ReviewGeriatrics & gerontology international2026
Geriatric Assessment in Oncology: Evolution, Evidence, and Implications for Geriatric Medicine in Japan.
Review in Geriatrics & gerontology international, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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.
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.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
This review summarizes the evolution of recommendations for geriatric assessment (GA), the randomized evidence underpinning GA-guided management (GAM), and current implementation challenges in Japan. From the combined perspectives of oncology and geriatric medicine, we discuss how GA relates to comprehensive geriatric assessment (CGA), and argue that GA is best understood as an oncology-adapted extension of CGA. Recent trials show that active, multidisciplinary implementation of GA is associated with improvements in treatment toxicity, functional status, communication, and quality of life. In Japan, GA remains underused because of workforce limitations and structural barriers, despite its conceptual fit with the national long-term care insurance (LTCI) system. Progress will require practical workflows that link assessment to management, selective integration of GA with LTCI information to reduce duplication, and sustained collaboration between oncology and geriatrics. Overall, GA has moved beyond risk stratification toward a pragmatic, evidence-supported approach that may help reframe cancer care for older adults in Japan.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
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.