Evaluation of the Groningen Frailty Indicator and the G8 questionnaire as screening tools for frailty in older patients with cancer

INTRODUCTION: Frailty prevalence differs across different population depending on the models used to assess, age, economic situation, social status, and the proportion of men and women in the study. The diagnostic value of different models of frailty varies from population to population. OBJECTIVES: To assess the prevalence of frailty using 4 different diagnostic models and their sensitivity for identifying persons with autonomy decline. MATERIAL AND METHODS: A random sample of 611 people aged 65 and over. Models used: the Age is not a blocking factor model, the SOF Frailty Index, the Groningen Frailty Indicator, L. Fried model. Covariates: nutritional status, anemia, functional status, depression, dementia, chronic diseases, grip strength, physical function. RESULTS: The prevalence of the Frailty Phenotype ranged from 16.6 to 20.4% and the Frailty Index was 32.6%. Frailty, regardless of the used models was associated with an increase in the prevalence of the geriatric syndromes: urinary incontinence, hearing and vision loss, physical decline, malnutrition and the risk of malnutrition, low cognitive functions and autonomy decline (p 0.05). The negative predictive value (NPV) of the Age is not a blocking factor model, the SOF Frailty Index, the Groningen Frailty Indicator for identifying individuals with autonomy decline was 8690%. CONCLUSION: The prevalence of frailty depended on the operational definition and varied from 16.6 to 32.6%. The Age is not a blocking factor model, the SOF Frailty Index, the Groningen Frailty Indicator, L. Fried model can be used as screening tools to identify older patient with autonomy decline. Regardless of the model used, frailty is closely associated with an increase in the prevalence of major geriatric syndromes.

Download Full-text

Groningen frailty indicator in older patients with end-stage renal disease

Renal Failure ◽

10.3109/0886022x.2015.1077315 ◽

2015 ◽

Vol 37 (9) ◽

pp. 1419-1424 ◽

Cited By ~ 11

Author(s):

F. G. Meulendijks ◽

M. E. Hamaker ◽

F. T. J. Boereboom ◽

A. Kalf ◽

N. P. J. Vögtlander ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Renal Disease ◽

End Stage Renal Disease ◽

Older Patients ◽

Groningen Frailty Indicator ◽

Stage Renal Disease ◽

End Stage ◽

Frailty Indicator

Download Full-text

Evaluation of the G8 screening tools for fraility in older patients with cancer

Annals of Oncology ◽

10.1093/annonc/mdv472.59 ◽

2015 ◽

Vol 26 ◽

pp. vii119 ◽

Cited By ~ 1

Author(s):

Asao Ogawa ◽

Fumio Nagashima ◽

Tetsuya Hamaguchi

Keyword(s):

Older Patients ◽

Screening Tools ◽

Patients With Cancer

Download Full-text

Considerations and Controversies in the Management of Older Patients with Advanced Cancer

American Society of Clinical Oncology Educational Book ◽

10.14694/edbook_am.2012.32.168 ◽

2012 ◽

pp. 321-328 ◽

Cited By ~ 1

Author(s):

Supriya Gupta Mohile ◽

Heidi D. Klepin ◽

Arati V. Rao

Keyword(s):

Advanced Cancer ◽

Older Patients ◽

Clinical Care ◽

Treatment Options ◽

Screening Tools ◽

Patients With Cancer ◽

Functional Consequences ◽

Oncology Practice ◽

Combined Data

Overview: The incidence of cancer increases with age. Oncologists need to be adept at assessing physiologic and functional capacity in older patients in order to provide safe and efficacious cancer treatment. Assessment of underlying health status is especially important for older patients with advanced cancer, for whom the benefits of treatment may be low and the toxicity of treatment high. The comprehensive geriatric assessment (CGA) is the criterion standard for evaluation of the older patient. The combined data from the CGA can be used to stratify patients into categories to better predict risk for chemotherapy toxicity as well as overall outcomes. The CGA can also be used to identify and follow-up on possible functional consequences from treatment. A variety of screening tools might be useful in the oncology practice setting to identify patients who may benefit from further testing and intervention. In this chapter, we discuss how the principles of geriatrics can help improve the clinical care of older adults with advanced cancer. Specifically, we discuss assessing tolerance for treatment, options for chemotherapy scheduling and dosing for older patients with advanced cancer, and management of under-recognized symptoms in older patients with cancer.

Download Full-text

O4.11: Groningen Frailty Indicator in older patients with end-stage renal disease

European Geriatric Medicine ◽

10.1016/s1878-7649(14)70164-0 ◽

2014 ◽

Vol 5 ◽

pp. S75-S76

Author(s):

G. Meulendijks ◽

M.E. Hamaker ◽

F.T.J. Boerenboom ◽

A. Kalf ◽

N. Vogtlander ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Renal Disease ◽

End Stage Renal Disease ◽

Older Patients ◽

Groningen Frailty Indicator ◽

Stage Renal Disease ◽

End Stage ◽

Frailty Indicator

Download Full-text

Performance of Two Geriatric Screening Tools in Older Patients With Cancer

Journal of Clinical Oncology ◽

10.1200/jco.2013.51.1345 ◽

2014 ◽

Vol 32 (1) ◽

pp. 19-26 ◽

Cited By ~ 161

Author(s):

Cindy Kenis ◽

Lore Decoster ◽

Katrien Van Puyvelde ◽

Jacques De Grève ◽

Godelieve Conings ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Activities Of Daily Living ◽

Daily Living ◽

Older Patients ◽

Prognostic Value ◽

Functional Decline ◽

Treatment Decision ◽

Risk Profile ◽

Screening Tools ◽

Patients With Cancer ◽

Geriatric Screening

Purpose To compare the diagnostic characteristics of two geriatric screening tools (G8 and Flemish version of the Triage Risk Screening Tool [fTRST]) to identify patients with a geriatric risk profile and to evaluate their prognostic value for functional decline and overall survival (OS). Patients and Methods Patients ≥ 70 years old with a malignant tumor were included if a new cancer event occurred requiring treatment decision. Geriatric screening with G8 and fTRST (cutoff ≥ 1 [fTRST (1)] and ≥ 2 [fTRST (2)] evaluated) was performed in all patients, as well as a geriatric assessment (GA) evaluating social situation, functionality (activities of daily living [ADL] + instrumental activities of daily living [IADL]), cognition, depression, and nutrition. Functionality was re-evaluated 2 to 3 months after cancer treatment decision, and death rate was followed. Functional decline and OS were evaluated in relation to normal versus abnormal score on both screening tools. Results Nine hundred thirty-seven patients were included (October 2009 to July 2011). G8 and fTRST (1) showed high sensitivity (86.5% to 91.3%) and moderate negative predictive value (61.3% to 63.4%) to detect patients with a geriatric risk profile. G8 and fTRST (1) were strongly prognostic for functional decline on ADL and IADL, and G8, fTRST (1), and fTRST (2) were prognostic for OS (all P < .001). G8 had the strongest prognostic value for OS (hazard ratio for G8 normal v abnormal, 0.38; 95% CI, 0.27 to 0.52). Conclusion Both geriatric screening tools, G8 and fTRST, are simple and useful instruments in older patients with cancer for identifying patients with a geriatric risk profile and have a strong prognostic value for functional decline and OS.

Download Full-text