INTRODUCTION To examine the risk of AD among cancer survivors in a national database. METHODS Retrospective cohort of 3,499,378 mostly male US veterans ≥65 followed 1996–2011. We used Cox models to estimate risk of AD and alternative outcomes (non-AD dementia, osteoarthritis, stroke and macular degeneration) in veterans with and without a history of cancer. RESULTS Survivors of a wide variety of cancers had modestly lower AD risk, but increased risk of the alternative outcomes. Survivors of screened cancers, including prostate cancer, had a slightly increased AD risk. Cancer treatment was independently associated with decreased AD risk; those who received chemotherapy had a lower risk than those who did not. DISCUSSION Survivors of some cancers have a lower risk of AD but not other age-related conditions, arguing that lower AD diagnosis is not simply due to bias. Cancer treatment may be associated with decreased risk of AD.

1) Roughly half of all medical intensive care unit patients predicted to die in hospital survived to discharge nonetheless. 2) More highly corroborated predictions had better predictive value; although, approximately 15% of patients survived unexpectedly, even when predicted to die by all medical caretakers.

If absolute certainty about mortality is the only criterion that can justify a decision to withhold or withdraw life-sustaining treatment in the NICU, these data would make such decisions difficult on the first day of life, and increasingly problematic thereafter. However, if we acknowledge that medicine is inevitably an inexact science and that clinical predictions can never be perfect, we can ask the more interesting question of whether good but less-than-perfect predictions of imprecise but ethically relevant clinical outcomes can still be useful. We think that they can-and that they must.

To prepare for the increasing numbers of older adults undergoing surgery, the American College of Surgeons (ACS) has recently launched the Geriatric Surgery Verification Program with the goal of encouraging the creation of centers of geriatric surgery. Meanwhile, the Society for Perioperative Assessment and Quality Improvement (SPAQI) has published recommendations for the preoperative management of frailty, which state that teams should actively screen for frailty before surgery and that pathways, including geriatric comanagement, shared decision‐making, and multimodal prehabilitation, should be embedded in routine care to help improve patient outcomes. Both SPAQI and the ACS advocate for a multidisciplinary approach to improve the value of care for older adults undergoing surgery. However, the best way to implement geriatric services in the surgical setting is yet to be determined. In this statement, we will describe the SPAQI recommendations for launching a geriatric surgery center and the process by which its value should be assessed over time.

No abstract