CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 1,098Frailty in Older AdultsNutrition and Health in AgingPharmaceutical Practices and Patient Outcomes

The DOI matches its Crossref record, with a small difference in title or year; 106 of the 106 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Use of comprehensive geriatric assessment in older cancer patients:

Extermann, Martine, Aapro, Matti, Bernabei, Roberto, Cohen, Harvey Jay, Droz, Jean-Pierre, Lichtman, Stuart, Mor, Vincent, Monfardini, Silvio, Repetto, Lazzaro, Sørbye, Liv, Topinkova, Eva·2005·Critical Reviews in Oncology/Hematology
DOI 10.1016/j.critrevonc.2005.06.003
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

Background As more and more cancers occur in elderly people, oncologists are increasingly confronted with the necessity of integrating geriatric parameters in the treatment of their patients.Methods The International Society of Geriatric Oncology (SIOG) created a task force to review the evidence on the use of a comprehensive geriatric assessment (CGA) in cancer patients. A systematic review of the evidence was conducted.Results Several biological and clinical correlates of aging have been identified. Their relative weight and clinical usefulness is still poorly defined. There is strong evidence that a CGA detects many problems missed by a regular assessment in general geriatric and in cancer patients. There is also strong evidence that a CGA improves function and reduces hospitalization in the elderly. There is heterogeneous evidence that it improves survival and that it is cost-effective. There is corroborative evidence from a few studies conducted in cancer patients. Screening tools exist and were successfully used in settings such as the emergency room, but globally were poorly tested. The article contains recommendations for the use of CGA in research and clinical care for older cancer patients.Conclusions A CGA, with or without screening, and with follow-up, should be used in older cancer patients, in order to detect unaddressed problems, improve their functional status, and possibly their survival. The task force cannot recommend any specific tool or approach above others at this point and general geriatric experience should be used.

Overview

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.critrevonc.2005.06.003

Cites

106 of 106 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Verification

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

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?

Citations

Cites

Show all 105 references

Research works printed but not linked: 2

  1. Extermann, 2003, Influence of p450-metabolized concomitant medications on toxicity from chemotherapy, Proc Am Soc Clin Oncol, 22, 730
  2. Balducci, 1990, Individualized treatment of the older cancer patient: a decision analysis, Am Geriatr Soc Proceed, 58, 61a

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Items 701–800 of 1,000

Related

See all

Metadata

Authors
Extermann, M., Aapro, M., Bernabei, R., Cohen, H. J., Droz, J.-P., Lichtman, S., Mor, V., Monfardini, S., Repetto, L., Sørbye, L., & Topinkova, E.
Affiliations
  • Moffitt Cancer Center (US)
  • Clinique de Genolier (CH)
  • Università Cattolica del Sacro Cuore (IT)
  • Duke University (US)
  • Centre Léon Bérard (FR)
  • Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center (US)
  • Brown University (US)
  • Azienda Ospedale - Università Padova (IT)
  • Istituto Nazionale di Riposo e Cura per Anziani (IT)
Corresponding author
Extermann, Martine
ORCID
Venue
Critical Reviews in Oncology/Hematology
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2005-09
Volume
55
Issue
3
Pages
241-252
ISSN
1040-8428 (ISSN-L)
DOI
10.1016/j.critrevonc.2005.06.003
OpenAlex
W2126277530
Cited by
1,098
References
105
Citations by year
2026: 38 · 2025: 31 · 2024: 32 · 2023: 55 · 2022: 67 · 2021: 60 · 2020: 61 · 2019: 72 · 2018: 70 · 2017: 62 · 2016: 65 · 2015: 54 · 2014: 73 · 2013: 42 · 2012: 56
FWCI
4.01
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Licence
www.elsevier.com/tdm/userlicense/1.0/ (tdm)
Locations
  • Critical Reviews in Oncology/Hematology (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
  • Amgen
  • European Society for Medical Oncology
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Geriatrics and Gerontology › Frailty in Older Adults
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Physiology (medical) › Nutrition and Health in Aging
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Geriatrics and Gerontology › Pharmaceutical Practices and Patient Outcomes
Keywords
comprehensive geriatric assessment, elderly cancer patients, geriatric oncology, functional status, hospitalization, survival, cost-effectiveness, geriatric screening tools
MeSH terms
Aged, Female, Geriatrics, Health Planning Guidelines, Humans, Male, Medical Oncology, Societies, Medical, Geriatric Assessment, Advisory Committees

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