Table 1.

Summary of randomized controlled trials of geriatric assessment‐guided care presented at the 2020 ASCO Annual Meeting

Reference	Interventions	Setting	Patients	Outcomes
GAIN Li et al. [5]	Intervention group: multidisciplinary GA‐based interventions (physical therapy, nutrition, advanced care planning, occupational therapy, medication reconciliation, referrals for comorbidity care) Usual care group: GA provided to treating oncologist but no interventions offered	Single cancer center in the U.S. with availability of multidisciplinary team with geriatric expertise	n = 600 Inclusion criteria: age ≥65, any functional status, solid tumors, all stages, starting chemotherapy	Decreased incidence of severe chemotherapy toxicity (50% vs. 60%, p = .02). Increased advance directive completion (24% vs. 10%, p < .01)
GAP‐70 Mohile et al. [4]	Intervention group: GA‐based recommendations sent to treating oncologists Usual care group: No summary provided to treating oncologists, patients treated according to standard of care	41 community practice sites in the U.S. Geriatricians unavailable at the practice sites.	n = 41 centers (718 patients) Inclusion criteria: age >70, ≥1 impaired GA domain, incurable solid tumors or lymphoma, starting new treatment	Decreased incidence of severe chemotherapy toxicity (50% vs. 71%, p < .01). No differences in 6‐month survival
INTEGERATE Soo et al. [6]	Intervention group: patients were comanaged by a geriatrician during oncological treatment. Usual care group: Care directed by oncologist alone	Three Australian cancer centers with availability of geriatricians	n = 154 Inclusion criteria: age ≥70, solid tumors and lymphoma, candidates for systemic therapy	Quality of life better in the intervention group at 6 months. Reduced hospitalizations (41% less) and emergency room visits (39% less)
Qian et al. [8]	Intervention group: perioperative geriatric interventions multidisciplinary GA‐based interventions. Usual care group: GA provided to treating oncologist but no interventions offered	Single cancer center in the U.S. with availability of multidisciplinary team with geriatric expertise	n = 160 Inclusion criteria: age ≥65, undergoing surgery for GI cancer, any functional status, all stages	Per‐protocol analysis: decreased hospital stay (8.2 vs. 7.3 days, p = .02); decreased ICU admissions (32% vs. 13%, p = .05). No differences in ITT analysis

Abbreviations: ASCO, American Society of Clinical Oncology; GA, geriatric assessment; GI, gastrointestinal; ICU, intensive care unit; ITT, intention‐to‐treat