Consistent with our previous review , several domains of GA are associated with adverse outcomes .
BACKGROUND Our previous systematic review of geriatric assessment ( GA ) in oncology included a literature search up to November 2010 .
However , the quickly evolving field warranted an up date .
Aims of this review : ( i ) provide an overview of all GA instruments developed and /or in use in the oncology setting ; ( ii ) evaluate effectiveness of GA in predicting/modifying outcomes ( e.g. treatment decision impact , treatment toxicity , mortality , use of care ) .
A multicenter phase II randomized trial of gemcitabine followed by erlotinib at progression, versus the reverse sequence, in vulnerable elderly patients with advanced non small-cell lung cancer selected with a comprehensive geriatric assessment (the GFPC 0505 study).
BACKGROUND The aim of this r and omized phase II trial was to evaluate the feasibility and activity of weekly gemcitabine ( G ) followed by erlotinib at disease progression ( arm A ) versus erlotinib followed by G at progression ( arm B ) in vulnerable elderly patients with advanced non small-cell lung cancer ( NSCLC ) , selected on the basis of a comprehensive geriatric assessment ( CGA ) . METHODS Vulnerable elderly chemotherapy-naive patients with stage IIIB/IV NSCLC were selected after a CGA ( socioeconomic , cognitive and emotional status , depression , nutritional status , ADL and IADL assessment s ) . The primary endpoint was the time to second progression ( TTP2 ) . Overall survival ( OS ) , time to first progression ( TTP1 ) and safety were secondary endpoints . RESULTS Between May 2006 and January 2010 , 21 centers enrolled 100 patients , of whom 94 were eligible .  TTP2 was 4.3 and 3.5 months in arm A and arm B , respectively ; TTP1 was 2.5 and 2.2 months ; and the median OS time was 4.4 and 3.9 months . The respective one-year survival rates were 27.3 % and 20 % . There was no major unexpected toxicity . CONCLUSION In vulnerable elderly patients with NSCLC not selected for EGFR expression , both strategies were feasible but had modest efficacy . Further studies are needed to identify elderly patients who should receive palliative care only
Consistent with our previous review , several domains of GA are associated with adverse outcomes .
BACKGROUND Our previous systematic review of geriatric assessment ( GA ) in oncology included a literature search up to November 2010 .
However , the quickly evolving field warranted an up date .
Aims of this review : ( i ) provide an overview of all GA instruments developed and /or in use in the oncology setting ; ( ii ) evaluate effectiveness of GA in predicting/modifying outcomes ( e.g. treatment decision impact , treatment toxicity , mortality , use of care ) .