Integrating Touchscreen-Based Geriatric Assessment and Frailty Screening for Adults With Multiple Myeloma to Drive Personalized Treatment Decisions.
Аннотация
PurposeGeriatric assessment (GA) results predict toxicity/survival in older adults, yet GA is not routinely used in care for patients with multiple myeloma (MM). We tested a tablet-based modified GA (mGA) providing real-time results to clinicians.MethodsOne hundred sixty-five patients with MM aged ≥ 65 years facing a treatment decision from 4 sites completed a tablet-based mGA with Katz Activities of Daily Living (ADL), Lawton Instrumental ADL, Charlson Comorbidity Index, and variables from the Cancer and Aging Research Group's Chemotherapy Toxicity Calculator. Providers reviewed the assessment results at the treatment visit.ResultsPatients were white (72%; n = 86), mean age was 72 years (range, 65-85 years), and averaged 7.71 minutes (range, 2-17 minutes) for survey completion. Providers averaged 3.2 minutes (range, 1-10 minutes) to review mGA results. Using International Myeloma Working Group frailty score, patients were fit (39%; n = 64), intermediate fit (33%; n = 55), or frail (28%; n = 46). Providers selected more aggressive treatments in 16.3% of patients and decreased treatment intensity in 34% of patients; treatment intensification was more common for fit patients and milder treatments for frail patients (χ2 = 20.02; P P = .004). Outcomes on 144 patients 3 months post study visit showed 19.4% (n = 28) had grade ≥ 3 hematologic toxicities, 38.9% (n = 56) had dose modifications, and 18% (n = 26) had early therapy cessation.ConclusionLimited patient time required for survey completion and provider time for results review show mGA can be easily incorporated into clinical workflow. Real-time mGA results indicating fit/frailty status influenced treatment decisions.
Подготовка и перевод публикации
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Тип публикации указан по данным источника. Уровень доказательности автоматически не присваивается.