The DOI matches its Crossref record; 6 of the 6 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Predicting the risk of chemotherapy toxicity in older patients: The Chemotherapy Risk Assessment Scale for High‐Age Patients (CRASH) score
Open accessAbstract
BACKGROUND: Tools are lacking to assess the individual risk of severe toxicity from chemotherapy. Such tools would be especially useful for older patients, who vary considerably in terms of health status and functional reserve. METHODS: The authors conducted a prospective, multicentric study of patients aged ≥70 years who were starting chemotherapy. Grade 4 hematologic (H) or grade 3/4 nonhematologic (NH) toxicity according to version 3.0 of the Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events was defined as severe. Twenty‐four parameters were assessed. Toxicity of the regimen (Chemotox) was adjusted using an index to estimate the average per‐patient risk of chemotherapy toxicity (the MAX2 index). In total, 562 patients were accrued, and 518 patients were evaluable and were split randomly (2:1 ratio) into a derivation cohort and a validation cohort. RESULTS: Severe toxicity was observed in 64% of patients. The Chemotherapy Risk Assessment Scale for High‐Age Patients (CRASH) score was constructed along 2 subscores: H toxicity and NH toxicity. Predictors of H toxicity were lymphocytes, aspartate aminotransferase level, Instrumental Activities of Daily Living score, lactate dehydrogenase level, diastolic blood pressure, and Chemotox. The best model included the 4 latter predictors (risk categories: low, 7%; medium‐low, 23%; medium‐high, 54%; and high, 100%, respectively; Ptrend < .001). Predictors of NH toxicity were hemoglobin, creatinine clearance, albumin, self‐rated health, Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance, Mini‐Mental Status score, Mini‐Nutritional Assessment score, and Chemotox. The 4 latter predictors provided the best model (risk categories: 33%, 46%, 67%, and 93%, respectively; Ptrend < .001). The combined risk categories were 50%, 58%, 77%, and 79%, respectively; Ptrend < .001). Bootstrap internal validation and independent sample validation demonstrated stable risk categorization and Ptrend < .001. CONCLUSIONS: The CRASH score distinguished several risk levels of severe toxicity. The split score discriminated better than the combined score. To the authors' knowledge, this is the first score systematically integrating both chemotherapy and patient risk for older patients and has a potential for future clinical application. Cancer 2011. © 2011 American Cancer Society.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Folstein, M. F., Folstein, S. E., & McHugh, P. R. (1975) · Journal of Psychiatric Research · doi:10.1016/0022-3956(75)90026-6 · Cited by 88,282
(1990) · Choice Reviews Online · doi:10.5860/choice.27-3338 · Cited by 35,305
Hosmer, D. W., & Lemeshow, S. (2000) · doi:10.1002/0471722146 · Cited by 20,302
Sheikh (1986) · doi:10.1300/j018v05n01_09 · Cited by 7,236
Predicting chemotherapy toxicity in older adults with cancer: a prospective multicenter study
Hurria, A., Togawa, K., Mohile, S. G., Owusu, C., Klepin, H. D., Gross, C. P., Lichtman, S. M., Gajra, A., Bhatia, S., Katheria, V., et al. (2011) · Journal of Clinical Oncology · doi:10.1200/jco.2011.34.7625 · Cited by 1,841
Grønberg, B. H., Sundstrøm, S., Kaasa, S., Bremnes, R. M., Fløtten, Ø., Amundsen, T., Hjelde, H. H., Plessen, C. V., & Jordhøy, M. (2010) · European Journal of Cancer · doi:10.1016/j.ejca.2010.04.009 · Cited by 120
Cited by
Mohile, S. G., Dale, W., Somerfield, M. R., Schonberg, M. A., Boyd, C. M., Burhenn, P. S., Canin, B., Cohen, H. J., Holmes, H. M., Hopkins, J. O., et al. (2018) · Journal of Clinical Oncology · doi:10.1200/jco.2018.78.8687 · Cited by 1,479
Validation of a prediction tool for chemotherapy toxicity in older adults with cancer
Hurria, A., Mohile, S., Gajra, A., Klepin, H., Muss, H., Chapman, A., Feng, T., Smith, D., Sun, C.-L., De Glas, N., et al. (2016) · Journal of Clinical Oncology · doi:10.1200/jco.2015.65.4327 · Cited by 598
Soubeyran, P., Bellera, C., Goyard, J., Heitz, D., Curé, H., Rousselot, H., Albrand, G., Servent, V., Jean, O. S., van Praagh, I., et al. (2014) · PLoS ONE · doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0115060 · Cited by 601
Measuring Aging and Identifying Aging Phenotypes in Cancer Survivors
Guida, J. L., Ahles, T. A., Belsky, D., Campisi, J., Cohen, H. J., DeGregori, J., Fuldner, R., Ferrucci, L., Gallicchio, L., Gavrilov, L., et al. (2019) · JNCI: Journal of the National Cancer Institute · doi:10.1093/jnci/djz136 · Cited by 216
Guerard, E. J., Deal, A. M., Chang, Y., Williams, G. R., Nyrop, K. A., Pergolotti, M., Muss, H. B., Sanoff, H. K., & Lund, J. L. (2017) · Journal of the National Comprehensive Cancer Network · doi:10.6004/jnccn.2017.0122 · Cited by 168
Metadata
- Authors
- Extermann, M., Boler, I., Reich, R. R., Lyman, G. H., Brown, R. H., DeFelice, J., Levine, R. M., Lubiner, E. T., Reyes, P., Schreiber, F. J., & Balducci, L.
- Venue
- Cancer
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 2011-11-09
- Volume
- 118
- Issue
- 13
- Pages
- 3377-3386
- ISSN
- 0008-543X (ISSN-L)
- 1097-0142
- OpenAlex
- W1991020867
- Cited by
- 1,143
- References
- 6
- FWCI
- 22.38
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- bronze
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Predicting the risk of chemotherapy toxicity in older patients: The Chemotherapy Risk Assessment Scale for High‐Age Patients (CRASH) score. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1002/cncr.26646
- The paper
- Extermann, M., Boler, I., Reich, R. R., Lyman, G. H., Brown, R. H., DeFelice, J., Levine, R. M., Lubiner, E. T., Reyes, P., Schreiber, F. J., & Balducci, L. (2012). Predicting the risk of chemotherapy toxicity in older patients: The Chemotherapy Risk Assessment Scale for High‐Age Patients (CRASH) score. Cancer. https://doi.org/10.1002/cncr.26646
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.