AzTrials
AzTrials

Myelodysplastic SyndromesNCT02842229

A Study to Determine Final Geriatric Assessment in Haematology (GAH) Score as a Tool for Predicting Tolerance to Treatment in Elderly Patients (≥ 65 Years) With Haematologic Neoplasms

An observational study of Myelodysplastic Syndromes and Leukemia Myeloid Acute, run by Celgene at 15 sites in Spain.

Completed

Finished. The study has ended and is not enrolling. Results may be posted on the official record.

Official record
Search all trials

Trial summary

This is a post-authorization, retrospective multicentre observational nationwide study (PAS-OD). It will be conducted by reviewing medical records and database of patients who participated in the validation of the psychometric properties of the GAH study (CEL-GAH-2011-01). Read more about this study

Who is it for?
Ages 65 years and older
How many people
117 participants
Where
15 sitesSpain
Study dates
20 Jul 2016to 2 Feb 2017
Phase
Observational
Are there results?
None posted in the registry

Key requirements

Who can take part, as listed by the sponsor. Only the study team can confirm whether you are eligible, so take this list to your doctor.

  • Ages 65 years and older
  • All sexes
  • No healthy volunteers
  • Older adult

Study population: At least 80 patients will be included who participated in the Geriatric Assessment in Haematology (GAH) study (CEL-GAH-2011-01), who are scheduled to start treatment less than three months after completion of the GAH assessment (basal, test-retest or sensitivity to change) and who give their informed consent to data collection as long as such consent is possible.

Who may be able to join

  • Patients who were participating in the GAH study (CEL-GAH-2011-01).
  • Patients who have been scheduled to start treatment at a date less than three months after completion of the GAH (CEL-GAH-2011-01) scale in one of these visits: baseline, test-retest or sensitivity to change.
  • Patients who give informed consent to participate in the study as long as such consent is possible.

Who cannot join

  • Not applicable

Trial locations and contacts

15 sites in 1 country.

15 sites in 1 country

Spain15 sites
  • C.H. Universitario A Coruña

    A Coruña, La Coruña, 15006

  • Hospital La Ribera

    Alzira, Valencia, 46600

  • Hospital Germans Trias i Pujol

    Badalona, Barcelona, 08916

  • Hospital Vall d' Hebrón

    Barcelona, 08035

  • Hospital Durán I Reynals

    L'Hospitalet de Llobregat, Barcelona, 08908

  • Hospital U. Gregorio Marañón

    Madrid, 28007

  • Hospital Infanta Leonor

    Madrid, 28031

  • Hospital Universitario Central de Asturias

    Oviedo, Principality of Asturias, 33006

  • C. H. Navarra

    Pamplona, Navarre, 31008

  • Hospital Parc Taulí

    Sabadell, Barcelona, 08208

  • Hospital Universitario de Canarias

    San Cristóbal de La Laguna, Tenerife, 38320

  • Hospital Ntra. Sra. La Candelaria

    Santa Cruz de Tenerife, Tenerife, 38010

  • Hospital de Segovia

    Segovia, 40002

  • Hospital La Fe

    Valencia, 46026

  • Hospital Txagorritxu

    Vitoria-Gasteiz, Álava, 01009

Other trials in Spain

About this study

Official title: Retrospective Study to Determine Final Geriatric Assessment in Haematology (GAH) Score as a Tool for Predicting Tolerance to Treatment in Elderly Patients (≥ 65 Years) With Haematologic Neoplasms

This is a post-authorization, retrospective multicentre observational nationwide study (PAS-OD). It will be conducted by reviewing medical records and database of patients who participated in the validation of the psychometric properties of the GAH study (CEL-GAH-2011-01). In all cases, only data prior to the start date of the study will be collected to ensure its retrospective nature, thereby reflecting routine clinical practice and non-interference in the physician's clinical practice

Read the detailed description

Patients over 65 are the most prevalent population in oncological clinical practice. It is also expected that this group of patients will increase significantly in the coming decades as a result of increased life expectancy and the aging population.

Overall, the population is aging and this aging is accompanied by an increase in the prevalence and incidence of age-related diseases, such as cancer. So much so that approximately 60% of new cancer cases and 70% of the overall cancer mortality occurs in patients aged 65 and over.

Despite the high incidence of cancer in the elderly and its peculiarities as opposed to young patients, from the point of view of health, the management of elderly patients is especially complex because there are few data on the evaluation and treatment thereof. Often, older patients are underrepresented in clinical trials and treatment guidelines, resulting in a population that is undertreated or at greater risk of suffering treatment-related toxicities.

In this respect, both the National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN) and the International Society of Geriatric Oncology (SIOG, its acronym in Spanish) agree that age should not be an impediment to treat these diseases. Optimal management requires strategies specifically directed to the clinical and biological characteristics of this type of patient and they recommend an appropriate assessment of the patient as part of a safe and effective approach to haematological malignancies in the elderly.

There is scientific basis supporting the need for the elderly patient with cancer who will receive a particular treatment to be specifically assessed by means of a comprehensive geriatric assessment (CGA). Geriatric assessment is essential since it is a tool that integrates all aspects of the patient's life that could affect the course of the disease and response to treatment, such as functional status, comorbidities, cognitive, emotional or nutritional status and social environment. In addition, the CGA is a tool to identify the possible presence of fragility, characterized by a decrease in physiological reserves that conditions a lower response to stress and is associated with a lower risk of disability and increased morbidity and mortality.

Although currently it is assumed that chronological age is not synonymous with biological age, the decision on cancer treatment often falls on the subjective assessment of the physician, as few healthcare centres are performing comprehensive geriatric assessment in the oncology setting. Although various tools have been developed for this purpose, they have not been incorporated into routine clinical practice due to the time required, their length and the resources needed to gather information.

Therefore, there remains a need to find a scale for comprehensive assessment of the health status of elderly patients (≥ 65 years) with haematologic malignancies that incorporates the essential dimensions of the geriatric assessment, with the same precision of valid tools currently available, and that is simple, straightforward and easy to apply, so that it can be used in daily practice and assist to make clinical decisions objectively.

It was hypothesized that a simplified geriatric assessment could be a better tool for assessing elderly patients, instead of considering only age or subjective clinical impression, when deciding whether or not to prescribe active treatment. Such a tool would represent the real and multidimensional nature of aging, which is associated with an increased incidence of chronic diseases and geriatric syndromes with consequences on vulnerability and patient survival.

As described above, Bonanad et al. designed and developed a new comprehensive assessment scale aimed at elderly patients (≥ 65 years) diagnosed with haematological diseases [myelodysplastic syndrome (MDS) or Acute myeloid leukemia (AML), multiple myeloma (MM) and chronic lymphocytic leukemia (LLC)], the Geriatric Assessment in Haematology (GAH). The purpose of this scale is to help doctors identify objectively and reliably those elderly patients with haematological diseases who are eligible for intensive treatment versus those who are most vulnerable.

The GAH scale is a tool of 30 items grouped into eight relevant dimensions of geriatric assessment, which include:

  1. Number of drugs: Polypharmacy has been associated with adverse effects related to frailty, disability, mortality and falls in the elderly, and it may be more frequent in elderly patients with cancer.
  2. Gait velocity: Determining the time taken to walk four meters at a normal pace is a method of assessing gait velocity that is widely used in the literature due to its simplicity, speed and reliability. There is sufficient evidence to consider walking speed as a strong and consistent predictor of adverse outcomes in older patients, and its use as a single item has proven to be at least as sensitive as compound instruments in predicting most of these results long-term.
  3. Mood: We propose as a screening test for depression a single item extracted from the Center for Epidemiologic Studies Depression Scale (CES-D), widely used for its validity and reliability. This unique and simple measure of depression was shown to be strongly correlated with a clinical diagnosis of depression; it detects patients rarely or sometimes depressed and patients depressed occasionally or much of the time.
  4. Activities of daily living: The assessment of functional status in older people should include assessment of so-called basic activities of daily living (ADLs), including the skills necessary for life such as dressing, grooming, bathing and feeding. ADL is a tool that has been used as a predictor of hospitalization and mortality in elderly patients. To develop the activities of daily living (ADL) of the GAH scale, items were selected from the Vulnerable Elders Survey (VES-13) with two additional questions.
  5. Subjective health status: The patient rating his or her own health is another worthwhile parameter. This is why a self-rated health item was also selected, also included in the Vulnerable Elders Survey (VES-13). Recently it has been determined that this is a predictive parameter of functional impairment or death.
  6. Nutrition: Nutritional deficit is a common serious problem in elderly patients, contributing significantly to morbidity and mortality associated with this group of people. To determine this dimension, some items were selected from the short version of the full questionnaire, Mini-Nutritional Assessment. This tool was developed and validated in representative samples of older patients worldwide and it identifies subjects at nutritional risk.
  7. Mental State: To evaluate mental state, all the items were selected that make up the Short Portable Mental Status Questionnaire (SPMSQ). It is designed and validated to assess four aspects of intellectual functioning: short and long-term memory, orientation, information on daily events and computing ability. It has been observed that cognitive impairment is also an independent predictor of mortality and the end of chemotherapy.
  8. Comorbidity: Six variables of comorbidity and habits were considered (diabetes mellitus, cancer, lung disease, heart failure, smoking), drawn from the Prognostic Index for 4-year Mortality in Older Adults.

The final score of the GAH scale has not yet been defined. At present, for purely exploratory purposes, each of the dimensions was assigned a dichotomous score (0 or 1), generating a provisional score ranging from 0 (best possible health status) to 8 (worst health status). The recently published study showed that the GAH scale is a measuring instrument that meets the expected psychometric properties (feasibility, ceiling-floor effect, reliability and validity) for a tool to determine health status in elderly patients with haematological diseases. Also, it has been determined that this scale is sensitive to change <pending (reference short report)>, since it is able to detect changes in the health status of patients after a certain time and is able to predict survival in this patient group.

This study aims to determine the weights of each of the dimensions of the GAH scale, as well as cut-off points for the final score of the scale that will be used to predict treatment tolerability in elderly patients diagnosed with MDS/ AML, MM or CLL (chronic lymphocytic leukemia).

Keywords
Myelodysplastic Syndromes, Leukemia Myeloid Acute, Multiple Myeloma, Leukemia, Lymphocytic, Chronic, Elderly Patients, Haematological malignancy, Elderly, Health Status, Scale validation, Retrospective
Medical subject headings
Myelodysplastic Syndromes, Leukemia, Myeloid, Acute, Multiple Myeloma, Leukemia, Lymphocytic, Chronic, B-Cell, Hematologic Neoplasms

What participants receive

What participants receive. In a randomised study each person is assigned to one group by chance.

Study groups in NCT02842229
Study groupRoleWhat they receive
Patients with Haematologic NeoplasmsPatients with Myelodysplastic Syndromes (MDS), any IPSS (International Prognostic Scoring System) risk, or Acute Myeloid Leukemia (AML) who participated in the Geriatric Assessment in Haematology (GAH) study(CEL-GAH-2011-01). Patients with Multiple Myeloma (MM), symptomatic or asymptomatic who participated in the Geriatric Assessment in Haematology (GAH) study (CEL-GAH-2011-01). Patients with Chronic Lymphocytic Leukemia who participated in the Geriatric Assessment in Haematology (GAH) study (CEL-GAH-2011-01).

What is being measured

The primary outcome is the main question the study is designed to answer.

  1. Assessment of the tolerability of the treatment administered

    Number of patients, which suspend or modify treatment due to toxicity

    Measured: Up to approximately 4 months

  2. The score of number of drugs on the Geriatric Assessment in Haematology (GAH) scale

    Determination of number of drugs that patients were taken.

    Measured: Up to approximately 4 months

  3. The time of gait velocity on the Geriatric Assessment in Haematology (GAH) scale

    To determine the time taken to walk four meters at a normal pace.

    Measured: Up to approximately 4 months

  4. The score of activities of daily living on th Geriatric Assessment in Haematology (GAH) scale

    Assessment of so-called basic activities of daily living (ADLs), including the skills necessary for life such as dressing, grooming, bathing and feeding

    Measured: Up to approximately 4 months

  5. The score of subjective health status on the Geriatric Assessment in Haematology (GAH) scale

    The patient rating his or her own health

    Measured: Up to approximately 4 months

  6. The score of nutrition on the Geriatric Assessment in Haematology (GAH) scale

    To determine nutritional deficit

    Measured: Up to approximately 4 months

  7. The score of mental State on the Geriatric Assessment in Haematology (GAH) scale

    To evaluate mental state

    Measured: Up to approximately 4 months

  8. The score of comorbidity on the Geriatric Assessment in Haematology (GAH) scale

    Six variables of comorbidity and habits were considered (diabetes mellitus, cancer, lung disease, heart failure, smoking)

    Measured: Up to approximately 4 months

Secondary outcomes (5)
  1. Therapeutic approach according to clinical judgment

    Number of patients that due to their fragility, the physician decided to modify the planned start treatment.

    Measured: Up to approximately 4 months

  2. Discontinuation of the planned treatment due to toxicity

    Percentage of patients who discontinued the planned treatment due to toxicity

    Measured: Up to approximately 4 months

  3. Modification of the planned treatment regimen due to toxicity

    Percentage of patients who modified the planned treatment regimen due to toxicity

    Measured: Up to approximately 4 months

  4. Percentage of patients with toxicity

    Percentage of patients who suspend or amend the treatment regimen due toxicity

    Measured: Up to approximately 4 months

  5. Number of participants visit to hospital as a result of toxicity

    Number of patients who were admitted to hospital as a result of toxicity

    Measured: Up to approximately 4 months

Timeline

From the start of the study to its completion; the mark is today. Estimated dates are the sponsor’s plan.

  1. First posted22 Jul 2016 (estimated)
  2. Study start20 Jul 2016
  3. Primary completion2 Feb 2017
  4. Study completion2 Feb 2017

Resources

More details

For doctors and researchers: how the study is designed, who runs it, and its registry IDs.

Study design
Study type
Observational
Observational model
Case only
Time perspective
Retrospective
Enrolment
117 participants (actual)
IDs, dates and publications
ClinicalTrials.gov ID
NCT02842229
Sponsor's protocol ID
CEL-GAH-2016-01
Status last verified
Jul 2017
First submitted
21 Jun 2016
Last updated
26 Jul 2017
Results posted
No
Data monitoring committee
No

Questions about this trial

What is this clinical trial studying?

An observational study of Myelodysplastic Syndromes and Leukemia Myeloid Acute, run by Celgene at 15 sites in Spain.

The full registered description is in the About this study section and the official record.

Who may be eligible to take part?

The sponsor lists 3 inclusion and 1 exclusion criteria. Eligibility is decided by the study team after screening, so read the full criteria and contact a listed site.

Is this clinical trial currently recruiting?

The record says: finished, as of the sponsor's last update on 26 Jul 2017. Status can change between updates, so confirm with the study contact before making plans.

Where is the study taking place?

The record lists 15 sites in Spain. Whether a site is taking part right now should be confirmed with that site. See every site.

What are the possible benefits and risks?

They depend on the study and the treatment, and no study can promise a benefit. The study team explains the known risks during informed consent, before anyone joins; the record itself does not list them.

Are results available for this study?

The study is completed, but results are not available in the source record. That does not mean the treatment did or did not work.

How can a doctor refer a patient or contact the research team?

The record lists no contact. The official record names the sponsor, who can be asked directly. AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals.

What does the primary outcome measure?

Assessment of the tolerability of the treatment administered (time frame: Up to approximately 4 months). The study lists 8 primary outcomes in all. It is what the study was designed to measure, not a finding.

Where can I read the original study information?
Does a listing mean the treatment is approved or proven to work?

No. A listing means the study is registered. It does not show that the treatment is safe, works, or is approved by a regulator.

How often is this information updated?

AzTrials copies changed records from ClinicalTrials.gov every night and reloads the whole registry every week. The sponsor last updated this record on 26 Jul 2017; AzTrials last refreshed its copy on 7 Nov 2026.

Free account

Log in to keep searching

You’ve used your 3 free searches. AzTrials is free: log in or create a free account to keep searching clinical trials and save the ones you want to follow.

Create a free accountLog in