ReviewDrugs & aging2025
Patient-Reported Outcomes in Geriatric Oncology-Balancing Quality of Life and Therapeutic Effectiveness Using Primary Breast Cancer as a Model.
Review in Drugs & aging, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Effect of early integration of supportive care in addition to standard care in patients with breast cancer: A randomised controlled trial.Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer · 2026Trial
- Novel Hypothesis on Phase Angle as a Candidate Marker Associated with Physiological Reserve in Geriatric Patients in Long-Term Care.Geriatrics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- The relationship between alexithymia, meaning in life, and quality of life in older breast cancer patients: a cross-sectional study based on variable-centered and person-centered perspectives.Frontiers in medicine · 2026Article
- Clinical Pharmacist and Clinical Nurse Specialist led medicine optimisation and medication adherence via eArly identifiCation advanCed gEriatric aSsesSment (ACCESS) tool in Senior Adult Oncology Programme (SAOP).International journal of clinical pharmacy · 2025Article
- Updates and Future Directions for the Nottingham Research Programme on Primary Breast Cancer in Older Women.Cancers · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Breast cancer remains the most prevalent cancer worldwide, necessitating advancements in its management. Surgery remains the recommended primary treatment although neoadjuvant or adjuvant treatments, such as chemotherapy, may also be indicated. However, such medications confer a risk of toxicity, often resulting in dose reductions and hospitalisations. This morbidity is particularly pertinent within older patients, for whom their experience of breast cancer is already faced through the lens of unique challenges often including comorbidity, socioeconomic decline and limited support networks. Quality of life (QoL) assessments acknowledge the impact of diagnosis and treatment on patients' psychological, emotional and physical well-being. Multiple tools exist (each with their own strengths and weaknesses) ranging from the more comprehensive [such as the European Organization for the Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Questionnaire (EORTC QLQ-C30)] to the more broadly focused [including the General Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy (FACT-G)]. However, while such tools have existed for some time, there remains a gap in clinical guidance as to their integration, particularly within older patient cohorts. This article seeks to address these complexities in breast cancer decision-making by exploring how QoL assessment can best be utilised inform efficacy-tolerability trade-offs, and subsequently facilitate optimal patient-centred care.
Indexed as
Identifiers
39671154What 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.