Article

The SAKK cancer-specific geriatric assessment (C-SGA): a pilot study of a brief tool for clinical decision-making in older cancer patients

BMC Medical Informatics and Decision Making (Impact Factor: 1.5). 08/2013; 13(1):93. DOI: 10.1186/1472-6947-13-93
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT Recommendations from international task forces on geriatric assessment emphasize the need for research including validation of cancer-specific geriatric assessment (C-SGA) tools in oncological settings. The objective of this study was to evaluate the feasibility of the SAKK Cancer-Specific Geriatric Assessment (C-SGA) in clinical practice.
A cross sectional study of cancer patients >=65 years old (N = 51) with pathologically confirmed cancer presenting for initiation of chemotherapy treatment (07/01/2009-03/31/2011) at two oncology departments in Swiss canton hospitals: Kantonsspital Graubunden (KSGR N = 25), Kantonsspital St. Gallen (KSSG N = 26). Data was collected using three instruments, the SAKK C-SGA plus physician and patient evaluation forms. The SAKK C-SGA includes six measures covering five geriatric assessment domains (comorbidity, function, psychosocial, nutrition, cognition) using a mix of medical record abstraction (MRA) and patient interview. Five individual domains and one overall SAKK C-SGA score were calculated and dichotomized as below/above literature-based cut-offs. The SAKK C-SGA was evaluated by: patient and physician estimated time to complete, ease of completing, and difficult or unanswered questions.
Time to complete the patient questionnaire was considered acceptable by almost all (>=96%) patients and physicians. Patients reported slightly shorter times to complete the questionnaire than physicians (17.33 +/- 7.34 vs. 20.59 +/- 6.53 minutes, p = 0.02). Both groups rated the patient questionnaire as easy/fairly easy to complete (91% vs. 84% respectively, p = 0.14) with few difficult or unanswered questions. The MRA took on average 8.32 +/- 4.72 minutes to complete. Physicians (100%) considered time to complete MRA acceptable, 96% rated it as easy/fairly easy to complete. Individual study site populations differed on health-related characteristics (excellent/good physician-rated general health KSGR 71% vs. KSSG 32%, p = 0.007). The overall mean C-SGA score was 2.4 +/- 1.12. Patients at KSGR had lower C-SGA scores (2.00 +/- 1.19 vs. 2.81 +/- 0.90, p = 0.009) and a smaller proportion (28% vs.65%, p = 0.008) was above the C-SGA cut-off score compared to KSSG.
These results suggest the SAKK C-SGA is a feasible practical tool for use in clinical practice. It demonstrated discriminative ability based on objective geriatric assessment measures, but additional investigations on use for clinical decision-making are warranted. The SAKK C-SGA also provides important usable domain information for intervention to optimize outcomes in older cancer patients.

0 Followers
 · 
159 Views
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: To identify Comprehensive Geriatric Assessment (CGA) components independently associated with changes in planned cancer treatment. We prospectively included 375 consecutive elderly patients with cancer (ELCAPA01 study) assessed by geriatricians using the CGA. Multivariate analysis was used to identify factors associated with changes in the cancer treatment (intensification, decrease, or delayed > 2 weeks). Change was defined as a difference between the initial treatment proposal and the final treatment selected in a multidisciplinary meeting. Mean age was 79.6 years (standard deviation [SD], 5.6 years), and 197 (52.5%) were women. The most common tumor location was the digestive system (58.7%). The mean number of comorbidities was 4.2 (SD, 2.7) per patient, and the mean Cumulative Illness Rating Scale for Geriatrics score was 11.8 (SD, 5.3). After the CGA, the initial cancer treatment plan was modified for 78 (20.8%) of 375 patients (95% CI, 16.8 to 25.3), usually to decrease treatment intensity (63 [80.8%] of 78 patients). By univariate analysis, cancer treatment changes were associated with Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status ≥ 2 (73.3% in the group with changes v 41.1% in the in the group without changes; P < .001), dependency for one or more activities of daily living (ADL; 59.0% v 24.2%; P < .001), malnutrition (81.8% v 51.2%; P < .001), cognitive impairment (38.5% v 24.9%; P = .023), depression (52.6% v 21.7%; P < .001), and greater number of comorbidities (mean, 4.8 [SD, 2.9] v 4.0 [SD, 2.6]; P = .02). By multivariate analysis, factors independently associated with cancer treatment changes were a lower ADL score (odds ratio [OR], 1.25 per 0.5-point decrease; CI, 1.04 to 1.49; P = .016) and malnutrition (OR, 2.99; CI, 1.36 to 6.58; P = .007). Functional status assessed by the ADL score and malnutrition were independently associated with changes in cancer treatment.
    Journal of Clinical Oncology 06/2011; 29(27):3636-42. DOI:10.1200/JCO.2010.31.0664 · 17.88 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Geriatric assessment is a multidisciplinary diagnostic process that evaluates the older adult's medical, psychological, social, and functional capacity. No systematic review of the use of geriatric assessment in oncology has been conducted. The goals of this systematic review were: 1) to provide an overview of all geriatric assessment instruments used in the oncology setting; 2) to examine the feasibility and psychometric properties of those instruments; and 3) to systematically evaluate the effectiveness of geriatric assessment in predicting or modifying outcomes (including the impact on treatment decision making, toxicity of treatment, and mortality). We searched Medline, Embase, Psychinfo, Cinahl, and the Cochrane Library for articles published in English, French, Dutch, or German between January 1, 1996, and November 16, 2010, reporting on cross-sectional, longitudinal, interventional, or observational studies that assessed the feasibility or effectiveness of geriatric assessment instruments. The quality of articles was evaluated using relevant quality assessment frameworks. We identified 83 articles that reported on 73 studies. The quality of most studies was poor to moderate. Eleven studies examined psychometric properties or diagnostic accuracy of the geriatric assessment instruments used. The assessment generally took 10-45 min. Geriatric assessment was most often completed to describe a patient's health and functional status. Specific domains of geriatric assessment were associated with treatment toxicity in 6 of 9 studies and with mortality in 8 of 16 studies. Of the four studies that examined the impact of geriatric assessment on the cancer treatment decision, two found that geriatric assessment impacted 40%-50% of treatment decisions. Geriatric assessment in the oncology setting is feasible, and some domains are associated with adverse outcomes. However, there is limited evidence that geriatric assessment impacted treatment decision making. Further research examining the effectiveness of geriatric assessment on treatment decisions and outcomes is needed.
    CancerSpectrum Knowledge Environment 07/2012; 104(15):1133-63. DOI:10.1093/jnci/djs285 · 15.16 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: BACKGROUND: Metastatic breast cancer chemotherapy in the elderly is considered effective in carefully selected patients, but there is little data regarding its effect in vulnerable patients. METHODS: We evaluated tumour response (primary endpoint), feasibility and outcomes after six courses of an adapted dose of pegylated liposomal doxorubicin (PLD) (40mg/m(2) every 28 days) as first-line chemotherapy for hormone-resistant MBC. RESULTS: Of 60 patients >70 years (median 77 years), 15% had performance status ⩾2 and 73% had visceral metastases. Geriatric assessment included: ⩾2 comorbidities, 42%; ⩾1 deficiency in Activities of Daily Living (ADL), 10% and Instrumental ADL (IADL), 82%; living in residential homes, 12%; albumin <35g/L, 17%; body mass index (BMI) <21, 20%; depression, 17%; and lymphocytes ⩽1×10(3)/mm(3), 27%. Complete response, partial response and stable disease were observed in 5%, 15% and 60%, respectively, but only 48% completed six cycles. Treatment discontinuations were mostly due to disease progression (18%) and non-haematological (NH) toxicities (22%). Eight patients died during treatment (three possibly related to PLD), and 15 had unplanned hospital admissions. Exploratory analyses to identify geriatric covariates associated with treatment outcomes revealed severe haematological toxicities significantly correlated with lymphocytes ⩽1×10(3)/mm(3). NH toxicities correlated with age ⩾80 years and living in residential homes. Progression-free survival (median 6.1 months) decreased with age, deficiency in IADL, cardiac dysfunction and living in residential homes. Overall survival (median 15.7 months) also decreased with living in residential homes. CONCLUSION: Despite manageable haematological toxicities and expected response rates, PLD feasibility was poor in unselected elderly patients.
    European journal of cancer (Oxford, England: 1990) 06/2013; DOI:10.1016/j.ejca.2013.04.027 · 4.82 Impact Factor

Full-text (4 Sources)

Download
6 Downloads
Available from
Oct 3, 2014