6
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: not found

      Beyond Performance Status

      research-article

      Read this article at

      ScienceOpenPublisherPMC
      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Oncologists should recognise the need to move beyond the Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group Performance Status (ECOG PS) score. ECOG PS is a longstanding and ubiquitous feature of oncology. It was evolved 40 years ago as an adaption of the 70-year-old Karnofsky performance score. It is short, easily understood and part of the global language of oncology. The wide prevalence of the ECOG PS attests to its proven utility and worth to help triage patient treatment. The ECOG PS is problematic. It is a unidimensional functional score. It is mostly physician assessed, subjective and therefore open to bias. It fails to account for multimorbidity, frailty or cognition. Too often the PS is recorded only once in wilful ignorance of a patient's changing physical state. As modern oncology offers an ever-widening array of therapies that are ‘personalised’ to tumour genotype, modern oncologists must strive to better define patient phenotype. Using a wider range of scoring and assessment tools, oncologists can identify deficits that may be reversed or steps taken to mitigate detrimental effects of treatment. These tools can function well to identify those patients who would benefit from comprehensive assessment. This overview identifies the strengths of ECOG PS but highlights the weaknesses and where these are supported by other measures. A strong recommendation is made here to move to routine use of the Clinical Frailty Score to start to triage patients and most appropriately design treatments and rehabilitation interventions.

          Related collections

          Most cited references54

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          Use of comprehensive geriatric assessment in older cancer patients: recommendations from the task force on CGA of the International Society of Geriatric Oncology (SIOG).

          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. 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. 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. 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.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            Validation of a Prediction Tool for Chemotherapy Toxicity in Older Adults With Cancer.

            Older adults are at increased risk for chemotherapy toxicity, and standard oncology assessment measures cannot identify those at risk. A predictive model for chemotherapy toxicity was developed (N = 500) that consisted of geriatric assessment questions and other clinical variables. This study aims to externally validate this model in an independent cohort (N = 250).
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Developing a cancer-specific geriatric assessment: a feasibility study.

              As the U.S. population ages, there is an emerging need to characterize the "functional age" of older patients with cancer to tailor treatment decisions and stratify outcomes based on factors other than chronologic age. The goals of the current study were to develop a brief, but comprehensive, primarily self-administered cancer-specific geriatric assessment measure and to determine its feasibility as measured by 1) the percentage of patients able to complete the measure on their own, 2) the length of time to complete, and 3) patient satisfaction with the measure. The geriatric and oncology literature was reviewed to choose validated measures of geriatric assessment across the following domains: functional status, comorbidity, cognition, psychological status, social functioning and support, and nutritional status. Criteria applied to geriatric assessment measurements included reliability, validity, brevity, and ability to self-administer. The measure was administered to patients with breast carcinoma, lung carcinoma, colorectal carcinoma, or lymphoma who were fluent in English and receiving chemotherapy at Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center (New York, NY) or the University of Chicago (Chicago, IL). The instrument was completed by 43 patients (mean age, 74 yrs; range, 65-87 yrs). The majority had AJCC Stage IV disease (68%). The mean time to completion of the assessment was 27 minutes (range, 8-45 mins). Most patients were able to complete the self-administered portion of the assessment without assistance (78%) and were satisfied with the questionnaire length (90%). There was no association noted between age (P = 0.56) or educational level (P = 0.99) and the ability to complete the assessment without assistance. In this cohort, this brief but comprehensive geriatric assessment could be completed by the majority of patients without assistance. Prospective trials of its generalizability, reliability, and validity are justified. (c) 2005 American Cancer Society.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Contributors
                Journal
                Clin Oncol (R Coll Radiol)
                Clin Oncol (R Coll Radiol)
                Clinical Oncology (Royal College of Radiologists (Great Britain)
                The Royal College of Radiologists. Published by Elsevier Ltd.
                0936-6555
                1433-2981
                16 July 2020
                16 July 2020
                Affiliations
                []Brighton and Sussex University Hospitals NHS Trust, Brighton, UK
                []Brighton and Sussex Medical School, Brighton, UK
                Author notes
                []Author for correspondence: R. Simcock, Brighton and Sussex University Hospitals NHS Trust, Brighton, UK. richard.simcock@ 123456nhs.net
                Article
                S0936-6555(20)30272-7
                10.1016/j.clon.2020.06.016
                7365102
                32684503
                ac22bb0d-15af-463e-b58f-af1503ffc32b
                © 2020 The Royal College of Radiologists. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

                Since January 2020 Elsevier has created a COVID-19 resource centre with free information in English and Mandarin on the novel coronavirus COVID-19. The COVID-19 resource centre is hosted on Elsevier Connect, the company's public news and information website. Elsevier hereby grants permission to make all its COVID-19-related research that is available on the COVID-19 resource centre - including this research content - immediately available in PubMed Central and other publicly funded repositories, such as the WHO COVID database with rights for unrestricted research re-use and analyses in any form or by any means with acknowledgement of the original source. These permissions are granted for free by Elsevier for as long as the COVID-19 resource centre remains active.

                History
                : 15 June 2020
                : 19 June 2020
                : 25 June 2020
                Categories
                Article

                Oncology & Radiotherapy
                comorbidity,frailty,multimorbidity,polypharmacy
                Oncology & Radiotherapy
                comorbidity, frailty, multimorbidity, polypharmacy

                Comments

                Comment on this article