ArticleFrontiers in oncology2023
Clinical utility of geriatric assessment tools in older patients with gastrointestinal cancer.
Article in Frontiers in oncology, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.
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
6 citing papers in PubMed, 7 citations in OpenAlex.
- Frailty assessed by comprehensive geriatric assessment and postoperative outcomes of older adults undergoing gastrectomy for gastric cancer.Surgery today · 2026Article
- Geriatric 8 score as a prognostic factor of the efficacy and safety of oxaliplatin-based chemotherapy in elderly patients with metastatic colorectal cancer.International journal of colorectal disease · 2025Article
- Distribution of Geriatric 8 screening tool scores in elderly and non-elderly patients with cancer.International journal of clinical oncology · 2025Article
- Management of biliary tract cancers in elderly patients: a French multicenter retrospective study (PRONOBIL-ACABi).Therapeutic advances in medical oncology · 2025Article
- Article
- Examining provider perceptions and practices for comprehensive geriatric assessment among cancer survivors: a qualitative study with an implementation science focus.Frontiers in aging · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Geriatric 8 (G8) and instrumental activities of daily living (IADL) are recommended to predict overall survival (OS) or risk of serious adverse events (SAEs) in older cancer patients. However, the clinical utility is relatively unknown in older patients suffering malnutrition with gastrointestinal (GI) cancer, including gastric cancer (GC) and pancreatic cancer (PC). Materials and methods: We retrospectively included patients aged ≥65 years with GC, PC, and colorectal cancer (CRC) who received a G8 questionnaire at first visit from April 2018 to March 2020. The associations between G8/IADL and safety or OS were assessed in patients with advanced/unresectable tumors. Results: Of 207 patients (median age: 75 years), the median G8 score was 10.5 and normal G8 score rate was 6.8%. Both the median G8 score and normal G8 (>14) score rate numerically increased in the order of GC < PC < CRC. There was no clear association between the G8 standard cutoff value of 14 and SAEs or OS. However, OS was significantly longer in patients with G8 >11 than in those with G8 ≤11 (19.3 vs. 10.5 months, Conclusion: The G8 cutoff value of 14 would not be clinically useful in patients with GI cancer for predicting OS or SAEs; however, the cutoff value of 11 and IADL may be useful to predict OS for older patients with GI cancers including GC and PC.
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.