Related Experiment Video
Updated: Jul 28, 2025

Author Spotlight: Assessing Surgical Frailty with Point-of-Care Ultrasound of Quadriceps Muscles
Published on: July 26, 2024
How frail is frail in oncology studies? A scoping review
James A Fletcher1,2,3, Benignus Logan4, Natasha Reid4
1Division of Cancer Services, Princess Alexandra Hospital, 199 Ipswich Road, Woolloongabba, QLD, 4102, Australia. james.fletcher@uq.edu.au.
Aims:
The frailty index (FI) is one way in which frailty can be quantified. While it is measured as a continuous variable, various cut-off points have been used to categorise older adults as frail or non-frail, and these have largely been validated in the acute care or community settings for older adults without cancer. This review aimed to explore which FI categories have been applied to older adults with cancer and to determine why these categories were selected by study authors.
Methods:
This scoping review searched Medline, EMBASE, Cochrane, CINAHL, and Web of Science databases for studies which measured and categorised an FI in adults with cancer. Of the 1994 screened, 41 were eligible for inclusion. Data including oncological setting, FI categories, and the references or rationale for categorisation were extracted and analysed.
Results:
The FI score used to categorise participants as frail ranged from 0.06 to 0.35, with 0.35 being the most frequently used, followed by 0.25 and 0.20. The rationale for FI categories was provided in most studies but was not always relevant. Three of the included studies using an FI > 0.35 to define frailty were frequently referenced as the rationale for subsequent studies, however, the original rationale for this categorisation was unclear. Few studies sought to determine or validate optimum FI categorises in this population.
Conclusion:
There is significant variability in how studies have categorised the FI in older adults with cancer. An FI ≥ 0.35 to categorise frailty was used most frequently, however an FI in this range has often represented at least moderate to severe frailty in other highly-cited studies. These findings contrast with a scoping review of highly-cited studies categorising FI in older adults without cancer, where an FI ≥ 0.25 was most common. Maintaining the FI as a continuous variable is likely to be beneficial until further validation studies determine optimum FI categories in this population. Differences in how the FI has been categorised, and indeed how older adults have been labelled as 'frail', limits our ability to synthesise results and to understand the impact of frailty in cancer care.
More Related Videos
05:53Measuring Frailty in HIV-infected Individuals. Identification of Frail Patients is the First Step to Amelioration and Reversal of Frailty
Published on: July 24, 2013
07:27Exergaming in Older People Living with HIV Improves Balance, Mobility and Ameliorates Some Aspects of Frailty
Published on: October 6, 2016
Related Concept Videos
Cancer Survival Analysis
Types of Biopharmaceutical Studies: Controlled and Non-Controlled Approaches
Non-controlled studies, commonly employed for initial exploration, lack a control group, rendering them susceptible to biases and external influences. In contrast,...
Factors Affecting Illness
For instance, risk factors are connected to illness,...
Aging
Cellular Clock Theory
The cellular clock theory posits that the human lifespan is closely tied to the finite capacity of cells to divide, a phenomenon governed by telomeres, which are protective caps at the ends of...
Clinical Trials: Overview
Documentation in Long-Term and Home Healthcare Setting
Long-Term Care Facilities