Jove
Visualize
Contact Us
JoVE
x logofacebook logolinkedin logoyoutube logo
ABOUT JoVE
OverviewLeadershipBlogJoVE Help Center
AUTHORS
Publishing ProcessEditorial BoardScope & PoliciesPeer ReviewFAQSubmit
LIBRARIANS
TestimonialsSubscriptionsAccessResourcesLibrary Advisory BoardFAQ
RESEARCH
JoVE JournalMethods CollectionsJoVE Encyclopedia of ExperimentsArchive
EDUCATION
JoVE CoreJoVE BusinessJoVE Science EducationJoVE Lab ManualFaculty Resource CenterFaculty Site
Terms & Conditions of Use
Privacy Policy
Policies

Related Experiment Video

Updated: Jun 15, 2026

The Multiple Sclerosis Performance Test (MSPT): An iPad-Based Disability Assessment Tool
11:35

The Multiple Sclerosis Performance Test (MSPT): An iPad-Based Disability Assessment Tool

Published on: June 30, 2014

Karnofsky Performance Scale (KPS) or Physical Performance Test (PPT)? That is the question.

Catherine Terret1, Gilles Albrand, Géraldine Moncenix

  • 1Centre Léon Bérard, Lyon, France. terret@lyon.fnclcc.fr

Critical Reviews in Oncology/Hematology
|February 27, 2010
PubMed
Summary

The Karnofsky Performance Status (KPS) may inaccurately assess elderly cancer patients

Related Concept Videos

Pulmonary Function Tests01:25

Pulmonary Function Tests

Pulmonary Function Tests (PFTs)
Pulmonary Function Tests are crucial diagnostic tools for assessing respiratory function, particularly in patients with chronic respiratory disorders. They comprehensively evaluate lung volumes, ventilatory function, breathing mechanics, diffusion, and gas exchange. These tests help diagnose pulmonary diseases and play a significant role in monitoring disease progression, evaluating disability, and assessing response to therapy.
PFTs involve using a spirometer, a...

You might also read

Related Articles

Articles linked to this work by shared authors, journal, and citation graph.

Sort by
Same author

Characteristics, treatment and survival of older patients with metastatic triple negative breast cancer from the ESME mBC real-world national cohort: a comparison with younger women.

Breast (Edinburgh, Scotland)·2026
Same author

Individualized physical activity program for older adults undergoing chemotherapy for hematologic malignancies.

Journal of geriatric oncology·2026
Same author

Important aspects of care and priorities of older patients with cancer: The PRIORITY multicenter cohort study.

Journal of geriatric oncology·2025
Same author

Exploring Determinants of Compassionate Cancer Care in Older Adults Using Fuzzy Cognitive Mapping.

Current oncology (Toronto, Ont.)·2025
Same author

[Implementation of geriatric oncology in a remote hospital in French Guiana].

Bulletin du cancer·2024
Same author

Correction: Value of combining biological age with assessment of individual frailty to optimize management of cancer treated with targeted therapies: model of chronic myeloid leukemia treated with tyrosine kinase inhibitors (BIO-TIMER trial).

BMC cancer·2024

Area of Science:

  • Geriatric Oncology
  • Clinical Assessment Tools
  • Cancer Patient Evaluation

Background:

  • Oncologists rely on performance status (PS) for cancer treatment decisions.
  • Accurate PS assessment is crucial for elderly cancer patients.
  • Existing tools may have limitations in this population.

Purpose of the Study:

  • To compare the accuracy of Karnofsky Performance Status (K) with the Physical Performance Test (PPT) in assessing elderly cancer patients.
  • To determine if PPT is a more reliable geriatric tool for functional status evaluation.

Main Methods:

  • A single examiner assessed PS using KPS and administered PPT to 152 elderly cancer patients.
  • Patients with KPS score >= 60 were included for PPT assessment.
  • Data on gender and disease stage were collected for correlation analysis.

Related Experiment Videos

Last Updated: Jun 15, 2026

The Multiple Sclerosis Performance Test (MSPT): An iPad-Based Disability Assessment Tool
11:35

The Multiple Sclerosis Performance Test (MSPT): An iPad-Based Disability Assessment Tool

Published on: June 30, 2014

Main Results:

  • Most patients (82%) had a high KPS (>= 80), but only 20% showed no health impairment on PPT.
  • KPS appears less accurate than PPT in reflecting the actual functional status of elderly cancer patients.
  • No significant correlation was found between PPT scores and patients' gender or disease stage.

Conclusions:

  • The Physical Performance Test (PPT) may be a more accurate tool than Karnofsky Performance Status (KPS) for assessing functional status in elderly cancer patients.
  • PPT could potentially serve as a more appropriate inclusion criterion for cancer treatment decisions in this demographic.