Evaluation of Turkish hematologists’ perspectives and practices on comprehensive geriatric assessment and hematologic-oncologic scales in older patients with hematological malignancies-a pilot study

Yıldırım M., Bozer D., Arayıcı M. E., Saydam G., Şahin S., Savaş E. S.

21st Congress of the European Geriatric Medicine Society, Reykjavik, İzlanda, 24 - 26 Eylül 2025, ss.330, (Özet Bildiri)

  • Yayın Türü: Bildiri / Özet Bildiri
  • Doi Numarası: 10.1007/s41999-025-01343-4
  • Basıldığı Şehir: Reykjavik
  • Basıldığı Ülke: İzlanda
  • Sayfa Sayıları: ss.330
  • Dokuz Eylül Üniversitesi Adresli: Evet

Özet

Introduction: In treatment planning of older patients (OPs) diagnosed with hematological malignancies (HMs), commonly used assessment performance scores fail to comprehensively evaluate heterogeneous physiological changes associated with ageing, functional ability and comorbidities. Though several societies published guidelines recommending that oncology OPs undergo comprehensive geriatric assessment (GA)(CGA) in addition to standard oncologic performance scales before treatment, how those are applied in management of HMs in Türkiye remains unclear. So, we aimed to assess knowledge, practices, perspectives of Turkish hematologists regarding use of CGA and hematological-oncological evaluation scales in treatment planning of OPs with HMs and also barriers-needs.

Methods: A nationwide online survey was designed. The study is ongoing, final results will be discussed in details.

Results: Hematologists (n = 65) agreed that treatment planning of OPs with HMs should differ from younger patients, ECOG/Karnofsky Performance scales were most commonly used, 53.8% integrated validated GA tools into their practice, 15.4% self-developed methods. Geriatrics consultation request from hematologists; often 10.8%, rarely 29.2%, no geriatric specialists24.6%, 16.9% no need. Positive contribution of GA to management of OPs with HMs; 85.9% beneficial, 95.4% believes GA is inadequately implemented. Perceived knowledge of hematologists on CGA 9.2% sufficient. GA parameters considered most valuable; frailty (89.2%), comorbidities (73.8%), functional status (69.2%); influencing treatment modifications were activities of daily living (87.7%), frailty (76.9%), and comorbidities (75.4%).

Key conclusions: We highlight gap between awareness and implementation regarding GA for OPs with HMs in Türkiye. Integrating practical CGA tools specific to HMs into routine clinical practice and improving training among hematologists are crucial.