RÉSUMÉ
Introducción: El cáncer es una enfermedad asociada al envejecimiento y tiene una alta prevalencia en los adultos mayores. La valoración geriátrica integral (VGI) mejora los cuidados de los adultos mayores (AM) con cáncer. En contextos sanitarios con recursos limitados, no todos los AM podrán ser evaluados por un geriatra. Un modelo en 2 pasos, incluyendo el test G8, en la consulta habitual del oncólogo, permite seleccionar aquellos pacientes que se beneficiarán de una VGI. Esta puede aportar en la toma de decisiones del tratamiento oncológico específico. Objetivo: Evaluar el beneficio del test G8 y la VGI en ≥ 70 años con cáncer candidatos a recibir quimioterapia. Material y Métodos: Estudio observacional, descriptivo, de corte transversal, de una muestra no probabilística de pacientes ≥ de 70 años con diagnóstico de cáncer y candidatos a recibir quimioterapia. Se aplicó el G8 por el oncólogo y se completó la VGI en los que presentaron alteración en algunas de las áreas evaluadas. Resultados: Se analizaron 32 pacientes. Se realizó G8 a todos, en 21 de ellos se completó la VGI. En estos, en reunión multidisciplinaria con oncólogo y geriatra se discutió el tratamiento. En el 38% de los pacientes se cambió la conducta oncológica tras contar con la valoración geriátrica integral. Conclusión: Creemos que la incorporación del G8 en la práctica clínica del oncólogo aporta una herramienta de cribado útil para identificar los pacientes ≥70 años que se benefician de una VGI previa al inicio de tratamiento oncoespecífico, optimizando de esta manera los recursos.
Introduction: Cancer is a disease associated with aging and has a high prevalence in older adults. Comprehensive geriatric assessment (CGA) improves the care of older adults (OA)with cancer. In healthcare settings with limited resources, not all OA may be evaluated by a geriatrician. A 2-step model, including the G8 test, in the usual oncologist consultation, allows selecting those patients who will benefit from CGA. This can contribute to decision-making regarding specific cancer treatment. Objective: To evaluate the benefit of the incorporation of the G8 test and CGA in the ≥ 70 years with cancer candidates for chemotherapy. Material and Methods: Observational, descriptive, cross-sectional study of a non-probability sample of patients ≥ 70 years of age with a diagnosis of cancer and candidates for chemotherapy. The G8 was applied by the oncologist and the CGA was completed in those who presented alteration in some of the evaluated areas. Results: 32 patients were analyzed. G8 was performed in all, in 21 of them the CGA was completed. In these, the treatment was discussed in a multidisciplinary meeting with an oncologist and a geriatrician. Oncological behavior was changed in 38% of patients after having a comprehensive geriatric evaluation. Conclusion: We believe that the incorporation of the G8 test in the clinical practice of the oncologist provides a useful screening tool to identify patients ≥70 years who benefit from CGA prior to the start of oncospecific treatment, thus optimizing resources.
Introdução: O câncer é uma doença associada ao envelhecimento e tem alta prevalência em idosos. A avaliação geriátrica ampla (AGA) melhora o atendimento a idosos com câncer. Em ambientes de saúde com recursos limitados, nem todos eles podem ser avaliadas por um geriatra. Um modelo de duas etapas, incluindo o teste G8, na consulta oncológica usual, permite selecionar os pacientes que serão beneficiados pela AGA. Isso pode contribuir para a tomada de decisões em relação ao tratamento específico do câncer. Objetivo: Avaliar o benefício da incorporação do teste G8 e AGA nos ≥ 70 anos com câncer, candidatos à quimioterapia. Material e Métodos: Estudo observacional, descritivo e transversal de uma amostra não probabilística de pacientes com idade ≥ 70 anos com diagnóstico de câncer e candidatos à quimioterapia. O G8 foi aplicado pelo oncologista e a AGA foi realizada naqueles que apresentaram alteração em algumas das áreas avaliadas. Resultados: 32 pacientes foram analisados. O G8 foi realizado em todos, em 21 deles a AGA foi aplicada. Nesses, o tratamento foi discutido em reunião multidisciplinar com oncologista e geriatra. O tratamento oncológico foi alterado em 38% dos pacientes após uma avaliação geriátrica amplia. Conclusão: Acreditamos que a incorporação do teste G8 na prática clínica do oncologista fornece uma ferramenta de triagem útil para identificar pacientes com idade ≥70 anos que se beneficiam da AGA antes do início do tratamento oncoespecífico, otimizando recursos.
Sujet(s)
Humains , Mâle , Femelle , Sujet âgé , Évaluation gériatrique/statistiques et données numériques , Triage , Tumeurs/traitement médicamenteux , Antinéoplasiques/effets indésirables , Uruguay , Épidémiologie Descriptive , Études transversales , Prise de décisionRÉSUMÉ
Background: The incidence of renal cell carcinoma (RCC) is increasing globally due to an aging population and widespread use of imaging studies. Objective: The aim of this study was to describe the characteristics and perioperative outcomes of RCC surgery in very elderly patients (VEP), ≥75 years of age. Methods: This is a retrospective comparative study of 3656 patients who underwent the treatment for RCC from 1990 to 2015 in 28 centers from eight Latin American countries. We compared baseline characteristics as well as clinical and perioperative outcomes according to age groups (<75 vs.≥ 75 years). Surgical complications were classified with the Clavien-Dindo score. We performed logistic regression analysis to identify factors associated with perioperative complications. Results: There were 410 VEP patients (11.2%). On bivariate analysis, VEP had a lower body mass index (p < 0.01) and higher ASA score (ASA >2 in 26.3% vs. 12.4%, p < 0.01). There was no difference in performance status and clinical stage between the study groups. There were no differences in surgical margins, estimated blood loss (EBL), complication, and mortality rates (1.3% vs. 0.4%, p = 0.17). On multivariate regression analysis, age ≥75 years (odds ratio [OR] 2.33, p < 0.01), EBL ≥ 500 cc (OR 3.34, p < 0.01), and > pT2 stage (OR 1.63, p = 0.04) were independently associated with perioperative complications. Conclusions: Surgical resection of RCC was safe and successful in VEP. Age ≥75 years was independently associated with 30-day perioperative complications. However, the vast majority were low-grade complications. Age alone should not guide decision-making in these patients, and treatment must be tailored according to performance status and severity of comorbidities. (REV INVEST CLIN. 2020;72(5):308-15)