Changes in muscle stiffness have been reported with sarcopenia. Sonoelastography is an accessible and non-radiating imaging technique allowing quantification of elastic properties of tissue. We performed a systematic review of the literature to investigate whether sonoelastography can be a reliable method to assess sarcopenia in older patients. We searched Medline, Google Scholar, Scopus, SpringerLink and Science direct from January 1, 1990 to April 1, 2020. Three independent review authors assessed trial eligibility, extracted the data, and assessed risk of bias. We intended to learn which types of elastography have been tested, if such measures are repeatable, and if they have been compared to the currently accepted diagnostic method. Ten studies met the inclusion criteria. Most followed a cross-sectional design with young and older adult subgroups. The gastrocnemius, rectus femoris, and vastus intermedius appeared most frequently. Nine of the included studies used shear wave elastography and one-strain elastography. The passive elastic constant was significantly greater in sarcopenic versus healthy subjects after passive stretching (124.98 ± 60.82 vs. 46.35 ± 15.85, P = 0.004). However, even in non-sarcopenic patients, the age of the patient was responsible for about 45.5 % of the variance in SWV. Among ten included articles, four reported higher stiffness in the muscles of older adults, two reported lower stiffness, and four found no significant difference. Due to the substantial heterogenicity of actual data, we could not make any conclusions about the potential usefulness of elastography to assess sarcopenia. Further studies are needed, including a larger sample of older patients and using a standardized and reproducible protocol.

Todays challenge in geriatric oncology is to screen patients who need geriatric follow-up. The main goal of this study was to analyze factors that identify patients, in a large cohort of patients with solid tumors, who need more geriatric interventions and therefore specific follow-up. Between April 2012 and May 2018, 3530 consecutive patients were enrolled in the PACA EST cohort (France). A total of 3140 patients were finally enrolled in the study. A Comprehensive Geriatric Assessment (CGA) was performed at baseline. We analyzed the associations between factors at baseline (geriatric and oncologic factors) and the need to perform more than three geriatric interventions. The mean age of the population was 82 years old with 59% of patients aged older than 80 years old. A total of 8819 geriatric interventions were implemented for the 3140 patients. The percentage of patients with three or more geriatric interventions represented 31.8% (n = 999) of the population. In multivariate analyses, a Mini Nutritional assessment (MNA) <17, an MNA ≤23·5 and ≥17, a performans status (PS) >2, a dependence on Instrumental Activities of Daily Living (IADL), a Geriatric Depression Scale (GDS) ≥5, a Mini Mental State Examination (MMSE) <24, and a Screening tool G8 ≤14 were independent risk factors associated with more geriatric interventions. Factors associated with more geriatric interventions could assist practitioners in selecting patients for specific geriatric follow-up.

11548 Background: Some previous studies in geriatric oncology have described the GI and their adherence. Today’s challenge is to screen patients needing specific GI and repeated Comprehensive Geriatric Assessments (CGA). We recently analyzed a phenotype of patients requiring more GI (Boulahssass et al, Cancers 2019). The main purpose of the present study is to compare types of GI implemented, according to patient frailty levels, in order to better understand the necessary care plan. Methods: Between April 2012 and May 2018, 3530 consecutive patients with solid tumors were enrolled in this multicentric, prospective cohort. 3140 patients (mean age:82y) were finally included and a CGA was performed at Baseline. Twelve GI were standardized, individualized or based on experience if no guidelines were available. Within 1 month, geriatricians including patients in the cohort received standardized training. Logistic regression was performed to compare types of GI in the 3 groups using the Balducci Score (B1/B2/B3). Results: 8819 GI were implemented for the 3140 patients. On average, fit patients had 1.5 GI (n = 146), vulnerable patients 2.4 GI (n = 1568) and frail patients 3.3 GI (n = 1426). We observed no significant differences between the 3 groups concerning specific pain management (Fit vs B2: p = 0.19; Fit vs B3: p = 0.57) and psychological care (Fit vs B2:p = 0.03; Fit vs B3:p = 0.24). In vulnerable and frail patients, we recorded more significant GI for nutritional care, delirium prevention, comorbidity management, nursing interventions, social worker interventions, treatment modifications for optimization or iatrogenic disorders and physiotherapy, with the highest Odds Ratio for nursing interventions (Fit vs B2 OR:2.9 p = 0.011; Fit vs B3 OR:9 P < 0.001) and physiotherapy (Fit vs B2:OR 4.3 p < 0.001; Fit vs B3:OR:9 p < 0.001). B3 patients had significantly more GI on care pathways modifications (OR:3.1, p = 0.002) and caregiver care (OR:2, p = 0.049). Conclusions: Fit patients also needed GI. We observed differences in types of GI between the groups. However, the aims and levels also seemed to differ and need further studies to analyze their impact.

No abstract

No abstract