Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37754517›Full record

SynthesisCurrent oncology (Toronto, Ont.)2023

Comprehensive Geriatric Assessment for Older Women with Early-Stage (Non-Metastatic) Breast Cancer-An Updated Systematic Review of the Literature.

Chantae Reid-Agboola, Anita Klukowska, Francesca L Malcolm, Cora Harrison, Ruth M Parks, Kwok-Leung Cheung

Open access · goldAbstract readSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Current oncology (Toronto, Ont.), 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
9citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
2.0field-weighted citation impact, top 14% 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

9 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 11 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Physical health-related quality of life trajectories over two years following breast cancer diagnosis in older women: a secondary analysis.Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer · 2024
    Article
  9. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Chantae Reid-AgboolaNottingham Breast Cancer Research Centre, University of Nottingham, Nottingham NG7 2UH, UK.
Anita KlukowskaNottingham Breast Cancer Research Centre, University of Nottingham, Nottingham NG7 2UH, UK.
Francesca L MalcolmNottingham Breast Cancer Research Centre, University of Nottingham, Nottingham NG7 2UH, UK.
Cora HarrisonNottingham Breast Cancer Research Centre, University of Nottingham, Nottingham NG7 2UH, UK.
Ruth M ParksNottingham Breast Cancer Research Centre, University of Nottingham, Nottingham NG7 2UH, UK.ORCID 0000-0003-3832-7431
Kwok-Leung CheungNottingham Breast Cancer Research Centre, University of Nottingham, Nottingham NG7 2UH, UK.ORCID 0000-0003-2973-0755
University of Nottingham · GB

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundA previous systematic review by our team (2012) undertook comprehensive geriatric assessment (CGA) in breast cancer and concluded there was not sufficient evidence to instate CGA as mandatory practice. SIOG/EUSOMA guidelines published in 2021 advocate the use of CGA in breast cancer patients. The aim is to perform an updated systematic review of the literature.

methodsA systematic review of studies published between 2012 and 2022 that assessed the use of CGA in breast cancer was performed on Cochrane, PubMed and Embase.

resultsA total of 18 articles including 4734 patients with breast cancer were identified. The studies covered four themes for use of CGA in breast cancer: (1) to determine factors influencing survival (2) as an adjunct to treatment decision-making (3) to measure quality of life, and (4) to determine which tools should be included. There was evidence to support the use of CGA in themes 1-3; however, it is uncertain which assessment tools are best to use (theme 4).

conclusionsCGA can be used to determine factors affecting survival and quality of life in breast cancer patients and can therefore be used to aid treatment decision-making. Further work is required to determine gold standard CGA.

Indexed as

Breast NeoplasmsAgedFemaleGeriatric AssessmentHumansQuality of LifeUncertaintybreast cancercomprehensive geriatric assessmentoperableprimary

Identifiers

PMID37754517
PMCPMC10528736
OpenAlexW4386561123

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.