM have been associated with postoperative complications, frailty, falls, medication nonadherence, chemotherapy toxicity, and mortality. These findings emphasize the prognostic importance of careful medication review and identification of PIM by oncology teams. They also underscore the need to develop and test interventions to address polypharmacy and PIM in older patients with cancer, with the goal of improving outcomes in these patients.

Prevalence and factors associated with potentially inappropriate medication use in older medicare beneficiaries with cancer

OBJECTIVE

To assess the factors related to potentially inappropriate medication (PIM) use in elderly patients with cancer, as well as to compare the PIM prevalence in older adults with and without cancer.

METHODS

Data from the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results-Medicare-linked base (2009-2011) were accessed to conduct a retrospective study comparing patients with cancers of the breast, colon/rectum, and prostate against a matched population of subjects without cancer. PIM use was defined based on the 2015 Beers Criteria and was quantified using prescription claims. Multivariable logistic regression models were used to assess the associations between the patients' characteristics, clinical factors, and PIM use in patients with cancer based on Beers criteria. Propensity score matching was applied to compare use of PIM in patients with versus without cancer.

RESULTS

PIM usage rates in patients with colorectal and breast cancers were significantly higher than non-cancer-bearing adults; the difference in PIM usage rate was not significantly different in the prostate cancer-matched cohort. The prevalence of inappropriate medication use in the three types of cancers evaluated was directly correlated with number of medications prescribed, treatment with chemotherapy, and co-morbid medical problems.

CONCLUSION

Patients diagnosed with cancer were more likely to use PIM compared with their non-cancer counterparts. The updated Beers criteria has the potential to serve as an important tool in geriatric oncology practice but it may still need to take into consideration different cancer types and their respective treatments.