ArticleBMC geriatrics2026
Feasibility & clinical utility of Comprehensive Geriatric Assessment (CGA) and interventions in older adults with prostate cancer on Androgen Deprivation Therapy (ADT); a retrospective service evaluation.
Article in BMC geriatrics, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundAndrogen Deprivation Therapy (ADT) is often a component of treatment for localised and advanced prostate cancer but carries multiple potential side-effects. We evaluated the feasibility of a clinical pathway delivering comprehensive geriatric assessment (CGA) for older men receiving ADT for prostate cancer, and its utility in targeting patients with multiple other long-term conditions.
methodsThis retrospective service evaluation included consecutive new patients aged 65 + with prostate cancer of any stage, commencing ADT in a dedicated uro-oncology clinic in a 6-month period in 2021. The clinical referral pathway to a specialist geriatric oncology clinic for CGA was available for any of these patients who the nurses delivering the ADT initiation clinic considered would benefit. Patient characteristics were compared and for those referred to the pathway, outcome measures included feasibility, effectiveness in targeting medically complex patients, and clinical utility including ADT-specific assessments and other CGA interventions.
resultsOverall, 84 patients were seen in the ADT clinic during the evaluation period with a mean age of 73.4 years (SD 6.6). 45% were referred for CGA and of these, 100% received CGA. There were a greater number of patients with 4 + long-term conditions in the group referred for CGA (76.3%) vs. those who were not (34.8%). ADT toxicity screening (non-radiological) was performed in over 80% of the 38 patients referred for CGA, and DEXA scanning was completed in 55.3%. For the 38 patients who received CGA, 188 interventions unrelated to ADT were also implemented. Interventions were varied and tailored to a range of long-term conditions, which may not have been identified outside CGA.
conclusionsThis service evaluation confirms the feasibility and utility of CGA performed in a specialist geriatric oncology clinic for older men commencing ADT for prostate cancer. To fully explore the impact of CGA on clinical outcomes (cancer-related and otherwise) for older men starting ADT, prospective studies are needed.
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.