Association between Geriatric 8 frailty and health-related quality of life in older patients with cancer (PROGNOSIS-G8): a Danish single-centre, prospective cohort study

IF 13.4 Q1 GERIATRICS & GERONTOLOGY Lancet Healthy Longevity Pub Date : 2024-09-01 DOI:10.1016/S2666-7568(24)00118-1
{"title":"Association between Geriatric 8 frailty and health-related quality of life in older patients with cancer (PROGNOSIS-G8): a Danish single-centre, prospective cohort study","authors":"","doi":"10.1016/S2666-7568(24)00118-1","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Background</h3><p>Health-related quality of life (HRQoL) is highly valued among older adults with cancer. The Geriatric 8 screening tool identifies individuals with frailty, but its association with HRQoL remains sparsely investigated. Herein, we evaluate whether Geriatric 8 frailty is associated with short-term and long-term HRQoL in older patients with cancer.</p></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><p>In this Danish single-centre, prospective cohort study, patients aged 70 years and older, referred to oncological assessment for solid cancers, were screened with the Geriatric 8. Patients completed the European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) Quality-of-Life Core 30 (QLQ-C30) and Elderly 14 (ELD14) questionnaires at baseline, 3 months, 6 months, 9 months, and 12 months. Patient characteristics were obtained from medical records. Differences in mean global health status and QoL (GHS), measured using the two seven-point Likert scale questions from the EORTC QLQ-C30 regarding overall health and QoL during the past week, between patients with frailty (defined as a Geriatric 8 score of ≤14) and without frailty within 12 months were the primary outcome. Secondary outcomes were differences in the mean EORTC Summary Score comprised of all questions from the QLQ-C30 except for those included in the GHS and a question concerning financial difficulties, and five functional (physical, role, and social functioning, maintaining purpose, and family support from the EORTC QLQ-C30 and the EORTC-QLQ-ELD14), and five symptom scales (fatigue, pain, mobility, future worries, and burden of illness from the EORTC-QLQ-C30 and the EORTC-QLQ-ELD14). Analyses were done using linear mixed models. All primary and secondary outcomes were adjusted for gender, treatment intent, and cancer type and the primary outcome was also assessed by means of a responder analysis.</p></div><div><h3>Findings</h3><p>Between June 1, 2020 and Oct 15, 2021, 1398 eligible patients were screened with the Geriatric 8 (908 [65%] with frailty and 490 [35%] without frailty) and provided medical record data. Of these patients, 707 (51%) also provided HRQoL data (437 [62%] with frailty and 270 [38%] without frailty). When adjusted, patients with frailty had poorer GHS (–15·1, 95% CI –18·5 to –11·6; p&lt;0·0001) at baseline and throughout follow-up (3 months –7·4, –11·0 to –3·7, p=0·0001; 6 months –11·7, –15·5 to –7·9, p&lt;0·0001; 9 months –10·4, –14·3 to –6·5, p&lt;0·0001; 12 months –10·4, –14·6 to –6·2, p&lt;0·0001) compared to patients without frailty. Adjusted summary scores were also poorer for patients with frailty (–9·9, 95% CI –12·1 to –7·6; p&lt;0·0001) compared to patients without frailty at baseline and throughout follow-up (3 months –8·2, –10·5 to –5·8, p=0·0001; 6 months –9·0, –11·4 to –6·6, p&lt;0·0001; 9 months –9·2, –11·7 to –6·8, p&lt;0·0001; 12 months –8·9, –11·5 to –6·3, p&lt;0·0001). Patients with frailty had significantly worse physical and role functioning, mobility, and fatigue outcomes, with no differences in family support within 12 months, at all timepoints.</p></div><div><h3>Interpretation</h3><p>Older patients with cancer and frailty have significantly poorer HRQoL than those without frailty within the 12 months following an oncology referral. Thus, by identifying and treating frailty, we can ultimately improve patient HRQoL.</p></div><div><h3>Funding</h3><p>The Danish Cancer Society, Academy of Geriatric Cancer Research (AgeCare), Odense University Hospital, University of Southern Denmark, Dagmar Marshalls Fond, and Agnes and Poul Friis Fond.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":34394,"journal":{"name":"Lancet Healthy Longevity","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":13.4000,"publicationDate":"2024-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2666756824001181/pdfft?md5=535fb239e0e39156a71823a9ffaf776a&pid=1-s2.0-S2666756824001181-main.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Lancet Healthy Longevity","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2666756824001181","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"GERIATRICS & GERONTOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background

Health-related quality of life (HRQoL) is highly valued among older adults with cancer. The Geriatric 8 screening tool identifies individuals with frailty, but its association with HRQoL remains sparsely investigated. Herein, we evaluate whether Geriatric 8 frailty is associated with short-term and long-term HRQoL in older patients with cancer.

Methods

In this Danish single-centre, prospective cohort study, patients aged 70 years and older, referred to oncological assessment for solid cancers, were screened with the Geriatric 8. Patients completed the European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) Quality-of-Life Core 30 (QLQ-C30) and Elderly 14 (ELD14) questionnaires at baseline, 3 months, 6 months, 9 months, and 12 months. Patient characteristics were obtained from medical records. Differences in mean global health status and QoL (GHS), measured using the two seven-point Likert scale questions from the EORTC QLQ-C30 regarding overall health and QoL during the past week, between patients with frailty (defined as a Geriatric 8 score of ≤14) and without frailty within 12 months were the primary outcome. Secondary outcomes were differences in the mean EORTC Summary Score comprised of all questions from the QLQ-C30 except for those included in the GHS and a question concerning financial difficulties, and five functional (physical, role, and social functioning, maintaining purpose, and family support from the EORTC QLQ-C30 and the EORTC-QLQ-ELD14), and five symptom scales (fatigue, pain, mobility, future worries, and burden of illness from the EORTC-QLQ-C30 and the EORTC-QLQ-ELD14). Analyses were done using linear mixed models. All primary and secondary outcomes were adjusted for gender, treatment intent, and cancer type and the primary outcome was also assessed by means of a responder analysis.

Findings

Between June 1, 2020 and Oct 15, 2021, 1398 eligible patients were screened with the Geriatric 8 (908 [65%] with frailty and 490 [35%] without frailty) and provided medical record data. Of these patients, 707 (51%) also provided HRQoL data (437 [62%] with frailty and 270 [38%] without frailty). When adjusted, patients with frailty had poorer GHS (–15·1, 95% CI –18·5 to –11·6; p<0·0001) at baseline and throughout follow-up (3 months –7·4, –11·0 to –3·7, p=0·0001; 6 months –11·7, –15·5 to –7·9, p<0·0001; 9 months –10·4, –14·3 to –6·5, p<0·0001; 12 months –10·4, –14·6 to –6·2, p<0·0001) compared to patients without frailty. Adjusted summary scores were also poorer for patients with frailty (–9·9, 95% CI –12·1 to –7·6; p<0·0001) compared to patients without frailty at baseline and throughout follow-up (3 months –8·2, –10·5 to –5·8, p=0·0001; 6 months –9·0, –11·4 to –6·6, p<0·0001; 9 months –9·2, –11·7 to –6·8, p<0·0001; 12 months –8·9, –11·5 to –6·3, p<0·0001). Patients with frailty had significantly worse physical and role functioning, mobility, and fatigue outcomes, with no differences in family support within 12 months, at all timepoints.

Interpretation

Older patients with cancer and frailty have significantly poorer HRQoL than those without frailty within the 12 months following an oncology referral. Thus, by identifying and treating frailty, we can ultimately improve patient HRQoL.

Funding

The Danish Cancer Society, Academy of Geriatric Cancer Research (AgeCare), Odense University Hospital, University of Southern Denmark, Dagmar Marshalls Fond, and Agnes and Poul Friis Fond.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
老年医学 8 项虚弱与老年癌症患者健康相关生活质量之间的关系(PROGNOSIS-G8):一项丹麦单中心前瞻性队列研究。
背景:患有癌症的老年人非常重视与健康相关的生活质量(HRQoL)。老年医学 8 项筛查工具可识别虚弱的个体,但其与 HRQoL 的关系仍鲜有研究。在此,我们将评估老年医学 8 筛选工具是否与老年癌症患者的短期和长期 HRQoL 相关:在这项丹麦单中心前瞻性队列研究中,对 70 岁及以上的实体瘤患者进行了老年 8 项筛查。患者在基线、3个月、6个月、9个月和12个月时填写欧洲癌症研究和治疗组织(EORTC)生活质量核心30(QLQ-C30)和老年人14(ELD14)问卷。患者特征来自医疗记录。在 12 个月内,体弱患者(定义为老年医学 8 评分≤14 分)和非体弱患者的平均总体健康状况和 QoL(GHS)差异是主要结果,GHS 采用 EORTC QLQ-C30 中关于过去一周总体健康状况和 QoL 的两个七点李克特量表问题进行测量。次要结果是平均 EORTC 总分(包括 QLQ-C30 的所有问题,但不包括 GHS 中的问题和有关经济困难的问题)和五个功能性量表(EORTC QLQ-C30 和 EORTC-QLQ-ELD14 中的身体、角色和社会功能、保持目的和家庭支持)以及五个症状量表(EORTC-QLQ-C30 和 EORTC-QLQ-ELD14 中的疲劳、疼痛、活动能力、未来担忧和疾病负担)的差异。分析采用线性混合模型进行。所有主要和次要结果都根据性别、治疗意图和癌症类型进行了调整,主要结果还通过应答者分析进行了评估:2020 年 6 月 1 日至 2021 年 10 月 15 日期间,1398 名符合条件的患者接受了老年医学 8 项筛查(其中 908 人[65%]有体弱症状,490 人[35%]无体弱症状),并提供了病历数据。在这些患者中,707 人(51%)还提供了 HRQoL 数据(437 人[62%]有体弱症状,270 人[38%]无体弱症状)。经调整后,体弱患者的 GHS 较差(-15-1,95% CI -18-5 至 -11-6;p解释:在肿瘤转诊后的 12 个月内,患有癌症且体弱的老年患者的 HRQoL 明显低于无体弱的患者。因此,通过识别和治疗虚弱,我们可以最终改善患者的 HRQoL:丹麦癌症协会、老年癌症研究学院(AgeCare)、欧登塞大学医院、南丹麦大学、达格玛-马歇尔斯基金以及阿格尼丝和普尔-弗里斯基金。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Lancet Healthy Longevity
Lancet Healthy Longevity GERIATRICS & GERONTOLOGY-
CiteScore
16.30
自引率
2.30%
发文量
192
审稿时长
12 weeks
期刊介绍: The Lancet Healthy Longevity, a gold open-access journal, focuses on clinically-relevant longevity and healthy aging research. It covers early-stage clinical research on aging mechanisms, epidemiological studies, and societal research on changing populations. The journal includes clinical trials across disciplines, particularly in gerontology and age-specific clinical guidelines. In line with the Lancet family tradition, it advocates for the rights of all to healthy lives, emphasizing original research likely to impact clinical practice or thinking. Clinical and policy reviews also contribute to shaping the discourse in this rapidly growing discipline.
期刊最新文献
Early geriatric assessment and management in older patients with Clostridioides difficile infection in Denmark (CLODIfrail): a randomised trial. The views and experiences of older adults regarding digital mental health interventions: a systematic review ofqualitative studies. Effect of oral health on functional disability and mortality in older adults in Japan: a cohort study. Defining the role and reach of a geriatrician. The UN Decade of Healthy Ageing (2021-30) for people living with HIV.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1