ライフサイエンスコーパス: frailty

1 d wing length as measures of an individual's frailty.

2 ive symptoms, were significant correlates of frailty.

3 n in older adults, focusing on the impact of frailty.

4 of 79.3% for high frailty and 82.3% for low frailty.

5 sociated each physical performance test with frailty.

6 telomere length, chronic disease status, and frailty.

7 physical performance test to a single factor-frailty.

8 deficits to minimize the risk of low BMD and frailty.

9 e heterogeneous than males in their level of frailty.

10 patients without significant comorbidity or frailty.

11 health is associated with a reduced risk of frailty.

12 l activity is limited by illness, ageing, or frailty.

13 alence of most comorbidities and measures of frailty.

14 e (GHD) and/or sex steroids with low BMD and frailty.

15 14-item instrument used to measure surgical frailty.

16 ns of triglyceride levels with longevity and frailty.

17 signatures discriminate HIV pathophysiologic frailty.

18 dated frailty index (FI) was used to measure frailty.

19 hould be considered in managing persons with frailty.

20 ifespan often reduce healthspan and increase frailty.

21 ilure receiving a primary prevention ICD had frailty (10%) or dementia (1%).

22 One-year mortality was 22% for patients with frailty, 27% for patients with dementia, and 12% in the

23 h high 1-year mortality rates: dementia with frailty (29%), frailty with chronic obstructive pulmonar

24 To test whether frailty, a novel measure of physiologic reserve, is asso

25 Frailty, activities of daily living (ADL)/instrumental A

26 tion of frailty was important; adjusting for frailty alone yielded a VE estimate of 58.7% (95% CI, 36

27 Frailty also attenuated the association between LOS and

28 Frailty among HIV-infected men was associated with incre

29 mine the impact on prevention or reversal of frailty among HIV-infected men.

30 On the other hand, differences in frailty among individuals (i.e. individual heterogeneity

31 the only conventional factor associated with frailty among KT recipients; however, factors rarely mea

32 ed as tools for clinical characterization of frailty among older adults.

33 d hormonal deficits with risk of low BMD and frailty among survivors of ALL.

34 The prevalence of frailty among young adult HCT patients exceeded 8%.

35 Conclusions and Relevance: The prevalence of frailty among young-adult HCT survivors approaches that

36 for center-specific effects, we performed a frailty analysis, in which each center was assumed to ha

37 To understand the association between frailty and 30-day postoperative unplanned readmission.

38 th an area under the curve of 79.3% for high frailty and 82.3% for low frailty.

39 lliative care were notified of the patient's frailty and associated surgical risks; if indicated, per

40 Growing numbers of older people living with frailty and chronic health conditions are being referred

41 is study was the use of surrogate markers of frailty and comorbid conditions to identify patients at

42 Patient factors such as frailty and comorbidity strongly predict the development

43 mple included 10,034 women aged 65-84 y with frailty and complete dietary data from the Women's Healt

44 We sought to determine the prevalence of frailty and dementia among older adults receiving primar

45 Frailty and dementia should be considered in clinical de

46 association of mortality in older women with frailty and dietary intake and healthy diet indexes, suc

47 then tested the incremental contribution of frailty and disability markers to the model's discrimina

48 fected adults may experience higher rates of frailty and disability than the general population.

49 ected covariates to determine differences by frailty and HIV status.

50 s, has construct validity for the concept of frailty and improves risk prediction of waitlist mortali

51 monstrated to extending healthspan, reducing frailty and improving stem cell function in multiple mur

52 y in the degree to which various FS estimate frailty and in the identification of particular individu

53 The association between frailty and incident dementia was significant for adults

54 function influences the relationship between frailty and incident dementia, the analyses were repeate

55 The association between frailty and increased risk of death decreased with patie

56 In this review, we first define frailty and its relevance for patients with hematologic

57 t studies evaluating the association between frailty and mortality or functional status at 6 months o

58 The interaction between frailty and postoperative time demonstrated an increased

59 eness of several exercise modes in reversing frailty and preventing reduction in muscle and bone mass

60 r analysis evaluated the interrelatedness of frailty and the 5 physical performance tests.

61 ening of patients preoperatively to identify frailty and the efficacy of system-level initiatives aim

62 the impact of novel indices of comorbidity, frailty, and disability on outcomes after transcatheter

63 ferent FS are based on different concepts of frailty, and most pairs cannot be assumed to be intercha

64 ter FSI implementation, controlling for age, frailty, and predicted mortality (adjusted odds ratio fo

65 used proxy of muscular fitness, a marker of frailty, and predictor of a range of morbidities and all

66 trikingly decline, resulting in decrepitude, frailty, and ultimately death.

67 Thus, a larger number of females with low frailty are able to survive to older ages than males, wi

68 Single-center studies identify frailty as a risk factor for 30-day postoperative mortal

69 Adding frailty as a syndrome increased the c-indexes by 0.000 t

70 Frailty as measured by the EFT was the strongest predict

71 Frailty, as calculated by the 11 variables on the mFI.

72 Frailty, as defined by the Johns Hopkins Adjusted Clinic

73 Physical frailty, as measured by the Fried Frailty Index, is incr

74 (Frailty Assessment Before Cardiac Surgery & Transcathete

75 However, frailty assessment depends on patient cooperation.

76 unit is often not feasible using traditional frailty assessment instruments.

77 Background: Frailty assessment may inform surgical risk and prognosi

78 Comorbidity scores and frailty assessment scales might help the decision making

79 Limitation: Heterogeneity of frailty assessment, limited generalizability of multicom

80 ining the optimal components of preoperative frailty assessment.

81 lar ejection fraction, 27 +/- 14%) underwent frailty assessment.

82 rt transplantation from March 2013 underwent frailty assessment.

83 Surgical risk scores do not include frailty assessments (eg, gait speed), which are of parti

84 Growing consensus suggests that frailty-associated risks should inform shared surgical d

85 IDU+/HCV+-associated CpGs discriminated HIV frailty based upon a validated index with an area under

86 uit and vegetables (FVs) may protect against frailty, but to our knowledge no study has yet assessed

87 During a mean 2.5-y follow-up, 300 incident frailty cases occurred.

88 Frailty classification also showed a very wide range of

89 Conclusion These four frailty classifications have good prognostic performance

90 Purpose Frailty classifications of older patients with cancer ha

91 Controls for frailty (Clinical Frailty Score) were non-morbid, age- a

92 ost disease (GvHD) were at increased risk of frailty compared with autologous HCT (OR,15.02; 95% CI,

93 ed that the pooled ORs (95% CIs) of incident frailty comparing participants who consumed 1, 2, or >/=

94 correlates of frailty, the patterns of the 5 frailty components, and the risk associated with these p

95 We used multinomial regression to identify frailty correlates.

96 pensity score-matched analysis with a shared frailty Cox regression.

97 s showed a tendency to a reduced risk of all frailty criteria.

98 followed-up through 2012 to assess incident frailty, defined as >/=3 of the 5 Fried criteria.

99 The ACG frailty-defining diagnoses indicator is a binary variabl

100 Johns Hopkins Adjusted Clinical Groups (ACG) frailty-defining diagnoses indicator.

101 At a population level, preoperative frailty-defining diagnoses were associated with a signif

102 s a binary variable that uses 12 clusters of frailty-defining diagnoses.

103 nalytic files to determine the prevalence of frailty, dementia, and other conditions before ICD impla

104 rometry, health-related quality of life, and frailty) demonstrated good construct validity across all

105 RATIONALE: The prevalence of frailty (diminished physiologic reserve) and its effect

106 ex-specific inferences on physical function, frailty, disability, and pharmacodynamics that all merit

107 component instruments that measure different frailty domains seemed to outperform single-component on

108 normal tissues and may increase the risk of frailty even among nongeriatric HCT patients.

109 With coronary artery disease treatment, frailty generally follows a U-shaped trajectory, but the

110 Frailty has been associated with adverse outcomes and de

111 Half of those with clinical frailty (i.e., Clinical Frailty Scale score >/=5) were y

112 s and Measures: Prevalence and predictors of frailty; impact of frailty on subsequent mortality in HC

113 tdischarge mortality (1985 [0.8%]) varied by frailty in a dose-dependent fashion.

114 s associated with a lower short-term risk of frailty in a dose-response manner, and the strongest ass

115 Assessment of preoperative frailty in all patients scheduled for elective surgery b

116 utrition were frequently assessed domains of frailty in both types of procedures.

117 ing a severe burn, contributing to prolonged frailty in burn survivors.

118 tellite cells in the prevention of prolonged frailty in burn survivors.

119 Frailty in cirrhosis is a multidimensional construct tha

120 hould explore routine screening for clinical frailty in critically ill patients of all ages.

121 ns of triglyceride levels with longevity and frailty in elderly populations.

122 these alterations could contribute to brain frailty in FHM1 patients.

123 derivatives to extend healthspan and reduce frailty in humans.

124 e aim of this study was to determine whether frailty in older adults is associated with the risk of s

125 ation between FV consumption and the risk of frailty in older adults.

126 Obesity causes frailty in older adults; however, weight loss might acce

127 nd function is a key contributor to physical frailty in older individuals and our current understandi

128 Assessment of physical frailty in older trauma patients admitted to the intensi

129 habilitation interventions aimed at reducing frailty in patients with cirrhosis in preparation for li

130 y performance-based measures associated with frailty in patients with cirrhosis.

131 ever, it is not clear how best to screen for frailty in preoperative surgical populations.

132 AI-A represent effective tools for measuring frailty in surgical populations with predictive ability

133 ecipients were enrolled in a cohort study of frailty in transplantation (12/2008-8/2015).

134 Objective: To determine the prevalence of frailty in young adult HCT patients (18- to 64-year-olds

135 nician reported global functioning capacity (frailty) in such patients, as well as the impact of prio

136 among nonfrail older adults and declined as frailty increased.

137 who were not frail, though VE diminished as frailty increased.

138 Frailty increases early hospital readmission and mortali

139 ny countries to make rigorous assessment for frailty increasingly important for hematologic oncologis

140 e processes and extend healthspan and reduce frailty independent of lifespan.

141 ELD) MELD of 12.10 (25%) were frail by Fried Frailty Index >/=3.

142 lyceride levels were not associated with the frailty index (beta = 0.008; 95% CI: -0.013, 0.029) or t

143 A frailty index (FI) score was calculated at baseline (bef

144 A validated frailty index (FI) was used to measure frailty.

145 of literature investigating how the Modified Frailty Index (mFI), a validated measure of frailty, is

146 We selected the frailty index by balancing statistical accuracy with cli

147 Frailty was defined using a frailty index comprised of 47 health deficits.

148 The final frailty index consisted of: grip strength, chair stands,

149 Compared with MELDNa alone, MELDNa+frailty index correctly reclassified 16% of deaths/delis

150 re sufficient data to calculate the modified Frailty Index for 1021, in which the C statistics were 0

151 Our frailty index for patients with cirrhosis, comprised of

152 Frailty was diagnosed by the Frailty Index Questionnaire based on 50 variables.

153 res (<20th percentile), cirrhotics with poor frailty index scores (>80th percentile) were more impair

154 Compared to those with robust frailty index scores (<20th percentile), cirrhotics with

155 We aimed to develop a frailty index to capture these extrahepatic complication

156 The ability of MELDNa and the frailty index to correctly rank patients according to th

157 atients correctly reclassified by adding the frailty index to MELDNa.

158 0.547, and the correlations of the modified Frailty Index to the RAI-A and RAI-C were 0.301 and 0.26

159 and 0.76, respectively, but 0.82 for MELDNa+frailty index together.

160 (RAI-A), 0.797 (RAI-C), and 0.811 (modified Frailty Index).

161 odified Fried frailty phenotype and Rockwood frailty index).

162 Physical frailty, as measured by the Fried Frailty Index, is increasingly recognized as a critical

163 data to calculate the RAI-A and the modified Frailty Index.

164 urpose: To evaluate the evidence for various frailty instruments used to predict mortality, functiona

165 major procedures (n = 18 388; 8 studies), 9 frailty instruments were evaluated.

166 vasive procedures (n = 5177; 17 studies), 13 frailty instruments were evaluated.

167 component frailty instruments, few validated frailty instruments, and potential publication bias.

168 , limited generalizability of multicomponent frailty instruments, few validated frailty instruments,

169 Frailty is a clinically recognized syndrome of decreased

170 Frailty is a geriatric syndrome that diminishes the pote

171 Frailty is a measure of physiologic reserve that may be

172 Frailty is a novel preoperative predictor of poor KT out

173 Frailty is a risk factor for death and disability follow

174 Frailty is an independent risk factor for cardiovascular

175 In elderly populations, frailty is associated with higher mortality risk.

176 Frailty is common in critically ill adults aged 18 years

177 ven by human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) or frailty is not clear.

178 Frailty is prevalent among patients with advanced sympto

179 etary patterns on survivorship in those with frailty is yet to be examined in a well-powered cohort w

180 Frailty Index (mFI), a validated measure of frailty, is associated with unplanned readmission among

181 a and osteopenia as indicators of underlying frailty may provide complementary prognostic information

182 cipients (n = 74,859) and tested whether (1) frailty, measured immediately before KT in a novel cohor

183 ive risk adjustment for comorbid illness and frailty measures explain the higher mortality after AMI

184 es with Cox regression identified subsets of frailty measures that predicted waitlist mortality (=dea

185 independent of confounding by comorbidities, frailty measures, and laboratory markers of nutritional

186 I while adjusting for patient comorbidities, frailty measures, and laboratory markers of nutritional

187 Secondary outcomes included changes in other frailty measures, body composition, bone mineral density

188 MELD exceptions were assessed with candidate frailty measures.

189 ty predicted hospital length of stay and the frailty model had a moderately better predictive accurac

190 A parametric frailty model was combined with a logistic regression mo

191 ariance-correction model, random effect in a frailty model).

192 schedule (every 3 months) using a parametric frailty model.

193 and survival was evaluated using Cox shared frailty modeling.

194 Frailty models may be useful when within-subject correla

195 Multivariate frailty models were used to evaluate the effects of incr

196 Cox frailty models with random effects were used to assess a

197 weeks: logistic regression) and (2) whether frailty modified the association between LOS and mortali

198 ng phenotypes - longevity ( >/=95 years) and frailty (modified Fried frailty phenotype and Rockwood f

199 ent of important clinical covariates, as did frailty (odds ratio 8.01; 95% confidence interval 1.82-3

200 rent data regarding the effect of domains of frailty on outcomes for blood cancers including myelodys

201 The long-term and population-level effect of frailty on postoperative mortality is, to our knowledge,

202 valence and predictors of frailty; impact of frailty on subsequent mortality in HCT survivors.

203 4-year-olds) and siblings; and the impact of frailty on subsequent mortality in HCT survivors.

204 r than for younger adults, and the impact of frailty on vaccine effectiveness (VE) and outcomes is un

205 The presence of frailty or prefrailty was defined as having at least two

206 iduals aged 50 years or older indicated that frailty (OR=1.43, 95%CI 1.08-1.89, p=0.012), being a mal

207 nificant physical or cognitive disabilities, frailty, or residence in a nursing home or assisted livi

208 signed to medical therapy only showed stable frailty over the 30-month follow-up period (P value for

209 mance test was significantly associated with frailty (P < 0.01), even after adjustment for MELD or he

210 though limited by an absence of a measure of frailty, patient characteristics and treatment intensity

211 (beta = 0.008; 95% CI: -0.013, 0.029) or the frailty phenotype (OR: 1.91; 95% CI: 0.84, 4.37).

212 y ( >/=95 years) and frailty (modified Fried frailty phenotype and Rockwood frailty index).

213 revalence and prognostic significance of the frailty phenotype in patients referred for heart transpl

214 Redefining the frailty phenotype may be needed to improve risk stratifi

215 and Aging Study I and II to compare physical frailty phenotypes (PFPs).

216 mplifications and approximations of existing frailty phenotypes for risk prediction, there have been

217 Sarcopenia and frailty predicted hospital length of stay and the frailt

218 bility did not differ between sarcopenia and frailty prediction model, reflected by chi values of 21.

219 Frailty predicts postoperative mortality and morbidity m

220 After adjusting for current age, the odds of frailty/prefrailty were increased among men with GHD (OR

221 vors met criteria for low BMD, and 18.6% for frailty/prefrailty.

222 Targeting potentially modifiable aspects of frailty preoperatively, such as improving functional sta

223 Frailty prevalence was 19.5%.

224 the importance of a life-course approach for frailty prevention.

225 istic screening for radiologic indicators of frailty provides an additional tool for early identifica

226 pending on the scale used, the prevalence of frailty ranged from 26% to 68%.

227 gned to PCI and CABG experienced a sustained frailty reduction, whereas those assigned to medical the

228 Frailty was defined by >/=3 frailty-related phenotype criteria (weight loss, exhaust

229 Although frailty represents a high-risk state for this population

230 10 years for HCT recipients with and without frailty, respectively (P < .001).

231 Importance: Frailty results in decreased physiological reserve and d

232 cs associated with the greatest reduction of frailty risk were being physically active and ideal body

233 ment, we measured frailty using the Clinical Frailty Scale (range, 1 [very fit] to 7 [severely frail]

234 those with clinical frailty (i.e., Clinical Frailty Scale score >/=5) were younger than 65 years old

235 -72) years old and who had a median Clinical Frailty Scale score of 3 (3-5).

236 ion to analyze associations between Clinical Frailty Scale scores and outcomes, adjusting for age, se

237 Greater Clinical Frailty Scale scores were independently associated with

238 Clinical Frailty Scale scores were not associated with disability

239 ore, Charlson comorbidity index, or clinical frailty scale were independently predictive of Palliativ

240 emia, and hypoalbuminemia outperformed other frailty scales and is recommended for use in this settin

241 incremental predictive value of 7 different frailty scales to predict poor outcomes following TAVR o

242 The following frailty scales were compared: Fried, Fried+, Rockwood, S

243 We examined agreement between each frailty score and the mean of 35 FS, using a modified Bl

244 Controls for frailty (Clinical Frailty Score) were non-morbid, age- and gender-matched

245 e from illness onset to specimen collection, frailty score, and Charlson comorbidity index (CCI).

246 Although many frailty scores (FS) have been proposed, no single score

247 To examine the effect of the Frailty Screening Initiative (FSI) on mortality and comp

248 ogy: the exchange of age limits for rigorous frailty screening, development of disease-specific measu

249 Frailty should be monitored alongside cognitive function

250 Frailty simulations were used to assess whether causal a

251 bias in the PD GWA study, as demonstrated by frailty simulations.

252 Conclusion: Frailty status, assessed by mobility, disability, and nu

253 ined in a well-powered cohort with validated frailty status.

254 patients might benefit from consideration of frailty status.

255 may be improved by integrating a measure of frailty, such as 5-m gait speed, to better capture the h

256 American Society of Anesthesiologists score, frailty, surgery for malignancy, and postoperative compl

257 to assess construct validity with regard to frailty syndrome characterization and predictive validit

258 d negative predictive values for identifying frailty syndrome.

259 se have been linked to increased risk of the frailty syndrome.

260 n, enhances insulin sensitivity, and reduces frailty, targeting this fundamental mechanism to prevent

261 ith Cox regression and incorporating a gamma frailty term to account for clustering.

262 Cases had higher baseline frailty than controls (P = .006).

263 , it is through their effect on the level of frailty that they affect age patterns of mortality.

264 firmed the association between nutrition and frailty, the impact of dietary intake and dietary patter

265 state for this population, the correlates of frailty, the patterns of the 5 frailty components, and t

266 and used Cox proportional hazard models with frailties to examine associations with hospital mortalit

267 on to the hospital care of older people with frailty, to inform future interventions and their evalua

268 on to the hospital care of older people with frailty, to inform future interventions and their evalua

269 is modest when used as a sole criterion for frailty, to screen older adults who could benefit from f

270 ns with predictive ability on par with other frailty tools.

271 e Battery, Bern, Columbia, and the Essential Frailty Toolset (EFT).

272 At enrollment, we measured frailty using the Clinical Frailty Scale (range, 1 [very

273 Frailty was an independent predictor of increased all-ca

274 Agreement between IADL impairment and frailty was assessed using the weighted kappa statistic.

275 Frailty was assessed with modified Fried's criteria.

276 Frailty was assessed with the Risk Analysis Index (RAI),

277 In all cohorts, incident frailty was assessed with the use of the Fried criteria.

278 ltivariate analyses adjusted for covariates, frailty was associated among HIV-infected men with highe

279 Frailty was associated with a 2.76-fold (95% CI, 1.7-4.4

280 d to evaluate whether the degree of baseline frailty was associated with incident dementia.

281 Frailty was associated with New York Heart Association c

282 In contrast, HIV infection but not frailty was associated with significantly greater immune

283 Frailty was defined as a positive response to 3 or more

284 Frailty was defined by >/=3 frailty-related phenotype cr

285 Frailty was defined using a frailty index comprised of 4

286 Frailty was diagnosed by the Frailty Index Questionnaire

287 The contribution of frailty was important; adjusting for frailty alone yield

288 Frailty was independent of age, sex, heart failure durat

289 Frailty was independently associated with longer LOS [re

290 Frailty was measured by 4-m walk time, grip strength, se

291 ew and safer treatments for osteoporosis and frailty, we describe a novel series of selective androge

292 current event analysis incorporating patient frailty, we found no association between readmissions an

293 gether, the pooled ORs (95% CIs) of incident frailty were 0.41 (0.21, 0.60), 0.47 (0.25, 0.68), 0.36

294 tors that were independently associated with frailty were IADL disability (PR, 3.22; 95% CI, 1.72-6.0

295 ollow-up of 3.5 years, 117 cases of incident frailty were identified.

296 Sarcopenia and frailty were quantified in 102 patients and observed in

297 ortality rates: dementia with frailty (29%), frailty with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (25%)

298 nic obstructive pulmonary disease (25%), and frailty with diabetes mellitus (23%).

299 poorly described, as are the interactions of frailty with important predictors of mortality.

300 We hypothesized greater frailty would be associated with subsequent mortality, d