ReviewJournal of geriatric oncology2024
Assessing patient-reported outcomes (PROs) and patient-related outcomes in randomized cancer clinical trials for older adults: Results of DATECAN-ELDERLY initiative.
Review in Journal of geriatric oncology, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT03676218 (Assessing Patient-reported Outcomes), which is not on this map. Cited by 10 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.
Assessing Patient-reported Outcomes (PROs) and Patient-related Outcomes in Randomized Cancer Clinical Trials for Older Adults: the DATECAN-ELDERLY Initiative
Who cites it
10 citing papers in PubMed, 17 citations in OpenAlex.
- Prevalence of patient-reported and clinician-graded cognitive symptomatic adverse events in older patients with advanced cancer.JNCI cancer spectrum · 2026Trial
- The ESMO/SIOG Cancer in the Elderly Working Group pragmatic strategies for clinical trial designs and endpoints in older adults with cancer.ESMO open · 2026Review
- Closing the evidence gap in older adults with extensive-stage small-cell lung cancer: a CGA-guided, risk-adapted treatment framework.Therapeutic advances in medical oncology · 2026Review
- Comprehensive Geriatric Assessment: Addressing Unmet Healthcare Needs in Older Adults.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Review
- Article
- Remote monitoring in older adults with cancer, opportunities and challenges: a narrative review.Aging clinical and experimental research · 2025Review
- Article
- Psychological assessment and the role of the psychologist in early palliative care.Frontiers in psychology · 2024Article
- Prognostic impact of clinical factors for immune checkpoint inhibitor with or without chemotherapy in older patients with non-small cell lung cancer and PD-L1 TPS ≥ 50.Frontiers in immunology · 2024Article
- Patient-Reported Outcomes to Achieve Person-Centered Care for Aging People With Kidney Disease.Seminars in nephrologyReview
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
14 authors at 11 institutions in 9 countries.
Funding
Abstract
As older adults with cancer are underrepresented in randomized clinical trials (RCT), there is limited evidence on which to rely for treatment decisions for this population. Commonly used RCT endpoints for the assessment of treatment efficacy are more often tumor-centered (e.g., progression-free survival). These endpoints may not be as relevant for the older patients who present more often with comorbidities, non-cancer-related deaths, and treatment toxicity. Moreover, their expectation and preferences are likely to differ from younger adults. The DATECAN-ELDERLY initiative combines a broad expertise, in geriatric oncology and clinical research, with interest in cancer RCT that include older patients with cancer. In order to guide researchers and clinicians coordinating cancer RCT involving older patients with cancer, the experts reviewed the literature on relevant domains to assess using patient-reported outcomes (PRO) and patient-related outcomes, as well as available tools related to these domains. Domains considered relevant by the panel of experts when assessing treatment efficacy in RCT for older patients with cancer included functional autonomy, cognition, depression and nutrition. These were based on published guidelines from international societies and from regulatory authorities as well as minimum datasets recommended to collect in RCT including older adults with cancer. In addition, health-related quality of life, patients' symptoms, and satisfaction were also considered by the panel. With regards to tools for the assessment of these domains, we highlighted that each tool has its own strengths and limitations, and very few had been validated in older adults with cancer. Further studies are thus needed to validate these tools in this specific population and define the minimum clinically important difference to use when developing RCTs in this population. The selection of the most relevant tool should thus be guided by the RCT research question, together with the specific properties of the tool.
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.