The DOI matches its Crossref record; 2 of the 2 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Comorbidity and functional status are independent in older cancer patients.
Abstract
PURPOSE: Comorbidity is a frequent and often therapeutically limiting problem in older cancer patients. However, to date, there is no standard measure of the comorbidity burden available for these patients. We tested the performance of two comorbidity scales and their relationship with functional status. PATIENTS AND METHODS: The Cumulative Illness Rating Scale-Geriatric (CIRS-G) was compared with the Charlson scale in 203 patients who received a comprehensive geriatric assessment (CGA) in our Senior Adult Oncology Program (SAOP). Study end points were variability, reliability, correlation with Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) performance status (PS), Activities of Daily Living (ADL), and Instrumental Activities of Daily Living (IADL). The relative weight of comorbidity versus tumor stage in the correlations with functional status was assessed. RESULTS: Median age was 75 years (range, 63 to 91). Sixty-four percent of patients scored 0 on the Charlson scale versus 6% on the CIRS-G. The correlation between the Charlson and CIRS-G was fair (p = 0.25 to 0.39). CIRS-G grade 3/4 had a fair correlation with ADL (p = 0.27). Otherwise, there was low or no correlation between comorbidity and functional status across the measures. Tumor stage was not correlated with functional status either. Correlation of ECOG PS with ADL (p = 0.51)c and IADL (p = 0.61) was moderate. Interrater and test-retest correlations were good or very good for both the Charlson and CIRS-G. CONCLUSION: Comorbidity needs to be assessed independently from functional status. Both the Charlson and CIRS-G scales are reliable tools for use in trials of older cancer patients. Both can be tested in further studies as predictors of outcomes such as toxicity of treatment, changes in functional status, or survival.
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
Assessment of Older People: Self-Maintaining and Instrumental Activities of Daily Living
Lawton, M. P., & Brody, E. M. (1969) · The Gerontologist · doi:10.1093/geront/9.3_part_1.179 · Cited by 18,540
Adapting a clinical comorbidity index for use with ICD-9-CM administrative databases
DEYO, R. (1992) · Journal of Clinical Epidemiology · doi:10.1016/0895-4356(92)90133-8 · Cited by 10,452
Cited by
Sorror, M. L., Maris, M. B., Storb, R., Baron, F., Sandmaier, B. M., Maloney, D. G., & Storer, B. (2005) · Blood · doi:10.1182/blood-2005-05-2004 · Cited by 2,969
How to measure comorbiditya critical review of available methods
DEGROOT, V, BECKERMAN, H., LANKHORST, G., & BOUTER, L. (2003) · Journal of Clinical Epidemiology · doi:10.1016/s0895-4356(02)00585-1 · Cited by 1,757
Charlson Comorbidity Index: A Critical Review of Clinimetric Properties
Charlson, M. E., Carrozzino, D., Guidi, J., & Patierno, C. (2022) · Psychotherapy and Psychosomatics · doi:10.1159/000521288 · Cited by 1,686
The development of a comorbidity index with physical function as the outcome
GROLL, D., TO, T., BOMBARDIER, C., & WRIGHT, J. (2005) · Journal of Clinical Epidemiology · doi:10.1016/j.jclinepi.2004.10.018 · Cited by 1,198
Leng, S., Chen, X., & Mao, G. (2014) · Clinical Interventions in Aging · doi:10.2147/cia.s45300 · Cited by 991
Metadata
- Authors
- Extermann, M., Overcash, J., Lyman, G. H., Parr, J., & Balducci, L.
- Venue
- Journal of Clinical Oncology
- Published
- 1998-04
- Volume
- 16
- Issue
- 4
- Pages
- 1582-1587
- ISSN
- 0732-183X (ISSN-L)
- 1527-7755
- OpenAlex
- W2229509524
- Cited by
- 984
- References
- 2
- FWCI
- 19.59
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
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: Comorbidity and functional status are independent in older cancer patients. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1200/jco.1998.16.4.1582
- The paper
- Extermann, M., Overcash, J., Lyman, G. H., Parr, J., & Balducci, L. (1998). Comorbidity and functional status are independent in older cancer patients. Journal of Clinical Oncology. https://doi.org/10.1200/jco.1998.16.4.1582
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.