g8 screening tool
Recently Published Documents


TOTAL DOCUMENTS

34
(FIVE YEARS 18)

H-INDEX

6
(FIVE YEARS 2)

2021 ◽  
Vol 12 (8) ◽  
pp. S41-S42
Author(s):  
A. Chapman ◽  
K. Swartz ◽  
L. Hersh ◽  
M. Lasota

2021 ◽  
Vol 39 (15_suppl) ◽  
pp. 12038-12038
Author(s):  
Federica Biello ◽  
Alessia Mennitto ◽  
Abdurraouf Mahmoud ◽  
Francesca Platini ◽  
Daniela Ferrante ◽  
...  

12038 Background: Elderly cancer patients may have important benefits from innovative treatments. However, they are often barred from clinical trials because of highly selective eligibility criteria, or due to biased and subjective physician standpoints including reluctance to invite elderly patients and fear of excessive toxicity. Indeed, geriatric assessment has been increasingly recognized as predictive and prognostic instrument to detect frailty in older adults with cancer. In this perspective, the G8 score is a simple and reproducible instrument to identify elderly patients who should undergo full geriatric evaluation. The aim of our study was to evaluate the impact of frailty assessment by the G8 screening tool on the outcome of onco-hematological patients. Methods: Between January 2017 and December 2020 the G8 screening tool was administered to patients, aged >65 years, referred to our center for solid and hematological malignancies. G8 score was assessed at the time of first access. The primary endpoint was overall survival. Multivariate analysis was performed according to G8 score, age, tumor type, stage and treatment. Results: In the observation period, 430 patients were screened for frailty by G8; median age was 77 years (65-92); of these, 331 (77%) had a G8 score <14. Pts with solid tumors were 310 (72%), 175 (57%) of whom had metastatic diseases; 227 (73%) had a G8 score <14. Pts with hematological malignancies were 120 (28%), 100 (83%) of whom had a G8 score <14. Systemic therapy was administered to 336 patients (78%). At a median follow up of 7.2 months (range 1 to 52) 101 pts (24%) were dead. Median overall survival (mOS) was 27 months (1-52+).Patients with solid tumors, classified as frail by a G8 score <14 had a 3-fold risk of death compared with those with G8 > 14 (OR 3.26, CI 95 1.5-7.2, p = 0.003). Conversely, this increased risk was not observed in hematological malignancies (OR 1.4, CI 95 0.4-4.6, p = 0.57). By multivariate analysis, G8 score was associated with a worse prognosis only in patients with solid tumors. Conclusions: Our analysis suggest that elderly frail patients with solid tumors have a significantly increased risk of death as compared to elderly fit patients. Conversely, no impact of frailty, as assessed by a G8 score < 14, was evident in elderly patients with hematological malignancies.


Author(s):  
Cheryl P. Bruijnen ◽  
Anne Heijmer ◽  
Diny G. van Harten-Krouwel ◽  
Frederiek van den Bos ◽  
Remco de Bree ◽  
...  

2020 ◽  
Vol 31 ◽  
pp. S457
Author(s):  
G. Soler ◽  
R. Legido ◽  
X. Perez ◽  
M. Martinez-Villacampa ◽  
C. Santos ◽  
...  

2020 ◽  
Vol 38 (6_suppl) ◽  
pp. 206-206
Author(s):  
Shingo Hatakeyama ◽  
Masaki Momota ◽  
Itsuto Hamano ◽  
Teppei Okamoto ◽  
Hayato Yamamoto ◽  
...  

206 Background: This study aimed to evaluate the geriatric 8 (G8) screening tool for detecting frailty in patients with prostate cancer. Methods: Between January 2017 and June 2019, we prospectively evaluated the G8 in 540 prostate cancer patients, 444 with localized stage M0 and 96 with metastatic stage M1 disease. The primary endpoint was the comparison of G8 scores in patients treated with robot-assisted radical prostatectomy (RARP), radiotherapy, androgen deprivation therapy alone (ADT-alone) for localized disease, and standard care for the M1 disease. Secondary endpoint included the cutoff estimation of G8 score and the influence of G8 on prognosis. Results: The median age was 75 years. G8 scores ≤14 indicating frailty were seen in 36% of RARP (n = 214), 57% of RT (n = 209), 91% of ADT-alone (n = 21), and 70% of M1 disease (n=96). The median G8 score in M0 patients was significantly higher than that in M1 patients (14.5 vs 12.8, respectively). The median G8 score in patients treated with RARP, RT and ADT-alone was 15, 14, and 12, respectively. The patients with RARP had significantly higher G8 score than that of RT or ADT-alone. The optimal G8 cutoff score for patients with M0 and M1 disease was 13.0 (AUC: 0.681). The overall survival was significantly shorter in patients with G8 <13 than that of ≥13. Conclusions: The G8 score of patients with localized and metastatic PC was significantly different. Frailty was significantly associated with treatment selection and prognosis in patients with PC.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document