Skip to main content
. Author manuscript; available in PMC: 2021 Nov 18.
Published in final edited form as: J Natl Compr Canc Netw. 2021 Apr 15;19(9):1055–1062. doi: 10.6004/jnccn.2020.7684

Table 3.

Measures of functional status, assessment time points, and analytic approach by study type.

Characteristic Overall No. (%) (N=44) Older adult-specific studies No. (%) (n=17) Non-older adult-specific studies No. (%) (n=27) p-valuea
Measures of functional status
 Patient-reported outcomeb 43 (98) 17 (100) 26 (96) 1.00
  EORTC QLQ-C30 15 (34) 5 (11) 10 (37)
  ADL 9 (20) 7 (16) 2 (7)
  IADL 7 (16) 5 (11) 2 (7)
 Physical performance testb 9 (20) 3 (18) 6 (22) 1.00
  Grip strength 8 (18) 3 (18) 5 (19)
  Walking test 6 (14) 3 (19) 3 (11)
  Chair stands 5 (11) 1 (12) 4 (15)
 Clinician-reported 4 (9) 1 (6) 3 (11) 1.00
  ECOG PS 3 (7) 1 (6) 2 (7)
  KPS 1 (2) 0 (0) 1 (4)
Assessment time points
 Pretreatment and 1 follow-up 9 (20) 3 (18) 6 (22) 0.91
 Pretreatment and 2 follow-ups 6 (14) 3 (18) 3 (11)
 Pretreatment and ≥3 follow-ups 22 (50) 8 (47) 14 (52)
 Other assessment schedulec 7 (16) 3 (18) 4 (15)
Analytic approach
 Change score between two assessments 21 (48) 6 (35) 15 (56) 0.008
 Longitudinal analysis 14 (32) 3 (18) 11 (41)
 Dichotomous functional decline 6 (14) 5 (29) 1 (4)
 Time to deterioration 2 (5) 2 (12) 0 (0)
 Other analysisd 1 (2) 1 (6) 0 (0)

Abbreviations: ADL, activities of daily living; ECOG PS, Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status; EORTC QLQ-C30, European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Questionnaire-C30; IADL, instrumental activities of daily living; KPS, Karnofsky Performance Status.

a

Fisher’s exact test comparing older adult-specific studies and non-older adult-specific studies.

b

Only the three most common measures of functional status within each subgroup are shown.

c

Other assessment schedule: Initial assessment occurred after initiation of systemic therapy.

d

Other analysis: Association with patient-reported change in physical condition.