Exploring the Language Used to Describe Older Patients at Multidisciplinary Cancer Conferences

• Published in: Cancers Vol. 16; no. 8; p. 1477
• Main Authors: Kim, Valerie S, Carrozzi, Anthony, Papadopoulos, Efthymios, Tejero, Isabel, Thiruparanathan, Thirisangi, Perlis, Nathan, Hope, Andrew J, Jang, Raymond W, Alibhai, Shabbir M H
• Format: Journal Article
• Language: English
• Published: Switzerland MDPI AG 12.04.2024
• Subjects: Age; Cancer; Cancer therapies; Chemotherapy; communicate; Comorbidity; Data collection; Decision making; Frailty; geriatric assessment; geriatric oncology; Geriatrics; Jargon; Language; Medical students; Meetings; multidisciplinary cancer conferences; Older people; Oncology; Patients; Statistical analysis; Training level; Tumors; tumour boards; Variables; frailty; geriatric oncology; multidisciplinary cancer conferences; communicate; geriatric assessment; language; tumour boards
• ISSN: 2072-6694; 2072-6694
• DOI: 10.3390/cancers16081477

Older adults with cancer often present with distinct complexities that complicate their care, yet the language used to discuss their management at multidisciplinary cancer conferences (MCCs) remains poorly understood. A mixed methods study was conducted at a tertiary cancer centre in Toronto, Canada, where MCCs spanning five tumour sites were attended over six months. For presentations pertaining to a patient aged 75 or older, a standardized data collection form was used to record their demographic, cancer-related, and non-cancer-related information, as well as the presenter's specialty and training level. Descriptive statistics and thematic analysis were employed to explore MCC depictions of older patients ( = 75). Frailty status was explicitly mentioned in 20.0% of presentations, but discussions more frequently referenced comorbidity burden (50.7%), age (33.3%), and projected treatment tolerance (30.7%) as surrogate measures. None of the presentations included mentions of formal geriatric assessment (GA) or validated frailty tools; instead, presenters tended to feature select GA domains and subjective descriptions of appearance ("looks to be fit") or overall health ("relatively healthy"). In general, MCCs appeared to rely on age-focused language that may perpetuate ageism. Further work is needed to investigate how frailty and geriatric considerations can be objectively incorporated into discussions in geriatric oncology.