Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35550351›Full record

SynthesisJournal of geriatric oncology2022

Use of geriatric assessment in cancer clinical trials: A systematic review.

Woojung Lee, Spencer J Cheng, Shakira J Grant, Zachary A Marcum, Beth Devine

Open access · greenAbstract readSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Journal of geriatric oncology, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing papers in PubMed
2.1field-weighted citation impact, top 15% of its field
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

7 citing papers in PubMed, 16 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Partnering With All Patients: Ensuring Shared Decision Making and Evidence-Based Management for Underrepresented Groups With Multiple Myeloma.American Society of Clinical Oncology educational book. American Society of Clinical Oncology. Annual Meeting · 2023
    Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Woojung LeeThe Comparative Health Outcomes, Policy, and Economics (CHOICE) Institute, Department of Pharmacy, University of Washington, USA. Electronic address: wwlwj08@uw.edu.
Spencer J ChengThe Comparative Health Outcomes, Policy, and Economics (CHOICE) Institute, Department of Pharmacy, University of Washington, USA.
Shakira J GrantDepartment of Medicine, Division of Hematology, The University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, USA; Lineberger Comprehensive Cancer Center, The University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, USA.
Zachary A MarcumThe Comparative Health Outcomes, Policy, and Economics (CHOICE) Institute, Department of Pharmacy, University of Washington, USA.
Beth DevineThe Comparative Health Outcomes, Policy, and Economics (CHOICE) Institute, Department of Pharmacy, University of Washington, USA.
University of Washington · US

Funding

UNC Oncology K12K12CA120780 · NCI · UNIV OF NORTH CAROLINA CHAPEL HILL · PI WILLIAM Y. KIM · 2007 to 2026
$9.6M
Functional Trajectories and Illness Experiences of Older Adults with Multiple MyelomaR03AG074030 · NIA · UNIV OF NORTH CAROLINA CHAPEL HILL · PI GRANT, SHAKIRA JEANENE · 2021 to 2022
$311k
NCI NIH HHS K12 CA120780NIA NIH HHS R03 AG074030
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundOlder adults are underrepresented in cancer clinical trials despite accounting for most of the disease burden. Geriatric assessment (GA) could be used in clinical trials of cancer drugs for older adults to improve the clinical evidence for cancer drug use among older adults.

objectiveTo examine patterns of use of GA in cancer clinical trials.

methodsWe undertook a systematic review of the studies reporting use of GA in a clinical trial setting for all cancer types and published between January 2010 and January 2020. Characteristics of GA use were extracted for each study, along with study phase, cancer type, and participant age (PROSPERO: CRD42020170584).

resultsWe identified 320 studies and 63 studies met the final inclusion criteria. Among 74 purposes of GA use, the most common was to examine the association between impairments in GA domains and clinical outcomes (28/74, 38%). Among 258 GA domains assessed across 63 studies, physical status (59/258, 23%) and comorbidities (50/258, 19%) were most often evaluated. There was significant heterogeneity in the instruments used to assess physical function (n = 16) and mood disorders (n = 7). Most studies were phase 2 (32/63, 51%).

conclusionsGA is most often used in clinical trial settings to examine associations between GA-identified deficits and clinical outcomes. Significant heterogeneity exists in the GA instruments used across trials. Comprehensive and consistent incorporation of GA into future cancer clinical trial designs could help collect more older adult-specific clinical information and adjust trial eligibility criteria to increase representation by older adults.

Indexed as

Geriatric AssessmentNeoplasmsAgedComorbidityHumansCancer clinical trialsGeriatric assessmentOlder adults

Identifiers

PMID35550351
PMCPMC10129289
OpenAlexW4229445189

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.