An observational study in Cancer, sponsored by Institut Bergonié. Completed at 1 site in France. Open to participants aged 18 Years and older. Per ClinicalTrials.gov, last updated 2021-01-20.
Sponsored by Institut Bergonié · Observational
Older adults with cancer remain underrepresented in cancer clinical trials that establish new standards of care. Geriatric assessment (GA) is defined by geriatricians as a multidimensional interdisciplinary assessment of the general health stat us of the older patient, reviewing the medical, psychosocial, functional and environmental domains. For each domain, several tools are available, but consensus is lacking on which tool to use and the optimal cut-offs or threshold scores. The literature supports the prognostic value of the GA and its utility in weighing the benefits and risks of cancer treatments in older adults. However, GA has not been implemented in routine oncology practice or in cancer clinical trials.
The objective of this project is to develop a set of geriatric data, the Geriatric Core Dataset (G-CODE), to be collected in cancer trials of older patients. The methods rely on a consensus process involving international experts in the field of oncology and geriatrics.
Although cancer is prevalent in the older segment of the population, older adults with cancer remain underrepresented in cancer clinical trials that establish new standards of care. As a result, robust data on the benefit/risk balance are lacking for many treatment strategies in these patients.
Ageing is a heterogeneous process that stresses the clinical need to identify comorbid conditions and ageing-related physiologic changes, both well-known factors increasing the risk of treatment side-effects and poor outcomes.
Geriatric assessment (GA) is defined by geriatricians as a multidimensional interdisciplinary assessment of the general health stat us of the older patient, reviewing the medical, psychosocial, functional and environmental domains. For each domain, several tools are available, but consensus is lacking on which tool to use and the optimal cut-offs or threshold scores. The literature supports the prognostic value of the GA and its utility in weighing the benefits and risks of cancer treatments in older adults. However, GA has not been implemented in routine oncology practice or in cancer clinical trials.
In 2011, after a workshop on clinical trial methodology in older adults with cancer, the Elderly Task Force of the European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) recommended the use of a standardised minimum data set (minDS) for assessing the global health and functional status of older populations. This minDS consisted of the G8 screening tool, the Instrumental Activities of Daily Living Following a consensus approach, a panel of 14 geriatricians from oncology clinics identified seven domains of importance in geriatric assessment. Based on the international recommendations, geriatricians selected the mostly commonly used tools/items for geriatric assessment by domain. The Geriatric Core Dataset (G-CODE) was progressively developed according to RAND appropriateness ratings and feedback during three successive Delphi rounds. The face validity of the G-CODE was assessed with two large panels of health professionals (55 national and 42 international experts) involved both in clinical practice and cancer trials.
Institut Bergonié is the lead sponsor of 119 studies on the registry; 16 are open to participants now.
Counted across the registry records on this site, refreshed daily.
The panel of experts (cancer specialists, clinical research associates, nurses) was in charge of assessing the the relevance and approppriateness of the selected tools to include in the Geriatric Core Data Set (G-Code).
Number of Experts Who Considered That the Question "Do You Live Alone ?" Should be Retained in the G-CODE
Time frame: Day 1
Number of Experts Who Considered That the Question "do You Have a Person or Caregiver Able to Provide Care and Support" Should be Retained in the G-CODE
Time frame: Day 1
Number of Experts Who Considered That the Tool "ADL (Activities of Daily Living)" Should be Retained in the G-CODE
Time frame: Day 1
Number of Experts Who Considered That the Tool "4-IADL (Instrumental Activities of Daily Living)" Should be Retained in the G-CODE
Time frame: Day 1
Number of Experts Who Considered That the Test "Timed Up and Go" Should be Retained in the G-CODE
Time frame: Day 1
Number of Experts Who Considered That the Items "Weight Loss During the Past 6 Months and Body Mass Index (BMI)" Should be Retained in the G-CODE
Time frame: Day 1
Number of Experts Who Considered That the Item "One Cognitive Scale (Mini-Cog)" Should be Retained in the G-CODE
Time frame: Day 1
Number of Experts Who Considered That the Item "Char Lson Comorbidity Index" Should be Retained in the G-CODE
Time frame: Day 1
| Milestone | National Panel of Experts |
|---|---|
| Started | 42 |
| Completed | 42 |
| Not completed | 0 |
| Participants | National Panel of Experts |
|---|---|
| Number of Experts Who Considered That the Question "Do You Live Alone ?" Should be Retained in the G-CODE | 42 |
| Participants | National Panel of Experts |
|---|---|
| Number of Experts Who Considered That the Question "do You Have a Person or Caregiver Able to Provide Care and Support" Should be Retained in the G-CODE | 42 |
| Participants | National Panel of Experts |
|---|---|
| Number of Experts Who Considered That the Tool "ADL (Activities of Daily Living)" Should be Retained in the G-CODE | 42 |
| Participants | National Panel of Experts |
|---|---|
| Number of Experts Who Considered That the Tool "4-IADL (Instrumental Activities of Daily Living)" Should be Retained in the G-CODE | 42 |
| Participants | National Panel of Experts |
|---|---|
| Number of Experts Who Considered That the Test "Timed Up and Go" Should be Retained in the G-CODE | 42 |
| Participants | National Panel of Experts |
|---|---|
| Number of Experts Who Considered That the Items "Weight Loss During the Past 6 Months and Body Mass Index (BMI)" Should be Retained in the G-CODE | 42 |
| Participants | National Panel of Experts |
|---|---|
| Number of Experts Who Considered That the Item "One Cognitive Scale (Mini-Cog)" Should be Retained in the G-CODE | 42 |
| Participants | National Panel of Experts |
|---|---|
| Number of Experts Who Considered That the Item "Char Lson Comorbidity Index" Should be Retained in the G-CODE | 42 |
Collected over 1 year. Non-serious events are listed at a 5% frequency threshold.
| Group | Deaths | Serious | Other |
|---|---|---|---|
| National Panel of Experts | 0/42 (0%) | 0/42 (0%) | 0/42 (0%) |
| Age, Customized(Participants) | National Panel of Experts |
|---|---|
| >= 18 years | 42 |
| Sex: Female, Male(Participants) | National Panel of Experts |
|---|---|
| Female | 16 |
| Male | 26 |
Plan to share: Undecided
This study is completed, as verified in Dec 2020. You cannot join it, but the record below documents what was studied.
Get an email when the registry record changes — status, dates, results — or when someone posts here.
Sign in to followQuestions and observations about this study, from anyone following it. Not medical advice, and not a channel to the study team — their contact details are on the registry record.
Sign in to join the discussion. Reading takes no account; posting does. You choose a display name, and a pseudonym is the default.
Nothing here yet. If you are running this trial, taking part in it, or weighing whether to, this is the place to say so.
Institut Bergonié