Landscape of geriatric oncology in Switzerland: Results from a nationwide survey.
Authors: Marcus Hermann Friedrich Vetter, Elena Diana Chiru, Vérène Dougoud-Chauvin, Roch-Philippe Charles, Joerg Beyer, Michael Gagesch, Jan Gaertner, Friedemann U. Honecker, Laure Poudens Gaudout, Wiebke Rösler, Mathias Schloegel, Kathrin Vollmer, Anita Margulies
Journal: Journal of Clinical Oncology (2025)

e13855 Background: Geriatric oncology (GO) addresses the unique needs of older cancer patients, an increasingly critical population as the demographic shift towards aging continues. However, evidence gaps and a lack of standardized guidelines hinder the integration of GO into daily oncology practice. We conducted a comprehensive survey among physicians evaluate the current status of geriatric oncology in Switzerland . identify positive aspects as well as barriers. Methods: A structured questionnaire was disseminated to approximately 300 oncology professionals including hematologists, pathologists, gynecologic oncologists via email through the Swiss Group for Clinical Cancer Research (SAKK) between July and September 2024. Anonymous responses were collected using MS Forms with follow-up at the SAKK semi-annual meeting. The survey assessed baseline characteristics, utilization of GO guidelines, screening practices, and perceptions regarding the benefits and barriers to implementing GO in clinical settings. Results: A total of 100 responses were analyzed (response rate: &gt; 30%). Key findings include: Participant Profile: 55% female; 45% male. Predominantly professionals managing solid tumors, with 50% utilizing GO guidelines. The majority of participants were senior specialists ( &gt; 10 years of clinical experience). Screening Practices: The G8 tool was the most frequently used (45/68), primarily for patients aged &gt; 65 with geriatric syndromes or &gt; 75 years. Benefits of GO Assessments: Improved treatment personalization (69 mentions), quality of life (61 mentions), and decision-making accuracy (58 mentions) were cited as key advantages. Barriers: Personnel and expertise shortages were noted by 48% of respondents, alongside limited interest in GO workshops and insufficient healthcare policy support. Clinical Impact: Treatment modifications following GO assessments were reported occasionally (85%) or often (8%), with frequent exclusion of chemotherapy when inappropriate. Research Interests: High interest was observed in research domains like gynecological oncology, hematology, and surgery. Conclusions: While Switzerland has a robust network of experienced oncology professionals and supportive services, the integration of GO remains inconsistent and sparse. Addressing barriers such as personnel training, policy frameworks, and fostering research collaboration is essential. Initiatives to promote early education in GO, advocate for patient-centered care, and establish national consensus standards are critical next steps. These efforts will position Switzerland as a leader in geriatric oncology amidst a rapidly aging European population. Future Directions: The Swiss Geriatric Oncology Group (SGOG) aims to expand its efforts in education, research, and policy advocacy to bridge gaps in the implementation of GO, ensuring optimal care for older cancer patients.