Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Risikoassessment für die onkologische Chirurgie bei älteren Patient:innen

Surgical oncology risk assessment in older patients

  • Leitthema
  • Published:
Die Onkologie Aims and scope

Zusammenfassung

Hintergrund

Ein Großteil der Patient:innen in der onkologischen Chirurgie befinden sich in der Altersgruppe von 60 Lebensjahren und älter. Bei diesen Patient:innen liegen besondere Herausforderungen vor, hierzu gehören Frailty, Komorbiditäten und eingeschränkte Belastbarkeit hinsichtlich intensiver onkologisch-chirurgischer Therapien.

Ziel

Ziel ist ein umfassendes Review geriatrischer Assessment-Möglichkeiten und deren Wirkung bei onkologisch-chirurgischen Patient:innen.

Material und Methoden

Es erfolgte eine selektive Literaturrecherche in den einschlägigen Datenbanken PubMed und Medline zu geriatrischen Assessments in der onkologischen Chirurgie. Die Ergebnisse wurden im Rahmen eines narrativen Reviews zusammengestellt.

Ergebnisse

Ältere Patient:innen sind häufig von einem erhöhtem Risiko für Therapiekomplikationen und Mortalität betroffen. Wichtig ist es, Einschränkungen frühzeitig präoperativ zu erkennen. Ein umfassendes geriatrisches Assessment bei Risikopatient:innen ermöglicht es, genaue Risikoprofile und Problembereiche zu identifizieren und mit individualisierten Interventionen zu adressieren. Dies führt in zahlreichen Studien zu verbesserten Therapieergebnissen.

Schlussfolgerung

Basierend auf geriatrischen Assessments können individualisierte Therapiekonzepte und spezifische Interventionen entwickelt werden – gemeinsam mit den Patient:innen und dem interdisziplinären Behandlungsteam. Dies führt zu verbesserten Behandlungsergebnissen sowie erhöhter Lebensqualität der Patient:innen.

Abstract

Background

A large proportion of patients in surgical oncology are aged 60 years and older. Surgeons face multiple challenges in these patients such as frailty, comorbidities, and reduced capacities for coping with intense surgical oncology therapies.

Objective

The aim of this work was to provide a comprehensive review of geriatric assessment options and their implications in surgical oncology.

Materials and methods

A selective search of the literature was performed using databases such as PubMed and Medline on the topic “geriatric assessment in surgical oncology.” The results are reported in the context of a narrative review.

Results

Elderly patients face a high risk of treatment-associated complications and mortality. Early detection of these challenges remains crucial. A comprehensive geriatric assessment is meant to assess risk profiles and identify therapeutic obstacles in order to address them with individualized interventions. This approach has been associated with improved treatment outcomes in multiple studies.

Conclusion

Comprehensive geriatric assessments can form the basis of individualized treatment and specific interventions developed by the multidisciplinary team and the patients themselves. This leads to improved outcomes and quality of life.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Abb. 1

Literatur

  1. Pal SK, Hurria A (2010) Impact of age, sex, and comorbidity on cancer therapy and disease progression. j Clin Oncol 28(26):4086–4093

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Foster JA, Salinas GD, Mansell D, Williamson JC, Casebeer LL (2010) How does older age influence oncologists’ cancer management? The Oncol 15(6):584–592

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Sheill G, Guinan E, O’Neill L et al (2020) Preoperative exercise to improve fitness in patients undergoing complex surgery for cancer of the lung or oesophagus (PRE-HIIT): protocol for a randomized controlled trial. BMC Cancer 20(1):1–11

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. West MA, Anastasiou Z, Ambler G et al (2021) The effects of cancer therapies on physical fitness before oesophagogastric cancer surgery: a prospective, blinded, multi-centre, observational, cohort study. NIHR Open Res (1)

  5. Jang B, Chang JH (2019) Socioeconomic status and survival outcomes in elderly cancer patients: a national health insurance service-elderly sample cohort study. Cancer Med 8(7):3604–3613

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  6. Akinyemiju T, Ogunsina K, Sakhuja S, Ogbhodo V, Braithwaite D (2016) Life-course socioeconomic status and breast and cervical cancer screening: analysis of the WHO’s study on global ageing and adult health (SAGE). BMJ Open 6(11):e12753

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  7. Ramesh HS, Boase T, Audisio RA (2006) Risk assessment for cancer surgery in elderly patients. Clin Interv Aging 1(3):221–227

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  8. Kowdley GC, Merchant N, Richardson JP, Somerville J, Gorospe M, Cunningham SC (2012) Cancer surgery in the elderly. Sci World J (2012)

  9. Parks R, Cheung KL (2022) Challenges in geriatric oncology—a surgeon’s perspective. Curr Oncol 29(2):659–674

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  10. Sedrak MS, Freedman RA, Cohen HJ et al (2021) Older adult participation in cancer clinical trials: a systematic review of barriers and interventions. CA Cancer J Clin 71(1):78–92

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Hutchins LF, Unger JM, Crowley JJ, Coltman CA Jr, Albain KS (1999) Underrepresentation of patients 65 years of age or older in cancer-treatment trials. N Engl J Med 341(27):2061–2067

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Karnofsky DA (1949) The clinical evaluation of chemotherapeutic agents in cancer. Eval Chemother Agents (191–205)

  13. Sok M, Zavrl M, Greif B, Srpčič M (2019) Objective assessment of WHO/ECOG performance status. Support Care Cancer 27:3793–3798

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Charlson ME, Pompei P, Ales KL, MacKenzie CR (1987) A new method of classifying prognostic comorbidity in longitudinal studies: development and validation. J Chronic Dis 40(5):373–383

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Fried LP, Tangen CM, Walston J et al (2001) Frailty in older adults: evidence for a phenotype. J Gerontol A Biol Sci Med Sci 56(3):M146–M157

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Rockwood K, Song X, MacKnight C et al (2005) A global clinical measure of fitness and frailty in elderly people. Cmaj 173(5):489–495

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  17. Subramaniam S, Aalberg JJ, Soriano RP, Divino CM (2018) New 5‑factor modified frailty index using American college of surgeons NSQIP data. J Am Coll Surg 226(2):173–181

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Handforth C, Clegg A, Young C et al (2015) The prevalence and outcomes of frailty in older cancer patients: a systematic review. Ann Oncol 26(6):1091–1101

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Muffly LS, Boulukos M, Swanson K et al (2013) Pilot study of comprehensive geriatric assessment (CGA) in allogeneic transplant: CGA captures a high prevalence of vulnerabilities in older transplant recipients. Biol Blood Marrow Transplant 19(3):429–434

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Wieland D, Hirth V (2003) Comprehensive geriatric assessment. Cancer Control 10(6):454–462

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Bernabei R, Venturiero V, Tarsitani P, Gambassi G (2000) The comprehensive geriatric assessment: when, where, how. Crit Rev Oncol Hematol 33(1):45–56

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Chow WB, Rosenthal RA, Merkow RP, Ko CY, Esnaola NF (2012) Optimal preoperative assessment of the geriatric surgical patient: a best practices guideline from the American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program and the American Geriatrics Society. J Am Coll Surg 215(4):453–466

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Feng MA, McMillan DT, Crowell K, Muss H, Nielsen ME, Smith AB (2015) Geriatric assessment in surgical oncology: a systematic review. J Surg Res 193(1):265–272

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Hamaker M, Lund C, Te Molder M et al (2022) Geriatric assessment in the management of older patients with cancer—a systematic review (update). J Geriatr Oncol 13(6):761–777

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Kalsi T, Babic-Illman G, Ross P et al (2015) The impact of comprehensive geriatric assessment interventions on tolerance to chemotherapy in older people. Br J Cancer 112(9):1435–1444

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  26. Li D, Sun CL, Kim H et al (2021) Geriatric assessment—driven intervention (GAIN) on chemotherapy-related toxic effects in older adults with cancer: a randomized clinical trial. JAMA Oncol 7(11):e214158–e214158

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  27. Dolin TG, Mikkelsen M, Jakobsen HL et al (2021) Geriatric assessment and intervention in older vulnerable patients undergoing surgery for colorectal cancer: a protocol for a randomised controlled trial (GEPOC trial). BMC Geriatr 21(1):1–10

    Article  Google Scholar 

  28. Puts M, Alqurini N, Strohschein F et al (2023) Impact of geriatric assessment and management on quality of life, unplanned hospitalizations, toxicity, and survival for older adults with cancer: the randomized 5C trial. J Clin Oncol 41(4):847

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Klinik für Chirurgie, Universitätsklinikum Schleswig-Holstein, Campus Lübeck, Ratzeburger Allee 160, 23562, Lübeck, Deutschland

    Louisa Bolm &  Tobias Keck

Authors
  1. Louisa Bolm
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Tobias Keck
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Tobias Keck.

Ethics declarations

Interessenkonflikt

L. Bolm und T. Keck geben an, dass kein Interessenkonflikt besteht.

Für diesen Beitrag wurden von den Autor/-innen keine Studien an Menschen oder Tieren durchgeführt. Für die aufgeführten Studien gelten die jeweils dort angegebenen ethischen Richtlinien.

Additional information

Hinweis des Verlags

Der Verlag bleibt in Hinblick auf geografische Zuordnungen und Gebietsbezeichnungen in veröffentlichten Karten und Institutsadressen neutral.

figure qr

QR-Code scannen & Beitrag online lesen

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Bolm, L., Keck, T. Risikoassessment für die onkologische Chirurgie bei älteren Patient:innen. Onkologie 30, 90–96 (2024). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00761-023-01460-4

Download citation

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00761-023-01460-4

Schlüsselwörter

Keywords

Search

Navigation