Are the Fried Criteria Predictive of a Functional Decline in Older People With Solid Malignant Tumors?

Study Overview
=================
Brief Summary
-----------------
Identifying the frail elderly patients or those at risk of becoming frail has become a cornerstone of modern geriatric medicine. Many instruments have been developed to identify fragility at the individual level. The 'Fragile' phenotype defined by Fried is based on 5 criteria: weakness, slowness, low level of activity, exhaustion, and unintentional weight loss. The patient is fragile if it meets at least three out of five criteria. It is 'pre-fragile' if it meets one or two criteria. In onco-geriatrics, the International onco-geriatrics society recommends the implementation of a 'G8 scale' to detect elderly patients at risk of fragility. People with a positive G8 are then referred to the geriatric team to benefit from a comprehensive geriatric assessment. This evaluation is interpreted by the geriatrician, who proposes an action plan to overcome the various problems of the elderly patient. The evaluation can also help the oncologist in the choice of treatment for the patient: palliative care, standard treatment or adapted treatment (No-go, Go-go or slow-go). The investigators would like to assess if fragility as defined by the Fried criteria is predictive of a functional, physical or cognitive decline, or a loss of quality of life in patients treated for a solid malignant tumor. Furthermore, they will assess if the frailness categorization has an impact on the oncologic treatment decision. Does the oncologist switches the patient's oncologic treatment after being informed of the frailness status ?

Detailed Description
-----------------
Identifying the frail elderly patients or those at risk of becoming frail has become a cornerstone of modern geriatric medicine. The term 'frail' has been elusive during quite a long time. Several studies have been conducted over the last 15 years to clarify this concept: fragility is a clinical syndrome defined by an increase of vulnerability following a decline in physiological reserves and organic functions, that compromises the ability to cope with daily life or acute stress. Many instruments have been developed to identify fragility at the individual level. The 'Fragile' phenotype defined by Fried (Cardiovascular Health Study) is based on 5 criteria: weakness, slowness, low level of activity, exhaustion, and unintentional weight loss. The patient is fragile if it meets at least three out of five criteria. It is 'pre-fragile' if it meets one or two criteria. In onco-geriatrics, the International onco-geriatrics society recommends the implementation of a 'G8 scale' to detect elderly patients at risk of fragility. People with a positive G8 are then referred to the geriatric team to benefit from a comprehensive geriatric assessment. This evaluation is interpreted by the geriatrician, who draws an action plan to overcome the various problems of the elderly patient. The evaluation also helps the oncologist in the choice of treatment for the patient: palliative care, standard treatment or adapted treatment (No-go, Go-go or slow-go). However, many studies have shown that fragile patients had a greater morbidity and mortality than non-fragile patients. The rate of postoperative complications and the length of stay are significantly higher in fragile patients suffering from a colorectal cancer treated by elective surgery. On the other hand and quite surprisingly, another study showed that none of the comprehensive geriatric assessment based fragility indicators was able to predict a post-surgery functional decline in patients having undergone surgery for colorectal cancer. One of the primary goals of geriatry being to maintain the autonomy and independence of patients. The investigators would thus like to assess if fragility as defined by the Fried criteria is predictive of a functional, physical or cognitive decline, or a loss of quality of life in patients treated for a solid malignant tumor. Furthermore, they will assess if the frailness categorization has an impact on the oncologic treatment decision. Does the oncologist switches the patient's oncologic treatment after being informed of the frailness status ?

Official Title
-----------------
Are the Fried Criteria Predictive of a Functional Decline in Older People With Solid Malignant Tumors?

Conditions
-----------------
Elderly Patients With a Solid Tumor

Intervention / Treatment
-----------------
* Other: Quality of life evaluation
* Other: Functional decline assessment
* Other: Physical decline assessment
* Other: Cognitive decline assessment


Participation Criteria
=================
Eligibility Criteria
-----------------
Inclusion Criteria: Patients with a solid malign tumor: ovary cancer, breast cancer, digestive cancer (colo-rectal, pancreas), lung cancer, urinary tract cancer (including bladder cancer). Patients having not undergone treatment yet (be it surgery, chemotherapy or radiotherapy) Ambulatory or hospitalized patients Exclusion Criteria: Patients unable to participate in the global geriatric evaluation (auditive or visual problems) Language barrier Clear therapeutic abstention Bedridden patients

Ages Eligible for Study
-----------------
Minimum Age: 70 Years

Sexes Eligible for Study
-----------------
All

Accepts Healthy Volunteers
-----------------
No

Study Plan
=================
How is the study designed?
-----------------

Arms and Interventions

| Participant Group/Arm | Intervention/Treatment |
| --- | --- |
| Elderly patients with solid tumors<br>The group will include elderly patients with a malignant solid tumor: ovary cancer, breast cancer, digestive cancer (colo-rectal, pancreas), lung cancer or urinary tract cancer (including bladder cancer). | Other: Quality of life evaluation<br>* Assess the quality of life ('SF-36' questionnaire) of patients 3 and 6 months after oncologic treatment. Since a diagnosis of frailness will have been established before the oncologic treatment, a correlation between the decline and the 'frail' categorization according to the Fried criteria can be established or denied.<br>Other: Functional decline assessment<br>* Assess functional decline ('Katz ADL' Score and 'Lawton IADL' Score) 3 and 6 months after oncologic treatment. Since a diagnosis of frailness will have been established before the oncologic treatment, a correlation between the decline and the 'frail' categorization according to the Fried criteria can be established or denied.<br>Other: Physical decline assessment<br>* Assess physical decline (walking speed and prehension force) 3 and 6 months after oncologic treatment. Since a diagnosis of frailness will have been established before the oncologic treatment, a correlation between the decline and the 'frail' categorization according to the Fried criteria can be established or denied.<br>Other: Cognitive decline assessment<br>* Assess cognitive decline 3 and 6 months ('MMSE 30' questionnaire) after oncologic treatment. Since a diagnosis of frailness will have been established before the oncologic treatment, a correlation between the decline and the 'frail' categorization according to the Fried criteria can be established or denied.<br>|

What is the study measuring?
-----------------
Primary Outcome Measures

| Outcome Measure | Measure Description | Time Frame |
| --- | --- | --- |
| Functional decline - Katz (ADL) | The functional decline will be assessed by using the Katz Basic Activities of Daily Living (ADL) score | 3 months after oncologic treatment | 
| Functional decline - Katz (ADL) | The functional decline will be assessed by using the Katz Basic Activities of Daily Living (ADL) score | 6 months after oncologic treatment | 
| Functional decline - Lawton (IADL) | The functional decline will be assessed by using the Lawton Instrumental Activities of Daily Living (IADL) score | 3 months after oncologic treatment | 
| Functional decline - Lawton (IADL) | The functional decline will be assessed by using the Lawton Instrumental Activities of Daily Living (IADL) score | 6 months after oncologic treatment | 
| Physical decline - walking speed | Will be assessed by the 'Timed Up and Go' test (TUG) | 3 months after oncologic treatment | 
| Physical decline - walking speed | Will be assessed by the 'Timed Up and Go' test (TUG) | 6 months after oncologic treatment | 
| Physical decline - prehension force | Prehension force (Grip test) will be measured | 3 months after oncologic treatment | 
| Physical decline - prehension force | Prehension force (Grip test) will be measured | 6 months after oncologic treatment | 
| Cognitive decline - MMSE 30 | Will be assessed by the mini mental state evaluation (MMSE 30) questionnaire | 3 months after oncologic treatment | 
| Cognitive decline - MMSE 30 | Will be assessed by the mini mental state evaluation (MMSE 30) questionnaire | 6 months after oncologic treatment | 
| Quality of life - SF 36 | Will be assessed by the Short Form-36 (SF-36) questionnaire | 3 months after oncologic treatment | 
| Quality of life - SF36 | Will be assessed by the Short Form-36 (SF-36) questionnaire | 6 months after oncologic treatment | 

Secondary Outcome Measures

| Outcome Measure | Measure Description | Time Frame |
| --- | --- | --- |
| Switch in oncologic treatment decision | Patients will be classified as frail, vulnerable or robust according to the Fried criteria. Does the oncologist changes his/her therapeutic treatment decision after being aware of the frailness categorization ? | Between diagnosis and oncologic treatment - maximum 8 weeks | 

 Terms related to the study
=================
Keywords Provided by Centre Hospitalier Valida
-----------------
Elderly patients, Onco-geriatrics, Fried criteria