ESTRO 36 Abstract Book

S744 ESTRO 36 2017 _______________________________________________________________________________________________

A customised online survey was anonymously administered to 118 RO trainees across Australasia. The survey assessed three domains: 1. Trainee demographics and prior training in geriatric medicine 2. Current clinical practice and attitudes regarding elderly cancer patients and radiation therapy 3. Opinions regarding educational opportunities around geriatric oncoloogy The survey was developed and reviewed by radiation oncologists with expertise in education and training. Results A total of 61 (52%) trainees responded to the survey. Over half the respondents had not undertaken a geriatric medicine residency term prior to RO speciality training. 91.8% of respondents had not received teaching during RO training specifically regarding geriatric oncology. The use of geriatric assessment (GA) tools for determining suitability for radiation therapy was uncommon, with 80.3% of respondents rarely or never using them. Over two thirds of respondents reported not seeking or rarely seeking multidisciplinary input from a geriatrician when assessing suitability for treatment. Trainees had low confidence levels in managing complex issues commonly observed in the elderly. Only 39.3% felt they had the confidence to manage these issues with 31.2% not confident/not at all confident. Respondents ranked important factors for deciding treatment options as functional status, assessment of co- morbidity, physiological age and cognition. Geriatrician referral scored the least. Of factors influencing dose fractionation schedule, physiological age ranked the highest, whilst performing GA ranked the lowest. The majority of trainees (85.3%) agreed or strongly agreed they would benefit from more training around RO in elderly patients. 65.6% felt the addition of learning objectives to RO curriculum around geriatric oncology would be valuable. Conclusion RO trainees report inadequate training and experience in geriatric oncology and geriatric medicine. RO trainees rarely use and poorly understand the rationale for GA tools and geriatrician input in clinical practice. Trainees strongly support improved education in geriatric oncology. EP-1408 Nutritional parameters in elderly patients with lung cancer and radiation treatment J. Monroy Anton 1 , L. Ribes Llopis 1 , E. Molina Luque 1 , M. Soler tortosa 1 , m. Lopez muñoz 1 , a. Soler rodriguez 1 , a. Navarro Bergada 1 , M. Estornell Gualde 1 1 Hospital universitario de la ribera, radiation oncology, Alzira, Spain Purpose or Objective Treatment of lung cancer in elderly patients is increasing in the last years due to the longevity of the population . An important element to consider in these patients is nutritional status, because it can have a major impact on the effects of treatment and compliance Our main objective was to analyze parameters related to feeding and nutrition of elderly in treatment for We analyzed 22 patients ; men: 21; women: 1 Age: 70-91 years; mean: 76.9 median: 76.5 Nutritional parameters analyzed : -Body mass index (BMI) -Weight loss -Type of diet: complete solid /oral (standard); deficient or non-solid ; other (parenteral, nasogastric) -Feeding problems: mechanical, physiological, or any other problems for feeding (due to patient status or treatment administration). -Nutritional supplements: addition or substitution with nutritional supplementary diets pulmonary neoplasms Material and Methods

These parameters were checked at three times: - T0: before start treatment - T1: fractions 12-15 - End of treatment Results T0 BMI Mean: 27.95 kg/m2 median: 27.35 (20.15 – 37.6) Weight loss <5%: 18 (81%) 5-10%: 3 (13.5%) >10%: 1 (4.5%) Diet Standard: 21 (95.5%) NO : 21 (95.5%) YES: 1 (4.5%) T1 BMI mean: 27.7 kg/m2; median: 26.75 (20.15 – 37.03) Weight loss No loss: 12 (54% <5%: 8 (29%) 5-10%: 2 (9%) Diet NO problems: 11 (50%) Disphagia gr. 1: 11 (50%) Nutritional supplements NO : 18 (82%) YES: 4 (18%) END RADIOTHERAPY BMI mean: 27.6; median: 26.7 kg/m2 (20.15 37.34) Deficient: 1 (4.5%) Feeding problems NO problems: 21 (95.5%) Disphagia gr 1 (RTOG): 1 (4.5%) Nutritional supplements Standard: 19 (86.5%) Deficient: 3 (13.5%) Feeding problems

Weight loss No loss: 14 (63.5%)

<5%: 7 (32%) 5-10%: 1 (4.5%) Diet

Standard: 18 (82%) Deficient: 4 (18%) Feeding problems NO problems: 10 (45.5%) Disphagia: 12 (54.5%) gr. 1: 10 (45.5%) gr. 2: 2 (9%) Nutritional supplements

NO: 16 (72,7%) YES: 6 (27.3%)