DASC-21: a novel geriatric assessment for discriminating best supportive care in older patients with inoperable advanced non-small cell lung cancer
Japanese Journal of Clinical Oncology, ISSN: 1465-3621, Vol: 51, Issue: 11, Page: 1628-1635
2021
- 23Captures
Metric Options: Counts1 Year3 YearSelecting the 1-year or 3-year option will change the metrics count to percentiles, illustrating how an article or review compares to other articles or reviews within the selected time period in the same journal. Selecting the 1-year option compares the metrics against other articles/reviews that were also published in the same calendar year. Selecting the 3-year option compares the metrics against other articles/reviews that were also published in the same calendar year plus the two years prior.
Example: if you select the 1-year option for an article published in 2019 and a metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019. If you select the 3-year option for the same article published in 2019 and the metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019, 2018 and 2017.
Citation Benchmarking is provided by Scopus and SciVal and is different from the metrics context provided by PlumX Metrics.
Example: if you select the 1-year option for an article published in 2019 and a metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019. If you select the 3-year option for the same article published in 2019 and the metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019, 2018 and 2017.
Citation Benchmarking is provided by Scopus and SciVal and is different from the metrics context provided by PlumX Metrics.
Metrics Details
- Captures23
- Readers23
- 23
Article Description
Objective: This study investigated whether the Dementia Assessment Sheet for the Community-based Integrated Care System is useful for decision-making or problem detection in the treatment and care of older patients with inoperable advanced non-small cell lung cancer compared with the current standard model using performance status. Methods: This study retrospectively examined 1595 cases admitted to the Department of Respiratory Medicine at the Tokyo Metropolitan Geriatric Hospital between 26 July 2016 and 28 January 2020. Among these, 29 and 31 patients who received pharmacotherapies and best supportive care were extracted, respectively. The performance in identifying best supportive care using the Dementia Assessment Sheet for the Community-based Integrated Care System was evaluated in comparison with performance status. The ability to detect impairments in each Dementia Assessment Sheet for the Community-based Integrated Care System domain was also assessed. Results: The Dementia Assessment Sheet for the Community-based Integrated Care System total score had an area under the curve of 0.831 (95% confidence interval, 0.694–0.914), which was statistically equivalent to performance status. The discriminatory cut-off value for identification of best supportive care was set at 29 with a sensitivity and specificity of 0.742 and 0.897, respectively. Dementia Assessment Sheet for the Community-based Integrated Care System total score showed good concordance with performance status especially when reported by family members or caregivers. Deficits other than activities of daily living were recognized (2.8–19.4%) in patients with good performance status. Impairments were more frequently detected when reported by family members or caregivers. Conclusions: The Dementia Assessment Sheet for the Community-based Integrated Care System discriminates the best supportive care for older patients with inoperable advanced non-small cell lung cancer. Moreover, it can identify vulnerabilities especially when reported by family members or caregivers that cannot be detected by performance status.
Bibliographic Details
Oxford University Press (OUP)
Provide Feedback
Have ideas for a new metric? Would you like to see something else here?Let us know