Gobind R Tarchand1, Vicki Morrison1, Mark A Klein1, Elyse Watkins1. 1. is a Physician Assistant, and is a Medical Oncologist, both in the Hematology-Oncology Section, Primary Care Service Line at the Minneapolis VA Health Care System in Minnesota. is Professor of Medicine in Medical Oncology and Infectious Diseases, and Mark Klein is Associate Professor of Medicine, both in the Division of Hematology, Oncology and Transplantation, Department of Medicine, University of Minnesota in Minneapolis. is Associate Professor for the Lynchburg DMSc program at the University of Lynchburg in Virginia. Vicki Morrison is a Geriatric Oncologist in the Division of Hematology/Oncology, Department of Medicine at Hennepin County Medical Center in Minneapolis, Minnesota.
Abstract
PURPOSE: Our objective was to review the utility of pretreatment comprehensive geriatric assessment (CGA) and its impact on decision making regarding choice and intensity of oncologic therapeutic regimens for older, frail, or poor-functional-status patients, as well as using this prospective assessment to predict chemotherapy-related toxicities. Database searches were conducted in Medline, PubMed, and Ovid for clinical studies, review articles, and journal publications. Search terms included geriatric assessment, medical oncology, chemotherapy, frailty, toxicity, and functional status. Thirty-seven pertinent articles were retrieved and serve as the basis for this clinical review. OBSERVATIONS: CGA is an important tool for examining aspects of frailty and functional status that are not captured by traditional performance status measures. These findings may then be used in selection of appropriate therapeutic regimens for a given patient that are efficacious and tolerable. Such pretreatment assessments also have been used in predicting therapy-related toxicities. CONCLUSIONS: Frail and older patients are common in oncology practices and are at high risk for therapy-related toxicities because of comorbidities and physiologic changes, presenting a considerable clinical challenge. CGA establishes evidence-based strategies to better assess the functional status of such patients and is predictive for chemotherapy-related toxicities in this vulnerable group. Despite publications on these measures in the oncology literature, there is limited evidence-based research to demonstrate the utility of CGA by practicing oncology providers and how to implement it into practice.
PURPOSE: Our objective was to review the utility of pretreatment comprehensive geriatric assessment (CGA) and its impact on decision making regarding choice and intensity of oncologic therapeutic regimens for older, frail, or poor-functional-status patients, as well as using this prospective assessment to predict chemotherapy-related toxicities. Database searches were conducted in Medline, PubMed, and Ovid for clinical studies, review articles, and journal publications. Search terms included geriatric assessment, medical oncology, chemotherapy, frailty, toxicity, and functional status. Thirty-seven pertinent articles were retrieved and serve as the basis for this clinical review. OBSERVATIONS: CGA is an important tool for examining aspects of frailty and functional status that are not captured by traditional performance status measures. These findings may then be used in selection of appropriate therapeutic regimens for a given patient that are efficacious and tolerable. Such pretreatment assessments also have been used in predicting therapy-related toxicities. CONCLUSIONS: Frail and older patients are common in oncology practices and are at high risk for therapy-related toxicities because of comorbidities and physiologic changes, presenting a considerable clinical challenge. CGA establishes evidence-based strategies to better assess the functional status of such patients and is predictive for chemotherapy-related toxicities in this vulnerable group. Despite publications on these measures in the oncology literature, there is limited evidence-based research to demonstrate the utility of CGA by practicing oncology providers and how to implement it into practice.
Authors: Supriya G Mohile; William Dale; Mark R Somerfield; Mara A Schonberg; Cynthia M Boyd; Peggy S Burhenn; Beverly Canin; Harvey Jay Cohen; Holly M Holmes; Judith O Hopkins; Michelle C Janelsins; Alok A Khorana; Heidi D Klepin; Stuart M Lichtman; Karen M Mustian; William P Tew; Arti Hurria Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2018-05-21 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: Talia R Weiss Wiesel; Christian J Nelson; William P Tew; Molly Hardt; Supriya Gupta Mohile; Cynthia Owusu; Heidi D Klepin; Cary P Gross; Ajeet Gajra; Stuart M Lichtman; Rupal Ramani; Vani Katheria; Laura Zavala; Arti Hurria Journal: Psychooncology Date: 2014-08-06 Impact factor: 3.894
Authors: Barbara L Andersen; Robert J DeRubeis; Barry S Berman; Jessie Gruman; Victoria L Champion; Mary Jane Massie; Jimmie C Holland; Ann H Partridge; Kate Bak; Mark R Somerfield; Julia H Rowland Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2014-04-14 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: Hans Wildiers; Pieter Heeren; Martine Puts; Eva Topinkova; Maryska L G Janssen-Heijnen; Martine Extermann; Claire Falandry; Andrew Artz; Etienne Brain; Giuseppe Colloca; Johan Flamaing; Theodora Karnakis; Cindy Kenis; Riccardo A Audisio; Supriya Mohile; Lazzaro Repetto; Barbara Van Leeuwen; Koen Milisen; Arti Hurria Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2014-08-20 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: Karlijn J G Schulkes; Esteban T D Souwer; Marije E Hamaker; Henk Codrington; Simone van der Sar-van der Brugge; Jan-Willem J Lammers; Johanneke E A Portielje; Leontine J R van Elden; Frederiek van den Bos Journal: Lung Date: 2017-03-09 Impact factor: 2.584