ArticleBMC cancer2025
Impact of comprehensive geriatric assessment on treatment decisions in older prostate cancer patients.
Article in BMC cancer, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundProstate cancer is the most common cancer in men aged above 75 years old. Given their heterogeneity, the International Society of Geriatric Oncology recommends using a comprehensive geriatric assessment (CGA) to adapt anticancer treatment management according to their geriatric status. While the theoretical value of this approach is in no doubt, the impact of the CGA on the final therapeutic decision remains elusive. This study therefore investigated the impact of comprehensive geriatric assessment on treatment decisions in older patients diagnosed with prostate cancer and described the factors associated with a change in treatment plan.
methodsThis single-centre retrospective study included prostate cancer patients who received a CGA prior to a therapeutic decision from January 2012 to December 2022. The CGA included medical, nutritional, cognitive, social, functional and psychological evaluation.
results140 patients were included, of whom 57 (40.7%) benefited from a change in their therapeutic plan after CGA, all in favour of a less aggressive treatment. There was no difference in event-free (EFS) or overall survival (OS) between patients with or without a therapeutic modification (HR for OS = 1.12 [0.68;1.84] p = 0.048). Factors associated with a change in treatment plan were a WHO performance status > 1, a high age-adjusted Charlson score, polymedication, an impaired functional independence with the ADL (Activities of Daily Living) scale and a 'frail' or 'vulnerable' geriatric profile according to Balducci's classification.
conclusionA comprehensive geriatric assessment prior to prostate cancer treatment plan initiation lead to therapeutic de-escalation in 40% of cases of without affecting overall survival or event-free survival. This adaptation offering a more tailored cancer management while preventing functional impact of treatment due to toxicity and improving patient quality of life.
trial registrationThe study was registered as (number's register: F20240123102237) and MR004 (CNIL number: 23RDUROL01).
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.