MON-PO408: Effect of Nutrition Status on Patient Activities of Daily Living in Digestive Cancer Patients

2019 ◽  
Vol 38 ◽  
pp. S209-S210
Author(s):  
T. Enishi ◽  
A. Matsumoto
2018 ◽  
Vol 2018 ◽  
pp. 1-5
Author(s):  
Hironari Tamiya ◽  
Hiroki Hagizawa ◽  
Takaaki Nakai ◽  
Yoshinori Imura ◽  
Takaaki Tanaka ◽  
...  

Zoledronate or denosumab treatment is beneficial for cancer patients with bone metastasis. However, each agent may trigger atypical femoral fractures. Incomplete atypical femoral fractures can be successfully treated with prophylactic intramedullary nailing. On the other hand, intramedullary nailing for displaced atypical femoral fractures occasionally causes problems with regard to bone healing, resulting in long-term treatment. In cancer patients with poor prognosis who experience atypical femoral fractures, improvement in activities of daily living should be the priority. Thus, we performed endoprosthetic reconstruction for a displaced atypical femoral fracture in a breast cancer patient with poor prognosis to enable walking in the early stage after the operation. Two weeks after the operation, she could successfully walk. The postoperative Musculoskeletal Tumor Society score was 47%, and it had improved to almost the preoperative level before injury (50%). In conclusion, endoprosthetic reconstruction for displaced atypical femoral fractures may be a first-line treatment approach to acquire early postoperative walking ability for improving activities of daily living in cancer patients with poor prognosis.


2007 ◽  
Vol 25 (18_suppl) ◽  
pp. 19651-19651
Author(s):  
M. Molina-Garrido ◽  
C. Guillén-Ponce ◽  
A. Carrato

19651 Background: Age is the major risk factor for the majority of patients with cancer. More than 50% of cancers occurs after the age of 60. Older patients are not simply old, but are geriatric patients because of interacting psychosocial and physical problems. As a consequence, the health status of old persons cannot be evaluated by merely describing the single disease or the group of age. We tested the performance of a new Comprehensive Geriatric Assessment (CGA) and its relationship with groups of age in cancer patients. Methods: Between June 2006 and December 2006, a total of 64 oncologic patients older than 75 years were approached to enrol in our study to analyze their functional, physical, mental, pharmacotherapeutic and socio-economic status and to correlate them to some groups of age: youngest-old (75 to 80 years-old), old-old (80 and 85 years-old) and oldest-old (older than 85 years). They were analysed Activities of Daily Living (ADL) measured by Barthel Scale, Instrumental Activities of Daily Living (IADL) measured by Lawton-Brody Scale, Grade of Fragility measured by Barber Scale, cognitive evaluation measured by Pfeiffer Test, and medication intake. A Chi Squared test was used for statistical analysis; p-value <0,05 was considered significative. Results: Sixty-four oncologic patients age > or = 75 years were recruited. Median age was 80.24 years (range 73.88 to 86.94). 51.6% female. Breast cancer was the most frequent diagnosis (30.2%), followed by lung cancer (19%). 29 patients (45.3%) were aged between 75 and 80 years old; 27 patients (43.5%) were between 80 and 85 years- old. There were statistic significative association between groups of age and Pfeiffer Test (p=0.037), Barber Scale (p=0.031) and medication intake (p=0.021). However, there was not a significative relationship between groups of age and Barthel Scale (p=0.052), Lawton-Brody Scale (p=0.2425), Cruz-Roja Scale (p=0,1485) or number of geriatric syndromes (p=0.129). Conclusions: This abstract reviews the findings regarding the correlation between a comprehensive geriatric assessment (CGA) and groups of age in older patients with cancer. Age per se must not be the only criterion for medical decision as it is not correlated to the health status of older cancer patients. No significant financial relationships to disclose.


2014 ◽  
Vol 32 (15_suppl) ◽  
pp. e20641-e20641
Author(s):  
Marie Anne Flannery ◽  
Charles Stewart Kamen ◽  
Michelle Christine Janelsins ◽  
Charles E. Heckler ◽  
Joseph A. Roscoe ◽  
...  

1998 ◽  
Vol 16 (4) ◽  
pp. 1582-1587 ◽  
Author(s):  
M Extermann ◽  
J Overcash ◽  
G H Lyman ◽  
J Parr ◽  
L Balducci

PURPOSE Comorbidity is a frequent and often therapeutically limiting problem in older cancer patients. However, to date, there is no standard measure of the comorbidity burden available for these patients. We tested the performance of two comorbidity scales and their relationship with functional status. PATIENTS AND METHODS The Cumulative Illness Rating Scale-Geriatric (CIRS-G) was compared with the Charlson scale in 203 patients who received a comprehensive geriatric assessment (CGA) in our Senior Adult Oncology Program (SAOP). Study end points were variability, reliability, correlation with Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) performance status (PS), Activities of Daily Living (ADL), and Instrumental Activities of Daily Living (IADL). The relative weight of comorbidity versus tumor stage in the correlations with functional status was assessed. RESULTS Median age was 75 years (range, 63 to 91). Sixty-four percent of patients scored 0 on the Charlson scale versus 6% on the CIRS-G. The correlation between the Charlson and CIRS-G was fair (p = 0.25 to 0.39). CIRS-G grade 3/4 had a fair correlation with ADL (p = 0.27). Otherwise, there was low or no correlation between comorbidity and functional status across the measures. Tumor stage was not correlated with functional status either. Correlation of ECOG PS with ADL (p = 0.51)c and IADL (p = 0.61) was moderate. Interrater and test-retest correlations were good or very good for both the Charlson and CIRS-G. CONCLUSION Comorbidity needs to be assessed independently from functional status. Both the Charlson and CIRS-G scales are reliable tools for use in trials of older cancer patients. Both can be tested in further studies as predictors of outcomes such as toxicity of treatment, changes in functional status, or survival.


2012 ◽  
Vol 21 (1) ◽  
pp. 97-105 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kyriaki Mystakidou ◽  
Eleni Tsilika ◽  
Efi Parpa ◽  
Efi Mitropoulou ◽  
Irene Panagiotou ◽  
...  

2015 ◽  
Vol 94 (3) ◽  
pp. 260-265 ◽  
Author(s):  
Katrin C. Asciutto ◽  
Grigorios Kalapotharakos ◽  
Mats Löfgren ◽  
Thomas Högberg ◽  
Christer Borgfeldt

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document