Search

Simple Summary: Comprehensive geriatric assessment is defined as a multi-dimensional, multi-disciplinary diagnostic and therapeutic process that is conducted to determine the medical, mental, and functional problems that older people with frailty have so that a coordinated and integrated plan for treatment and follow-up can be developed. Progress has been made in the definition of the best way to detect problems, but the benefits are mostly based on prognosis stratification and on the adaptation of cancer treatment. The present review aims to evaluate the level of evidence regarding geriatric interventions proposed following the detection of a problem in cancer patients. This review highlights the scarcity of published studies on this topic. Comprehensive geriatric assessment-based interventions have not yet demonstrated their specific impact. Multi-domain interventions seem promising, especially when they are based on global assessments. However, standardization seems difficult considering the lack of evidence for each domain. There is a consensus that the use of comprehensive geriatric assessment (CGA) is good clinical practice for older patients with solid tumors or hematological malignancies. To be complete, a CGA must include a geriatric assessment and an intervention plan. According to the SIOG consensus, a CGA should assess several domains: functional status, comorbidity, cognition, mental health status, fatigue, social status and support, nutrition, and the presence of geriatric syndromes. Progress has been made in the definition of the best way to detect problems, but the benefits are mostly based on prognosis stratification and on the adaptation of cancer treatment. The present review aims to evaluate the level of evidence regarding geriatric interventions proposed following the detection of a problem in cancer patients in each domain mentioned in the SIOG consensus. An online search of the PubMed database was performed using predefined search algorithms specific for each domain of the CGA. Eligible articles had to have well-defined interventions targeting specific domains of the CGA. We screened 1864 articles, but only a few trials on single-domain interventions were found, and often, these studies involved small groups of patients. This review highlights the scarcity of published studies on this topic. The specific impacts of CGA-based interventions have not yet been demonstrated. Multi-domain interventions seem promising, especially when they are based on global assessments. However, standardization seems difficult considering the lack of evidence for each domain. New studies are necessary in multiple care contexts, and innovative designs must be used to balance internal and external validity. An accurate description of the intervention and what "usual care" means will improve the external validity of such studies. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Nutritional impairment is common in cancer patients and is associated with poor outcomes. Only few studies focused on cachexia. We assessed the prevalence of cachexia in older cancer patients, identified associated risk factors, and evaluated its impact on 6 month overall mortality. Methods: A French nationwide cross‐sectional survey (performed in 55 geriatric oncology clinics) of older cancer patients aged ≥70 referred for geriatric assessment prior to treatment choice and initiation. Demographic, clinical, and nutritional data were collected. The first outcome was cachexia, defined as loss of more than 5% of bodyweight over the previous 6 months, or a body mass index below 20 kg/m2 with weight loss of more than 2%, or sarcopenia (an impaired Strength, Assistance with walking, Rise from chair, Climb stairs and Falls score) with weight loss of more than 2%. The second outcome was 6 month overall mortality. Results: Of the 1030 patients included in the analysis [median age (interquartile range): 83 (79–87); males: 48%; metastatic cancer: 42%; main cancer sites: digestive tract (29%) and breast (16%)], 534 [52% (95% confidence interval: 49–55%)] had cachexia. In the multivariate analysis, patients with breast (P < 0.001), gynaecologic (P < 0.001), urinary (P < 0.001), skin (P < 0.001), and haematological cancers (P = 0.006) were less likely to have cachexia than patients with colorectal cancer. Patients with upper gastrointestinal tract cancers (including liver and pancreatic cancers; P = 0.052), with previous surgery for cancer (P = 0.001), with metastases (P = 0.047), poor performance status (≥2; P < 0.001), low food intake (P < 0.001), unfeasible timed up‐and‐go test (P = 0.002), cognitive disorders (P = 0.03) or risk of depression (P = 0.005), were more likely to have cachexia. At 6 months, 194 (20.5%) deaths were observed. Cachexia was associated with 6 month mortality risk (adjusted hazard ratio = 1.49; 95% confidence interval: 1.05–2.11) independently of age, in/outpatient status, cancer site, metastatic status, cancer treatment, dependency, cognition, and number of daily medications. Conclusions: More than half of older patients with cancer managed in geriatric oncology clinics had cachexia. The factors associated with cachexia were upper gastrointestinal tract cancer, metastases, poor performance status, poor mobility, previous surgery for cancer, cognitive disorders, a risk of depression, and low food intake. Cachexia was independently associated with 6 month mortality. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose: Frailty is a recent concept used for evaluating elderly individuals. Our study determined the prevalence of frailty in intensive care unit (ICU) patients and its impact on the rate of mortality. Methods: A multicenter, prospective, observational study performed in four ICUs in France included 196 patients aged ≥65 years hospitalized for >24 h during a 6-month study period. Frailty was determined using the frailty phenotype (FP) and the clinical frailty score (CFS). The patients were separated as follows: FP score <3 or ≥3 and CFS <5 or ≥5. Results: Frailty was observed in 41 and 23 % of patients on the basis of an FP score ≥3 and a CFS ≥5, respectively. At admission to the ICU, the Simplified Acute Physiology Score II (SAPS II) and Sequential Organ Failure Assessment (SOFA) scores did not differ between the frail and nonfrail patients. In the multivariate analysis, the risk factors for ICU mortality were FP score ≥3 [hazard ratio (HR), 3.3; 95 % confidence interval (CI), 1.6-6.6; p < 0.001], male gender (HR, 2.4; 95 % CI, 1.1-5.3; p = 0.026), cardiac arrest before admission (HR, 2.8; 95 % CI, 1.1-7.4; p = 0.036), SAPS II score ≥46 (HR, 2.6; 95 % CI, 1.2-5.3; p = 0.011), and brain injury before admission (HR, 3.5; 95 % CI, 1.6-7.7; p = 0.002). The risk factors for 6-month mortality were a CFS ≥5 (HR, 2.4; 95 % CI, 1.49-3.87; p < 0.001) and a SOFA score ≥7 (HR, 2.2; 95 % CI, 1.35-3.64; p = 0.002). An increased CFS was associated with significant incremental hospital and 6-month mortalities. Conclusions: Frailty is a frequent occurrence and is independently associated with increased ICU and 6-month mortalities. Notably, the CFS predicts outcomes more effectively than the commonly used ICU illness scores. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]