Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Mostrar: 20 | 50 | 100
Resultados 1 - 8 de 8
Filtrar
Más filtros

Banco de datos
País/Región como asunto
Tipo del documento
Intervalo de año de publicación
1.
Ann Oncol ; 31(1): 13-14, 2020 01.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-31912786

Asunto(s)
Hongos , Neoplasias , Humanos
2.
Ann Oncol ; 26(2): 288-300, 2015 Feb.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-24936581

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: Screening tools are proposed to identify those older cancer patients in need of geriatric assessment (GA) and multidisciplinary approach. We aimed to update the International Society of Geriatric Oncology (SIOG) 2005 recommendations on the use of screening tools. MATERIALS AND METHODS: SIOG composed a task group to review, interpret and discuss evidence on the use of screening tools in older cancer patients. A systematic review was carried out and discussed by an expert panel, leading to a consensus statement on their use. RESULTS: Forty-four studies reporting on the use of 17 different screening tools in older cancer patients were identified. The tools most studied in older cancer patients are G8, Flemish version of the Triage Risk Screening Tool (fTRST) and Vulnerable Elders Survey-13 (VES-13). Across all studies, the highest sensitivity was observed for: G8, fTRST, Oncogeriatric screen, Study of Osteoporotic Fractures, Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group-Performance Status, Senior Adult Oncology Program (SAOP) 2 screening and Gerhematolim. In 11 direct comparisons for detecting problems on a full GA, the G8 was more or equally sensitive than other instruments in all six comparisons, whereas results were mixed for the VES-13 in seven comparisons. In addition, different tools have demonstrated associations with outcome measures, including G8 and VES-13. CONCLUSIONS: Screening tools do not replace GA but are recommended in a busy practice in order to identify those patients in need of full GA. If abnormal, screening should be followed by GA and guided multidisciplinary interventions. Several tools are available with different performance for various parameters (including sensitivity for addressing the need for further GA). Further research should focus on the ability of screening tools to build clinical pathways and to predict different outcome parameters.


Asunto(s)
Evaluación Geriátrica/métodos , Geriatría/métodos , Tamizaje Masivo/métodos , Oncología Médica/métodos , Neoplasias , Anciano , Anciano de 80 o más Años , Femenino , Humanos , Masculino
3.
Eur J Cancer Care (Engl) ; 24(4): 574-89, 2015 Jul.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-25757457

RESUMEN

Despite consensus guidelines on best practice in the care of older patients with cancer, geriatric assessment (GA) has yet to be optimally integrated into the field of oncology in most countries. There is a relative lack of consensus in the published literature as to the best approach to take, and there is a degree of uncertainty as to how integration of geriatric medicine principles might optimally predict patient outcomes. The aim of the current study was to obtain consensus on GA in oncology to inform the implementation of a geriatric oncology programme. A four-round Delphi process was employed. The Delphi method is a structured group facilitation process, using multiple iterations to gain consensus on a given topic. Consensus was reached on the optimal assessment method and interventions required for the commonly employed domains of GA. Other aspects of GA, such as screening methods and age cut-off for assessment, represented a higher degree of disagreement. The expert panel employed in this study clearly identified the criteria that should be included in a clinical geriatric oncology programme. In the absence of evidence-based guidelines, this may prove useful in the care of older cancer patients.


Asunto(s)
Evaluación Geriátrica/métodos , Neoplasias/terapia , Guías de Práctica Clínica como Asunto , Adulto , Anciano , Consenso , Técnica Delphi , Femenino , Humanos , Irlanda , Masculino , Oncología Médica/métodos
4.
Support Care Cancer ; 21(7): 2059-66, 2013 Jul.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-23446880

RESUMEN

PURPOSE: This study was conducted in order to characterize the prevalence of falls and functional impairments (FIs) and their association with chemotherapy-induced peripheral neuropathy (CIPN) in cancer survivors. METHODS: We analyzed baseline assessments from a phase III RCT in cancer survivors with self-reported CIPN scores of >4 out of 10. Patients completed the EORTC QLQ-CIPN-20 for neuropathy and reported falls in the previous 3 months. FIs were defined using the Activities of Daily Living subsection of the Vulnerable Elder's Scale. Associations of baseline characteristics and CIPN with falls and FIs were examined using logistic regression. RESULTS: Of 421 patients, 11.9 % experienced recent falls and 26.6 % reported FIs. Motor neuropathy was the only factor associated with falls (OR = 1.127, p = 0.01). Factors associated with FIs included non-white race (OR = 0.335 white relative to non-white, 0.781, p = 0.01) and greater motor neuropathy scores (OR = 1.262, p < 0.0001). CONCLUSION: CIPN, primarily motor, is associated with falls and FIs. Future prospective research should investigate the ability of motor neuropathy severity to predict falls.


Asunto(s)
Accidentes por Caídas/estadística & datos numéricos , Neoplasias/fisiopatología , Enfermedades del Sistema Nervioso Periférico/fisiopatología , Adulto , Anciano , Ensayos Clínicos Fase III como Asunto , Femenino , Humanos , Modelos Logísticos , Masculino , Persona de Mediana Edad , Neoplasias/tratamiento farmacológico , Neoplasias/epidemiología , New York/epidemiología , Enfermedades del Sistema Nervioso Periférico/inducido químicamente , Enfermedades del Sistema Nervioso Periférico/epidemiología , Prevalencia , Estudios Prospectivos , Ensayos Clínicos Controlados Aleatorios como Asunto , Sobrevivientes
5.
J Geriatr Oncol ; 13(6): 892-903, 2022 07.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-35292232

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: Cancer survivors over the age of 65 have unique needs due to the higher prevalence of functional and cognitive impairment, comorbidities, geriatric syndromes, and greater need for social support after chemotherapy. In this study, we will evaluate whether a Geriatric Evaluation and Management-Survivorship (GEMS) intervention improves functional outcomes important to older cancer survivors following chemotherapy. METHODS: A cluster-randomized trial will be conducted in approximately 30 community oncology practices affiliated with the University of Rochester Cancer Center (URCC) National Cancer Institute Community Oncology Research Program (NCORP) Research Base. Participating sites will be randomized to the GEMS intervention, which includes Advanced Practice Practitioner (APP)-directed geriatric evaluation and management (GEM), and Survivorship Health Education (SHE) that is combined with Exercise for Cancer Patients (EXCAP©®), or usual care. Cancer survivors will be recruited from community oncology practices (of participating oncology physicians and APPs) after the enrolled clinicians have consented and completed a baseline survey. We will enroll 780 cancer survivors aged 65 years and older who have completed curative-intent chemotherapy for a solid tumor malignancy within four weeks of study enrollment. Cancer survivors will be asked to choose one caregiver to also participate for a total up to 780 caregivers. The primary aim is to compare the effectiveness of GEMS for improving patient-reported physical function at six months. The secondary aim is to compare effectiveness of GEMS for improving patient-reported cognitive function at six months. Tertiary aims include comparing the effectiveness of GEMS for improving: 1) Patient-reported physical function at twelve months; 2) objectively assessed physical function at six and twelve months; and 3) patient-reported cognitive function at twelve months and objectively assessed cognitive function at six and twelve months. Exploratory health care aims include: 1) Survivor satisfaction with care, 2) APP communication with primary care physicians (PCPs), 3) completion of referral appointments, and 4) hospitalizations at six and twelve months. Exploratory caregiver aims include: 1) Caregiver distress; 2) caregiver quality of life; 3) caregiver burden; and 4) satisfaction with patient care at six and twelve months. DISCUSSION: If successful, GEMS would be an option for a standardized APP-led survivorship care intervention. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.govNCT05006482, registered on August 9, 2021.


Asunto(s)
Supervivientes de Cáncer , Neoplasias , Anciano , Cuidadores/psicología , Humanos , Neoplasias/tratamiento farmacológico , Neoplasias/psicología , Calidad de Vida , Ensayos Clínicos Controlados Aleatorios como Asunto , Sobrevivientes/psicología , Supervivencia
6.
Curr Geriatr Rep ; 3(3): 182-189, 2014 Sep.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-25587518

RESUMEN

Cancer is common in older adults and the approach to cancer treatment and supportive measures in this age group is continuously evolving. Incorporating geriatric assessment (GA) into the care of the older patient with cancer has been shown to be feasible and predictive of outcomes, and there are unique aspects of the traditional geriatric domains that can be considered in this population. Geriatric assessment-guided interventions can also be developed to support patients during their treatment course. There are several existing models of incorporating geriatrics into oncology care, including a consultative geriatric assessment, geriatrician "embedded" within an oncology clinic and primary management by a dual-trained geriatric oncologist. Although a geriatrician or geriatric oncologist leads the geriatric assessment, is it truly a multidisciplinary assessment, and often includes evaluation by a physical therapist, occupational therapist, pharmacist, social worker and nutritionist.

SELECCIÓN DE REFERENCIAS
DETALLE DE LA BÚSQUEDA