Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31697365›Full record

Trial reportJAMA oncology2020

Communication With Older Patients With Cancer Using Geriatric Assessment: A Cluster-Randomized Clinical Trial From the National Cancer Institute Community Oncology Research Program.

Supriya G Mohile, Ronald M Epstein, Arti Hurria, Charles E Heckler, Beverly Canin, Eva Culakova, Paul Duberstein, Nikesha Gilmore, Huiwen Xu, Sandy Plumb and 14 more

Registry-linked trialOpen access · hybridAbstract readRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in JAMA oncology, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT02107443 (Improving Communication for Cancer Treatment), which is not on this map. Cited by 175 papers, 7 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
175citing papers in PubMed, 7 pooled it
30.6field-weighted citation impact, top 1% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

NCT02107443 nacompletednot on this map

Improving Communication for Cancer Treatment: Addressing Concerns of Older Cancer Patients and Caregivers

TypeinterventionalSponsorSupriya MohileRan2014 to 2020Enrolled546ConditionsAdult Solid Neoplasm, LymphomaArmsGeriatric Assessment Summary, Geriatric Assessment Targeted Recommendations, Geriatric Assessment (GA)
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

175 citing papers in PubMed, 7 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 284 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Guideline
  2. Predictive value of the Cancer and Aging Research Group Score for chemotherapy toxicities in older adults with cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer · 2026
    Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Guideline
  5. Practical Assessment and Management of Vulnerabilities in Older Patients Receiving Systemic Cancer Therapy: ASCO Guideline Update.Journal of clinical oncology : official journal of the American Society of Clinical Oncology · 2023
    Guideline
  6. Hepatitis B Virus Screening and Management for Patients With Cancer Prior to Therapy: ASCO Provisional Clinical Opinion Update.Journal of clinical oncology : official journal of the American Society of Clinical Oncology · 2020
    Guideline
  7. Pooled it
  8. Trial
  9. Trial
  10. Trial
  11. Trial
  12. Effect of polypharmacy and potentially inappropriate medications on physical functional decline among older adults with advanced cancer receiving systemic treatment.Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer · 2024
    Trial
  13. Trial
  14. Trial
  15. Trial
  16. Trial
  17. Trial
  18. Trial
  19. Trial
  20. Trial

115 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

24 authors at 7 institutions in 1 country.

Supriya G MohileDepartment of Medicine, University of Rochester, Rochester, New York.
Ronald M EpsteinDepartment of Family Medicine, University of Rochester, Rochester, New York.
Arti HurriaDepartment of Medical Oncology, City of Hope National Medical Center, Duarte, California.
Charles E HecklerUniversity of Rochester Cancer Center National Cancer Institute Community Oncology Research Program Research Base, Rochester, New York.
Beverly CaninUniversity of Rochester Cancer Center National Cancer Institute Community Oncology Research Program Research Base, Rochester, New York.
Eva CulakovaUniversity of Rochester Cancer Center National Cancer Institute Community Oncology Research Program Research Base, Rochester, New York.
Paul DubersteinDepartment of Health Behavior, Society, and Policy, Rutgers University School of Public Health, Piscataway, New Jersey.
Nikesha GilmoreUniversity of Rochester Cancer Center National Cancer Institute Community Oncology Research Program Research Base, Rochester, New York.
Huiwen XuDepartment of Medicine, University of Rochester, Rochester, New York.
Sandy PlumbDepartment of Medicine, University of Rochester, Rochester, New York.
Megan WellsDepartment of Medicine, University of Rochester, Rochester, New York.
Lisa M LowensteinDepartment of Health Services Research, University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston.
Marie A FlanneryUniversity of Rochester Cancer Center National Cancer Institute Community Oncology Research Program Research Base, Rochester, New York.
Michelle JanelsinsUniversity of Rochester Cancer Center National Cancer Institute Community Oncology Research Program Research Base, Rochester, New York.
Allison MagnusonDepartment of Medicine, University of Rochester, Rochester, New York.
Kah Poh LohDepartment of Medicine, University of Rochester, Rochester, New York.
Amber S KlecknerUniversity of Rochester Cancer Center National Cancer Institute Community Oncology Research Program Research Base, Rochester, New York.
Karen M MustianUniversity of Rochester Cancer Center National Cancer Institute Community Oncology Research Program Research Base, Rochester, New York.
Judith O HopkinsNovant Health Oncology Specialists, Winston-Salem, North Carolina.
Jane Jijun LiuHeartland Cancer Research National Cancer Institute Community Oncology Research Program, Decatur, Illinois.
Jodi GeerMetro Minnesota Community Oncology Research Program, St Louis Park.
Rita Gorawara-BhatDepartment of Medicine, University of Chicago, Chicago, Illinois.
Gary R MorrowUniversity of Rochester Cancer Center National Cancer Institute Community Oncology Research Program Research Base, Rochester, New York.
William DaleDepartment of Supportive Care, City of Hope National Medical Center, Duarte, California.
University of Rochester · USNational Cancer Institute · USCity Of Hope National Medical Center · USMetro-Minnesota Community Oncology Research Consortium · USRutgers, The State University of New Jersey · USThe University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center · USUniversity of Chicago · US

Funding

URCC NCORP Research BaseUG1CA189961 · NCI · UNIVERSITY OF ROCHESTER · PI Michelle C Janelsins, KAREN M. MUSTIAN · 2014 to 2026
$67.7M
Cancer Control Research Training Curriculum (R25T)R25CA102618 · NCI · UNIVERSITY OF ROCHESTER · PI JANELSINS, MICHELLE C, MORROW, GARY R · 2004 to 2018
$6.7M
Geriatric Oncology Research Infrastructure to Improve Clinical CareR33AG059206 · NIA · BECKMAN RESEARCH INSTITUTE/CITY OF HOPE · PI WILLIAM DALE, Heidi Diana Klepin · 2020 to 2026
$5.1M
Clinical and Translational Cancer Control Research Training ProgramT32CA102618 · NCI · UNIVERSITY OF ROCHESTER · PI Michelle C Janelsins, Gary R Morrow · 2019 to 2026
$2.7M
A Patient-Oriented Research Program in Geriatric OncologyK24AG056589 · NIA · UNIVERSITY OF ROCHESTER · PI Supriya G. Mohile · 2018 to 2026
$1.5M
Mitigating Cancer-Related Cognitive Dysfunction in Older Adults with Breast CancerK76AG064394 · NIA · UNIVERSITY OF ROCHESTER · PI MAGNUSON, ALLISON MARIAN · 2019 to 2023
$1.3M
Geriatric Oncology Research Infrastructure to Improve Clinical CareR21AG059206 · NIA · BECKMAN RESEARCH INSTITUTE/CITY OF HOPE · PI DALE, WILLIAM, MOHILE, SUPRIYA G. · 2018 to 2019
$478k
NCI NIH HHS R25 CA102618NCI NIH HHS T32 CA102618NCI NIH HHS UG1 CA189961NIA NIH HHS K24 AG056589NIA NIH HHS K76 AG064394NIA NIH HHS R21 AG059206NIA NIH HHS R33 AG059206
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Importance: Older patients with cancer and their caregivers worry about the effects of cancer treatment on aging-related domains (eg, function and cognition). Quality conversations with oncologists about aging-related concerns could improve patient-centered outcomes. A geriatric assessment (GA) can capture evidence-based aging-related conditions associated with poor clinical outcomes (eg, toxic effects) for older patients with cancer. Objective: To determine whether providing a GA summary and GA-guided recommendations to oncologists can improve communication about aging-related concerns. Design, Setting, and Participants: This cluster-randomized clinical trial enrolled 541 participants from 31 community oncology practices within the University of Rochester National Cancer Institute Community Oncology Research Program from October 29, 2014, to April 28, 2017. Patients were aged 70 years or older with an advanced solid malignant tumor or lymphoma who had at least 1 impaired GA domain; patients chose 1 caregiver to participate. The primary outcome was assessed on an intent-to-treat basis. Interventions: Oncology practices were randomized to receive either a tailored GA summary with recommendations for each enrolled patient (intervention) or alerts only for patients meeting criteria for depression or cognitive impairment (usual care). Main Outcomes and Measures: The predetermined primary outcome was patient satisfaction with communication about aging-related concerns (modified Health Care Climate Questionnaire [score range, 0-28; higher scores indicate greater satisfaction]), measured after the first oncology visit after the GA. Secondary outcomes included the number of aging-related concerns discussed during the visit (from content analysis of audiorecordings), quality of life (measured with the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy scale for patients and the 12-Item Short Form Health Survey for caregivers), and caregiver satisfaction with communication about aging-related patient concerns. Results: A total of 541 eligible patients (264 women, 276 men, and 1 patient did not provide data; mean [SD] age, 76.6 [5.2] years) and 414 caregivers (310 women, 101 men, and 3 caregivers did not provide data; mean age, 66.5 [12.5] years) were enrolled. Patients in the intervention group were more satisfied after the visit with communication about aging-related concerns (difference in mean score, 1.09 points; 95% CI, 0.05-2.13 points; P = .04); satisfaction with communication about aging-related concerns remained higher in the intervention group over 6 months (difference in mean score, 1.10; 95% CI, 0.04-2.16; P = .04). There were more aging-related conversations in the intervention group's visits (difference, 3.59; 95% CI, 2.22-4.95; P < .001). Caregivers in the intervention group were more satisfied with communication after the visit (difference, 1.05; 95% CI, 0.12-1.98; P = .03). Quality of life outcomes did not differ between groups. Conclusions and Relevance: Including GA in oncology clinical visits for older adults with advanced cancer improves patient-centered and caregiver-centered communication about aging-related concerns. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT02107443.

Indexed as

Geriatric AssessmentHealth CommunicationAgedAged, 80 and overAgingCaregiversFemaleHumansMaleNational Cancer Institute (U.S.)NeoplasmsOncologistsPatient SatisfactionPhysician-Patient RelationsUnited States

Identifiers

PMID31697365
PMCPMC6865234
OpenAlexW2988228572

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.