Prospective clinical trial evaluating vulnerability and chemotherapy risk using geriatric assessment tools in older patients with lung cancer. Issue 11 (20th November 2019)

• Record Type: Journal Article
• Authors: Tsubata, Yukari; Shiratsuki, Yohei; Okuno, Takae; Tanino, Akari; Nakao, Mika; Amano, Yoshihiro; Hotta, Takamasa; Hamaguchi, Megumi; Okimoto, Tamio; Hamaguchi, Shunichi; Kurimoto, Noriaki; Nishiyama, Yumi; Kimura, Tomohiro; Iwata, Haruko; Tsumoto, Shusaku; Isobe, Takeshi
• Is Part Of: Geriatrics and gerontology international. Volume 19:Issue 11(2019)
• Page Start: 1108
• Page End: 1111
• Publication Date: 2019-11-20
• Subjects: chemotherapy -- EGFR mutation -- geriatric assessment -- geriatric oncology -- lung cancer; Geriatrics -- Periodicals; Gerontology -- Periodicals; Geriatrics -- Japan -- Periodicals; Gerontology -- Japan -- Periodicals; 618.97
• DOI: 10.1111/ggi.13781
• Languages: English
• ISSNs: 1444-1586

Abstract

Abstract : Aim: In Japan, the number of older patients with cancer has been increasing. Assessment of performance status, cognitive function and social background is necessary for the treatment of older patients. The aims of the present study were: (i) to establish an evaluation system using electronic medical records; and (ii) to distinguish older patients as fit versus vulnerable or frail according to a geriatric assessment (GA) system score. Methods: We incorporated GA tools in our electronic medical records system and carried out comprehensive assessments for patients with newly diagnosed lung cancer aged ≥65 years. The decision about primary treatment followed consultation with the clinical team and was not guided by GA scores. Subsequent treatment and outcomes were recorded. Results: A total of 100 patients had completed GA. The average age was 75 years (range 65–94 years). Regarding GA results, 63% were positive on the Comprehensive Geriatric Assessment 7, 39% on the Vulnerable Elderly Survey‐13 and 84% on the Geriatric 8. The percentage of vulnerable patients (positive on all three GA) was significantly higher in the non‐standard therapy group ( n = 19) than in the standard therapy group ( n = 81; 78.9% vs 21.0%, P < 0.001). Among vulnerable patients who received standard therapy, 47% discontinued chemotherapy as a result of toxicity. Even if a patient was considered vulnerable based on GA scores, chemotherapy is possibly safe for those with EGFR mutations. Conclusions: We confirmed the feasibility of this system. During decision‐making for older patients with cancer, a combination of GA helps prevent undertreatment or overtreatment. Geriatr Gerontol Int 2019; 19: 1108–1111 .