ArticleEuropean geriatric medicine2026
Integration of geriatric assessment-guided care plan modifications and interventions into clinical paths of older adults with cancer (GORILLA): a feasibility approach.
Article in European geriatric medicine, 2026. 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
19 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeA comprehensive geriatric assessment (CGA) followed by geriatric assessment-guided interventions was demonstrated to reduce treatment-related toxicities CTCAE III°-V° in older adults with cancer undergoing systemic cancer treatments, but implementation remains insufficient. Thus, we aimed to evaluate the feasibility of implementing CGA into routine care and multidisciplinary tumor boards (MDTs) in Germany within a bicentric feasibility trial (DRKS00035569; 19.12.2024).
methodsPatients ≥ 65 years with positive geriatric screening (G8 < 15 points) and all patients ≥ 70 years received CGA as part of their routine care. Results were presented during MDT discussions to derive treatment recommendations. After CGA, patients were asked for trial participation which included data analysis and a telephone follow-up after 3 months. Clinicians participating in the MDT were asked about the added value of CGA presentation. Primary endpoint was the estimation of patient's willingness to participate with an accuracy of ± 7.5% to inform design for a later (cost) effectiveness trial.
results75 patients received CGA (62.5% females). Of those, 72 (96%) agreed to participate (95% confidence interval, [0.8875; 0.9917]). With an accuracy of estimating the willingness to participate of < |7.5%|, the primary endpoint was reached. The median age was 76.7 years (range 69-92 years). A member of the geriatric team attended 2/3 of MDT meetings. Clinicians rated the integration of CGA results predominantly as useful.
conclusionIntegration of CGA into routine care of older cancer patients is feasible but will likely require adequate geriatric staffing per center. A larger implementation study, evaluating efficacy and cost-effectiveness in the German healthcare system, is necessary.
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.