Patients in these age groups require specific programs that take into account factors such as care access and trial access, increased risk of acute toxicities, and treatment adherence, which can be particularly problematic in AYAs, they concluded.
Kristen O’Dwyer, MD, and her colleagues, in their article on AML treatment in AYAs, argue that based on “the distinguishing characteristics of AYAs with AML,” neither the pediatric nor adult approaches are ideally suited for them.
Rather, AYA-specific approaches merit consideration, they concluded (Blood 2018;132:362-68).
Similarly, Kieron Dunleavy, MD, and Thomas G. Gross, MD, note in an article on managing aggressive B-cell NHLs in AYAs that a “remarkable divide” in the treatment of patients under age 18 years with lymphoma versus their young adult counterparts underscores the need for collaboration in developing consensus regarding treatment of AYAs (Blood 2018;132:369-75).
But recent findings from a study by Paul C. Nathan, MD, and his colleagues focuses more on where that treatment should take place (J Natl Cancer Inst. 2018 Jul 19. doi: 10.1093/jnci/djy119).
The study provides new insights into the understanding of treatment differences for adolescents seen in pediatric vs. adult cancer facilities. And the findings suggest that the trade-off for improved outcomes among those treated in the pediatric setting – as emerging literature demonstrates – is higher resource use and cost, Helen M. Parsons, PhD, and her colleagues wrote in an accompanying editorial (J Natl Cancer Inst. 2018 Jul 19. doi: 10.1093/jnci/djy123).
Among 1,356 patients aged 15-17 years who were diagnosed with cancer between 1996 and 2010, the cost of care was higher when treatment took place in a pediatric setting vs. an adult institution. This was driven in part by higher hospitalization rates and longer hospital stays, the investigators found.
“Additionally, adolescents treated in the pediatric setting tended to seek more [emergency department] care immediately before diagnosis and during the initial treatment phase; these adolescents also used more home care services during initial treatment and survivorship,” Dr. Parsons and her colleagues wrote.
This was true across different diagnoses, including leukemias, lymphomas, sarcomas, and germ cell tumors, but only during the initial treatment phase.
The findings of higher inpatient days in the pediatric setting is not surprising given that induction therapies for pediatric ALL are generally more complex and intensive than therapies commonly used in adults with ALL, and given that pediatric cancer hospitals tend to have a wider array of services, including psychosocial and family support services.
“What is less clear is why individuals seen in pediatric settings have higher rates of ED care directly before diagnosis and during the initial treatment phase ... more work on this topic is needed to more fully understand these patterns,” they wrote, adding that “the finding that adolescents treated in pediatric institutions had higher resource use across diagnostic groups demonstrates that resource utilization may be driven just as much by care setting as diagnosis.”
Disease and developmental biology
As Dr. Hanna noted, biological differences and changes over time suggest that different age groups need varying approaches to treatment and may have different outcomes with the same treatments.