ReviewBMC cancer2018
Clinical decision making in cancer care: a review of current and future roles of patient age.
Review in BMC cancer, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 14 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
14 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Utilisation of endocrine therapy for cancer in Indigenous peoples: a systematic review and meta-analysis.BMC cancer · 2024Pooled it
- Radiosensitivity Prediction of Tumor Patient Based on Deep Fusion of Pathological Images and Genomics.Bioengineering (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Predicting ICU transfer for high-risk patients upon medical admission via the medical intensive care prediction score (MICAPS).BMC emergency medicine · 2026Article
- Implementation of an Oncogeriatric Unit for Frail Older Patients with Breast Cancer: Preliminary Results.Current oncology (Toronto, Ont.) · 2024Article
- Geriatric Communication Skills Training Program for Oncology Healthcare Providers: a Secondary Analysis of Patient and Caregiver Outcomes.Journal of cancer education : the official journal of the American Association for Cancer Education · 2024Article
- A comprehensive review on immune checkpoint inhibitors induced cardiotoxicity characteristics and associated factors.European journal of medical research · 2023Review
- Cardiovascular events and artificial intelligence-predicted age using 12-lead electrocardiograms.International journal of cardiology. Heart & vasculature · 2023Article
- Geriatrics communication skills training program for oncology healthcare providers to improve the management of care for older adults with cancer.PEC innovation · 2022Article
- All-Cause Mortality Risk Prediction in Older Adults with Cancer: Practical Approaches and Limitations.Current oncology reports · 2022Review
- A Classifier for Improving Early Lung Cancer Diagnosis Incorporating Artificial Intelligence and Liquid Biopsy.Frontiers in oncology · 2022Article
- The Impact of Dementia on Cancer Treatment Decision-Making, Cancer Treatment, and Mortality: A Mixed Studies Review.JNCI cancer spectrum · 2021Review
- Precision medicine and the principle of equal treatment: a conjoint analysis.BMC medical ethics · 2021Article
- How aging of the global population is changing oncology.Ecancermedicalscience · 2021Article
- Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundPatient age is among the most controversial patient characteristics in clinical decision making. In personalized cancer medicine it is important to understand how individual characteristics do affect practice and how to appropriately incorporate such factors into decision making. Some argue that using age in decision making is unethical, and how patient age should guide cancer care is unsettled. This article provides an overview of the use of age in clinical decision making and discusses how age can be relevant in the context of personalized medicine.
methodsWe conducted a scoping review, searching Pubmed for English references published between 1985 and May 2017. References concerning cancer, with patients above the age of 18 and that discussed age in relation to diagnostic or treatment decisions were included. References that were non-medical or concerning patients below the age of 18, and references that were case reports, ongoing studies or opinion pieces were excluded. Additional references were collected through snowballing and from selected reports, guidelines and articles.
resultsThree hundred and forty-seven relevant references were identified. Patient age can have many and diverse roles in clinical decision making: Contextual roles linked to access (age influences how fast patients are referred to specialized care) and incidence (association between increasing age and increasing incidence rates for cancer); patient-relevant roles linked to physiology (age-related changes in drug metabolism) and comorbidity (association between increasing age and increasing number of comorbidities); and roles related to interventions, such as treatment (older patients receive substandard care) and outcome (survival varies by age).
conclusionsPatient age is integrated into cancer care decision making in a range of ways that makes it difficult to claim age-neutrality. Acknowledging this and being more transparent about the use of age in decision making are likely to promote better clinical decisions, irrespective of one's normative viewpoint. This overview also provides a starting point for future discussions on the appropriate role of age in cancer care decision making, which we see as crucial for harnessing the full potential of personalized medicine.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.