Hiring in life sciences? Share your open positions with our professional community. Read more Close

Advertisement

Impact of Beers Criteria Medications in Elderly Patients With Head and Neck Cancer.

Created on 13 Aug 2026

Authors

Maxwell Y Lee, Mason M Sakamoto, Dale Kim, Andrey Finegersh, Vasu Divi, Rosh K V Sethi, Michelle M Chen

Published in

Head & neck. Aug 12, 2026. Epub Aug 12, 2026.

Abstract

Head and neck cancer patients often experience polypharmacy due to complex treatments and comorbidities. The Beers Criteria is a list of potentially inappropriate medications (PIMs) for patients above age 65 developed by the American Geriatrics Society. We hypothesize that increased use of PIMs will be associated with inferior health and quality of life outcomes in elderly patients with head and neck cancer.
We retrospectively examined patients aged ≥ 65 years with head and neck cancer diagnosed between 2011 and 2015 using SEER-Medicare data, analyzing associations between Beers Criteria Medications (BCMs) and survival as a primary outcome. Emergency department (ED) utilization served as a secondary outcome.
Among 5213 patients (mean age 72.6 years), 44% received no BCMs within 1 year of diagnosis, while 41.3% received 1 BCM, 9.3% received 2 BCMs, and 5.4% received ≥ 3 BCMs. The most common medications prescribed were Lorazepam (12.3%), Zolpidem (7.9%), and Alprazolam (7.5%). Two-year survival decreased with BCM use in a dose-dependent fashion: 88.2% (0 BCM), 86.8% (1 BCM), 86.7% (2 BCMs), and 81.4% (≥ 3 BCMs; p < 0.001). BCM users had higher ED utilization in the year after diagnosis (mean 1.21 vs. 0.95 claims, p = 0.004).
BCMs in elderly head and neck cancer patients were associated with inferior survival and increased healthcare utilization. These findings highlight the need for medication reconciliation and systematic reviews by multidisciplinary care teams to optimize outcomes in this vulnerable population.

PMID:
42590818
Bibliographic data and abstract were imported from PubMed on 13 Aug 2026.

Read full publication at:
Please sign in to see all details.

Advertisement

Stats

  • Community rating n/a 0 votes
  • Reviewers' rating n/a 0 votes
  • Your rating

1-terrible, 9-excellent. How would you rate this publication? Sign in in to submit your rating.

  • Recommendations n/a n/a positive of 0 vote(s)
  • Views 6
  • Comments 0

Recommended by

  • No recommendations yet.

Post a comment

You need to be signed in to post comments. You can sign in here.

Comments

There are no comments yet.

Advertisement