RESUMEN
INTRODUCTION: Older adults with cancer are at increased risk of delirium due to age, comorbidities, medications, cognitive impairment, and possibly cancer treatments. However, there is scant information on the risks of delirium with chemotherapy and approaches to prevent or treat it. We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis to summarize available evidence. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We systematically searched peer-reviewed journal articles in English, French, German, and Dutch from five databases from 1990 to May 2019 to identify studies examining delirium in adult patients receiving chemotherapy. We also attempted to identify delirium risk prediction models and prevention or treatment trials. All reviews and data extraction were performed by two independent reviewers. Summary estimates were derived from random effects models. RESULTS: A total of 23,389 titles and abstracts were screened, and 1272 full-text articles were reviewed. Nineteen articles reported on delirium using an acceptable diagnostic standard. Sample sizes varied from 7 to 324. The incidence of delirium ranged from 0 to 51% (weighted mean 9%, 95% confidence interval 5-16%). In a sensitivity analysis including 122 studies that used terminology suggestive of delirium but did not meet our inclusion criteria, the weighted incidence of delirium was 10% (95% confidence interval 8-12%). Age was not consistently associated with increased delirium risk. No intervention studies to prevent or treat delirium were identified. CONCLUSIONS: Delirium may occur in 1 in 11 older adults receiving chemotherapy; however, there were substantial limitations in reported studies. This systemic review highlights key gaps in knowledge, particularly regarding risk factors, prevention, and treatments.
Asunto(s)
Delirio , Anciano , Delirio/inducido químicamente , Delirio/epidemiología , Atención a la Salud , Humanos , Incidencia , Factores de RiesgoRESUMEN
PURPOSE: Geriatric assessment (GA) is recommended for older adultsâ¯≥â¯70â¯years with cancer to guide treatment selection. Screening tools such as the Vulnerable Elders Survey (VES-13) and G6 have been used to identify patients at highest need of GA. Whether either tool predicts a change in oncologic treatment following GA is unclear. METHODS: Patients attending a geriatric oncology clinic between July 2015 and June 2017 who completed a VES-13 and underwent subsequent GA were included. Clinical information was extracted from a prospectively maintained database. G6 scores were assigned retrospectively. Patients were stratified into those who were "VES-13 positive" (scoreâ¯≥â¯3) and "VES-13 negative" (scoreâ¯<â¯3). Logistic regression was used to explore the relationship between VES-13 score, G6 score, and treatment modification. RESULTS: Ninety-nine patients were seen prior to initiating cancer treatment. The median VES-13 score was 7; with 81.8% of patients scoring ≥3. The treatment plan was modified in 47.5% of patients after GA. VES-13 score was predictive of treatment plan modification (63.0% among VES-13 positive versus 16.7% among VES-13 negative patients; pâ¯=â¯0.001). G6 performed similarly to the VES-13. The only statistically significant predictor of treatment change in multivariable analysis was performance status. CONCLUSION: VES-13 positive patients are more likely to undergo treatment modification to reduce treatment intensity or supportive care only. The VES-13 may provide oncologists with a rapid, reliable way of identifying vulnerability in older adults with cancer who may need further GA prior to commencing cancer treatment.