Intrinsic capacity and survival among older adults with gastrointestinal malignancies: The Cancer and Aging Resilience Evaluation registry
Open accessAbstract
Background: Intrinsic capacity (IC) was introduced by the World Health Organization (WHO) as a marker of healthy aging, and is defined as the combination of an individual’s physical, mental, and psychological capacities. This study aimed to assess IC via a patient‐reported geriatric assessment (GA) and evaluate its association with survival among older adults with gastrointestinal (GI) malignancies. Methods: Data were used from a single‐institution prospective registry of older adults undergoing GA before cancer therapy. Key domains of IC (vitality, locomotion, and sensory [hearing and visual], psychological, and cognitive capacities) were captured via GA, and each was given a score of 0 or 1 (0, impaired) to compute the total IC score (range, 0–6, where 6 indicates no impairment and ≤5 indicates impairment in ≥1 domains). A frailty index (FI) was measured via the deficit accumulation method. Cox regression models and Kaplan–Meier curves were used to examine the impact of IC impairment on survival. Results: The study included 665 patients; the median age was 68 years, 57.4% were men, and 72.9% were White. The median IC score was 4, and 79.3% of participants showed impairment in ≥1 domains of IC. Most commonly impaired domains were locomotion (48.7%) and vitality (43.9%). IC was inversely associated with FI (Spearman coefficient, −0.75; p < .001). IC impairment was associated with inferior overall survival (score, 4–5: adjusted hazard ratio [aHR], 1.7; 95% CI, 1.11–2.48; score, 2–3: aHR, 1.9; 95% CI, 1.30–2.85; score, 0–1: aHR, 1.9; 95% CI, 1.11–2.48). Conclusions: IC impairment is associated with frailty and reduced overall survival in older patients with GI malignancies. GA can be used to screen for IC impairment as recommended by the WHO. Plain Language Summary: The World Health Organization introduced intrinsic capacity as a marker of healthy aging. Intrinsic capacity is the combination of an individual’s physical, mental, and psychological capacities. It contains six key domains: vitality, locomotion, and sensory (hearing and visual), psychological, and cognitive capacities. Older adults with cancer are susceptible to a decrease in intrinsic capacity as a result of cancer and the aging process. In this study, we aimed to assess the intrinsic capacity for patients with gastrointestinal cancer and also identify whether there exists any association of intrinsic capacity with overall survival. We identified that approximately 80% of this population had one or more impaired domains, and more intrinsic capacity impairment was associated with reduced overall survival.
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
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.
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
Combined intrinsic capacity domains predict resilience in older adults, are associated with survival in older individuals with cancer, and are mediated by multilevel resilience.
“Combined intrinsic capacity domains predict resilience in older adults129, are associated with survival in older individuals with cancer130 and are mediated by multilevel resilience131.”
From Resilience and brain health in global populations (2025) · cites this paper as [130]
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
No citation lists for this paper
No citation lists for this paper yet — checked again daily.
References 30 · Cited by 11
Research works printed but not linked: 3
- Williams GR, Hopkins JO, Klepin HD, et al. Practical assessment and management of vulnerabilities in older patients receiving systemic cancer therapy: ASCO guideline questions and answers. JCO Oncol Pract. 2023;19(9):718-723.
- Dotan E, Walter LC, Browner IS, et al. NCCN guidelines® insights: older adult oncology, version 1.2021: featured updates to the NCCN guidelines. J Natl Compr Canc Netw. 2021;19(9):1006-1019. doi:10. 6004/jnccn.2021.0043 · DOI
- Dale W, Klepin HD, Williams GR, et al. Practical assessment and management of vulnerabilities in older patients receiving systemic cancer therapy: ASCO guideline update. J Clin Oncol. 2023;41(26): 4293-4312.
- Authors
- Maheshwari, S., Dai, C., Giri, S., Harmon, C., Tucker, A., Fowler, M. E., Outlaw, D., & Williams, G. R.
- Affiliations
- University of Alabama at Birmingham (US)
- Corresponding author
- Maheshwari, Supriya
- ORCID
- Venue
- Cancer
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 2024-06-12
- Volume
- 130
- Issue
- 20
- Pages
- 3530-3539
- ISSN
- 0008-543X (ISSN-L)
- 1097-0142
- OpenAlex
- W4399563253
- Cited by
- 11
- References
- 30
- Citations by year
- 2026: 6 · 2025: 4 · 2024: 1
- FWCI
- 3.05
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- bronze
- doi.org
- Locations
- Cancer (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Geriatrics and Gerontology › Frailty in Older Adults
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Physiology › Nutrition and Health in Aging
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Neuropsychology and Physiological Psychology › Aging and Gerontology Research
- Keywords
- adults, gastrointestinal cancer, intrinsic capacity, healthy aging, frailty, frailty index, geriatric assessment, overall survival, locomotor impairment, vitality, cognitive ability, sensory impairment, patient-reported outcomes, pre-treatment assessment, deficit accumulation frailty index
- MeSH terms
- Frailty, Aged, Aged, 80 and over, Aging, Female, Gastrointestinal Neoplasms, Humans, Male, Middle Aged, Prospective Studies, Registries, Geriatric Assessment
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