Validation of the M.D. Anderson Symptom Inventory Brain Tumor Module (MDASI-BT)

Validating the M. D. Anderson Symptom Inventory (MDASI) for use in patients with ovarian cancer

OBJECTIVE

The M. D. Anderson Symptom Inventory (MDASI) captures the severity of common cancer symptoms from the patient's perspective. We describe the validity and sensitivity of a module of the MDASI to be used with patients having ovarian cancer (MDASI-OC).

METHODS

Ovarian cancer-specific module items were developed from 14 qualitative patient interviews. 128 patients with invasive epithelial ovarian, peritoneal, or fallopian-tube cancer treated at The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center were recruited. Patients completed the MDASI-OC, socio-demographic questionnaires, the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-Ovary (FACT-O), and a global quality-of-life (QOL) item. Reliability was assessed using Cronbach α, and sensitivity using a known group was assessed. Construct validity was tested using exploratory factor analysis.

RESULTS

The sample was primarily white (85.2%), had a mean age of 57.5 years (±12.7 years), and had previously been treated with chemotherapy (75.0%) and/or surgery (93.8%). Approximately 30% of patients reported disturbed sleep, fatigue, or numbness/tingling of at least moderate severity (≥5 on a 0-10 scale). On the ovarian-cancer-specific symptoms, approximately 20% reported back pain, feeling bloated, or constipation of at least moderate severity. Factor analysis revealed six underlying constructs (pain/sleep; cognitive; disease-related and numbness; treatment-related; affective; gastrointestinal-specific). MDASI-OC symptom and interference items had Cronbach α values of 0.90 and 0.89, respectively. The MDASI-OC was sensitive to symptom severity by performance status (p=0.009), QOL (p=0.002), and FACT-O scores (p<0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

The 27-item MDASI-OC meets common criteria for validation and reliability and is sensitive to expected changes in symptoms related to differences in disease and treatment status.

The validity and utility of the M. D. Anderson Symptom Inventory in patients with breast cancer: evidence from the symptom outcomes and practice patterns data from the eastern cooperative oncology group

BACKGROUND

The M. D. Anderson Symptom Inventory (MDASI) is a psychometrically validated patient-reported outcome measurement that assesses the severity and impact of multiple symptoms related to cancer and its treatment. With the MDASI, patients rate 13 common "core" symptoms and 6 items that reflect symptom interference with functioning. Several MDASI modules (core symptom and interference items plus additional symptoms specific to a particular cancer type or treatment modality) have been developed. Although the original MDASI validation study encompassed various cancer types, the instrument's psychometric properties have not been examined in a homogenous sample of patients with breast cancer in a national multicenter study.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We performed a secondary analysis of data from an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group study to establish the reliability, validity, and sensitivity of the MDASI in a large sample of patients with breast cancer (n = 1544), 78% of whom were receiving treatment. The instrument was administered twice, approximately 1 month apart.

RESULTS

Internal consistency and test-retest reliability were adequate, with Cronbach α values ≥ 0.85 and intraclass correlations ≥ 0.76 for all subscales. Known-group validity was evaluated by using performance status, tumor response, and disease stage. Sensitivity to change in patient-reported quality of life was established.

CONCLUSION

The MDASI is a valid, reliable, and sensitive symptom-assessment instrument that can enhance descriptive and clinical studies of symptom status in patients with breast cancer. Future studies might include cognitive debriefing and qualitative interviews to identify additional disease-specific items for inclusion in a MDASI breast cancer module.

Factors influencing quality of life in adult patients with primary brain tumors

We performed a literature review with respect to factors influencing health-related quality of life (QOL) in adults with primary brain tumors. A comprehensive, peer-reviewed literature search was performed including studies examining QOL in adults with high-grade gliomas and low-grade gliomas and in routine neuro-oncology practice. The interpretation and implication of QOL domain scores may be different in high-grade, low-grade, and benign brain tumors. Several patient-related, treatment-related, and sociocultural factors influence QOL scores. Pretreatment baseline QOL domain scores have been shown to be a predictive parameter for survival function. Implementation of QOL scores in routine clinical practice is underused. QOL is an important outcome measure in the treatment of patients with brain tumors and should be incorporated as a surrogate end point along with traditional end points, such as disease-free and overall survival in most current trials.

Measuring the symptom burden associated with the treatment of chronic myeloid leukemia

We developed a module of the MD Anderson Symptom Inventory (MDASI) for patients with chronic myeloid leukemia (CML). To develop the MDASI-CML, we identified CML-specific symptoms from qualitative interviews with 35 patients. A list of candidate symptoms was reduced by a panel of patients, caregivers, and clinicians to the 13 core MDASI symptom items and 6 CML-specific items; these items were subsequently administered to 30 patients. Cognitive debriefing confirmed that the items were clear, relevant, and easy to use. One additional CML-specific symptom item was added, for a total of 7. The refined MDASI-CML was administered to 152 patients once every 2 weeks for 1 year. The content, concurrent, known-group, and construct validity of the MDASI-CML were evaluated. The internal consistency and test-retest reliabilities of the module were adequate. Longitudinal analysis showed relatively stable symptom severity scores over time. The most severe symptoms were fatigue, drowsiness, disturbed sleep, muscle soreness and cramping, and trouble remembering things. Approximately one-third of the patients who completed the MDASI-CML reported persistent moderate-to-severe symptoms. The MDASI-CML is a valid and reliable symptom assessment instrument that can be used in clinical studies of symptom status in patients with CML.

On the pathway to success: defining subtypes of gliomas for better treatment selection and refining the meaning of success

The treatment for most patients with primary brain tumors remains inadequate. Despite an overwhelming increase in our knowledge of the molecular and genomic changes in these cancers, translation of these findings to effective therapies remains the exception. As evidenced by the series of articles in this issue, the incorporation of molecular signatures and patient-reported outcome measures into clinical trials is becoming increasingly successful. These efforts recently yielded a treatment-determining predictive marker, but challenges remain in optimizing marker-based patient selection and systematic implementation of patient-reported outcomes to maximize the risk-to-benefit assessment, thereby achieving individualized treatment.

Update on bevacizumab and other angiogenesis inhibitors for brain cancer

INTRODUCTION

Primary and metastatic brain tumors remain a major challenge. The most common primary adult malignant brain tumor, glioblastoma (GBM), confers a dismal prognosis as does the development of CNS metastases for most systemic malignancies. Anti-angiogenic therapy has been a major clinical research focus in neuro-oncology over the past 5 years.

AREAS COVERED

Culmination of this work includes US FDA accelerated approval of bevacizumab for recurrent GBM and the completion of two placebo-controlled Phase III studies of bevacizumab for newly diagnosed GBM. A multitude of anti-angiogenics are in evaluation for neuro-oncology patients but none has thus far surpassed the therapeutic benefit of bevacizumab.

EXPERT OPINION

These agents demonstrate adequate safety and the majority of GBM patients derive benefit. Furthermore, their anti-permeability effect can substantially decrease tumor-associated edema leading to stable or improved neurologic function and quality of life. In particular, anti-angiogenics significantly prolong progression-free survival - a noteworthy achievement in the context of infiltrative and destructive brain tumors like GBM; however, in a manner analogous to other cancers, their impact on overall survival for GBM patients is modest at best. Despite substantial clinical research efforts, many fundamental questions regarding anti-angiogenic agents in brain tumor patients remain unanswered.

Biopsy versus resection for the management of low-grade gliomas

BACKGROUND

Low-grade gliomas (LGG) constitute a class of slow-growing primary brain neoplasms. Patients with clinically and radiographically suspected LGG have two initial surgical options, biopsy or resection. Biopsy can provide a histological diagnosis with minimal risk but does not offer a direct treatment. Resection may have additional benefits such as increasing survival and delaying recurrence, but is associated with a higher risk for surgical morbidity. There remains controversy about the role of biopsy versus resection and the relative clinical outcomes for the management of LGG.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the clinical effectiveness of biopsy compared to surgical resection in patients with a new lesion suspected to be a LGG.

SEARCH METHODS

The following electronic databases were searched: Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) (2012, Issue 11), MEDLINE (1950 to week 3 November 2012), EMBASE (1980 to Week 46 2012). Unpublished and grey literature including Metaregister, Physicians Data Query, www.controlled-trials.com/rct, www.clinicaltrials.gov, and www.cancer.gov/clinicaltrials were also queried for ongoing trials.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Patients of any age with a suspected intracranial LGG receiving biopsy or resection within a randomized clinical trial (RCT) or controlled clinical trial (CCT) were included. Patients with prior resections, radiation therapy, or chemotherapy for LGG were excluded. Outcome measures included overall survival (OS), progression free survival (PFS), functionally independent survival (FIS), adverse events, symptom control, and quality of life (QoL).

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

A total of 2764 citations were searched and critically analyzed for relevance. This effort was undertaken by three independent review authors.

MAIN RESULTS

No RCTs of biopsy or resection for LGG were identified. Twenty other studies were retrieved for analysis based on pre-specified selection criteria. Ten studies were retrospective or literature reviews. Three studies were prospective but were limited to tumor recurrence or the extent of resection. One study was a population-based parallel cohort and not an RCT. Four studies were RCTs, however patients were randomized with respect to varying radiotherapy regimens to assess timing and dose of radiation. One RCT was focused on high-grade gliomas and not LGG. One last RCT evaluated diffusion tensor imaging (DTI)-based neuro-navigation for surgical resection.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Currently there are no randomized clinical trials or controlled clinical trials available on which to base clinical decisions. Therefore, physicians must approach each case individually and weigh the risks and benefits of each intervention until further evidence is available. Future research could focus on randomized clinical trials to determine outcomes benefits for biopsy versus resection.

Validation of the M. D. Anderson Symptom Inventory multiple myeloma module

Background

The symptom burden associated with multiple myeloma (MM) is often severe. Presently, no instrument comprehensively assesses disease-related and treatment-related symptoms in patients with MM. We sought to validate a module of the M. D. Anderson Symptom Inventory (MDASI) developed specifically for patients with MM (MDASI-MM).

Methods

The MDASI-MM was developed with clinician input, cognitive debriefing, and literature review, and administered to 132 patients undergoing induction chemotherapy or stem cell transplantation. We demonstrated the MDASI-MM’s reliability (Cronbach α values); criterion validity (item and subscale correlations between the MDASI-MM and the European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Questionnaire (EORTC QLQ-C30) and the EORTC MM module (QLQ-MY20)), and construct validity (differences between groups by performance status). Ratings from transplant patients were examined to demonstrate the MDASI-MM’s sensitivity in detecting the acute worsening of symptoms post-transplantation.

Results

The MDASI-MM demonstrated excellent correlations with subscales of the 2 EORTC instruments, strong ability to distinguish clinically different patient groups, high sensitivity in detecting change in patients’ performance status, and high reliability. Cognitive debriefing confirmed that the MDASI-MM encompasses the breadth of symptoms relevant to patients with MM.

Conclusion

The MDASI-MM is a valid, reliable, comprehensive-yet-concise tool that is recommended as a uniform symptom assessment instrument for patients with MM.

Validation of the Mishel's uncertainty in illness scale-brain tumor form (MUIS-BT)

The Mishel uncertainty in illness scale (MUIS) has been used extensively with other solid tumors throughout the continuum of illness. Interventions to manage uncertainty have been shown to improve mood and symptoms. Patients with primary brain tumors (PBT) face uncertainty related to diagnosis, prognosis, symptoms and response. Modifying the MUIS to depict uncertainty in PBT patients will help define this issue and allow for interventions to improve quality of life. Initially, 15 experts reviewed the content validity of the MUIS-brain tumor form (MUIS-BT). Patients diagnosed with PBT then participated in the study to test validity and reliability. Data was collected at one point in time. Six out of 33 items in the original MUIS were modified to better describe PBT patients' uncertainty. 32 of the 186 patients in the second-stage of the study were newly diagnosed with PBT, 85 were on treatment, and 69 were followed-up without active treatment. The validity of the MUIS-BT was demonstrated by its correlations with mood states (P < 0.01) and symptom severity (P < 0.01) and interference (P < 0.01). The MUIS-BT measures four constructs: ambiguity/inconsistency, unpredictability of disease prognosis, unpredictability of symptoms and other triggers, and complexity. Cronbach's alphas of the four subscales were 0.90, 0.77, 0.75 and 0.65, respectively. The 33-item MUIS-BT demonstrated adequate select measures of validity and reliability in PBT patients. Based on this initial validation and significant correlations with symptom distress and mood states, further understanding of uncertainty and evaluation of measures to help manage patients' uncertainty can be evaluated which in turn may improve coping and quality of life.

Congruence of primary brain tumor patient and caregiver symptom report

BACKGROUND

Evaluating the severity of symptoms in patients with primary brain tumors (PBTs) is important in clinical care and research but may be difficult due to patient neurocognitive (NC) impairment. This study was conducted to evaluate the congruence of symptom reporting in patient and caregiver dyads, examining potential impact of NC impairment and Karnofsky performance status (KPS).

METHODS

PBT patients undergoing NC testing and their caregivers were included in this study. These dyads (paired patient and caregiver group) completed the MD Anderson Symptom Inventory-Brain Tumor Module prior to testing, and impairment was categorized based on NC test scores. Concordance and equivalency was then assessed using Bland-Altman analysis and 2 one-sided techniques.

RESULTS

A total of 115 dyads participated. Median patient and caregiver age was 49 and 51 years, respectively, and 63% of patients were male (73% female caregivers). Most patients had a good KPS (≥90, 66%) but were classified as NC impaired (58%). Caregiver's report of patient symptoms are congruent to the self-report of the patient. Equivalency between patient and caregiver report were found using prespecified confidence intervals. KPS group (good, ≥90; poor, ≤80) comparisons of equivalency indicated no significant differences in symptoms and interference reporting between dyads (good = 0.49, P > .05; and poor = 0.3, P > .05) overall, but there was a tendency for higher report by caregivers if the patients had a poor KPS.

CONCLUSIONS

Caregivers of PBT patients have similar assessments of symptom severity (highly congruent) with patient self-report regardless of NC function or KPS. These findings suggest that caregivers may serve as proxy report of symptoms for primary brain tumor patients.

Methodological issues in designing and reporting health-related quality of life in cancer clinical trials: the challenge of brain cancer studies

Health-related quality of life (HRQOL) and other types of patient-reported outcomes (PROs) are now important outcome measures in cancer clinical trials. A number of potentially less toxic drugs are available, and newer treatments can potentially offer cancer patients the possibility to be treated with less aggressive approaches, making PROs more critical in evaluating treatment effectiveness. However, assessing PROs in clinical trials requires careful consideration of a number of methodological issues. Robust methodology and accurate reporting of results are crucial to provide the scientific community and health care providers with a transparent message about the impact of a given drug or a new medical approach on patients' health status. This paper provides basic guidance on methodological issues to be addressed when designing and reporting HRQOL in clinical trials and presents examples of relevant brain cancer studies.

Clinical course of adult patients with ependymoma: results of the Adult Ependymoma Outcomes Project

BACKGROUND

Ependymomas are a rare tumor in adults, and there are limited reports of the clinical course, treatment, and current health status of patients.

METHODS

Patients with ependymoma completed an online survey regarding their diagnosis, treatment course, and current health status. Descriptive statistics were used to report the characteristics and degree of symptom severity. Correlations between demographic and clinical characteristics were explored with univariate analysis.

RESULTS

One hundred eighteen adults participated, and there were more women (n = 68) than men (n = 50). The median age was 48 years (range, 22-77 years). Fifty-nine participants (48%) reported that they had not been able to work since their diagnosis, and 31% reported receiving disability benefits. Patients who had been treated for spine tumors had symptoms longer than those who had been treated for brain lesions (chi-square statistic, 7.294; P = .026), and the majority had 3 symptoms before diagnosis. Most patients reported undergoing complete resection (brain lesions, 62%; spine tumors, 58%), and patients with spine tumors were less likely to have received additional treatment (chi-square statistic, 9.687; P = .008). The majority had not had a recurrence and reported consulting a neurosurgeon for surveillance. Despite having stable disease and not receiving active treatment, most patients described moderate to severe symptoms, including fatigue (44%), numbness/tingling (39%), pain (36%), and disturbed sleep (34%) overall. Brain lesions were associated with altered vision (25%), difficulty concentrating (25%), weakness (19%), irritability (19%), difficulty speaking (19%), and understanding (17%); and spine lesions were associated with extremity weakness (55%), sexual dysfunction (48%), radiating pain (37%), and change in bowel pattern (35%).

CONCLUSIONS

Treatment for adult patients with ependymoma is not standardized. Despite the low recurrence rate, patients reported significant symptoms and disability.

Response assessment in neuro-oncology (a report of the RANO group): assessment of outcome in trials of diffuse low-grade gliomas

Although low-grade gliomas (LGG) have a less aggressive course than do high-grade gliomas, the outcome of these tumours is ultimately fatal in most patients. Both the tumour and its treatment can cause disabling morbidity, particularly of cognitive functions. Because many patients present with seizures only, with no other signs and symptoms, maintenance of quality of life and function constitutes a particular challenge in LGG. The slow growth pattern of most LGG, and the rare radiological true responses despite a favourable clinical response to treatment, interferes with the use of progression-free survival as the primary endpoint in trials. Overall survival as an endpoint brings logistical challenges, and is sensitive to other non-investigational salvage therapies. Clinical trials for LGG need to consider other measures of patient benefit such as cognition, symptom burden, and seizure activity, to establish whether improved survival is reflected in prolonged wellbeing. This Review investigates clinical and imaging endpoints in trials of LGG, and provides response assessment in neuro-oncology (RANO) criteria for non-enhancing tumours. Additionally, other measures for patients with brain tumours that assess outcome are described. Similar considerations are relevant for trials of high-grade gliomas, although for these tumours survival is shorter and survival endpoints generally have more value than they do for LGG.

Clinical trial end points for high-grade glioma: the evolving landscape

To review the strengths and weaknesses of primary and auxiliary end points for clinical trials among patients with high-grade glioma (HGG). Recent advances in outcome for patients with newly diagnosed and recurrent HGG, coupled with the development of multiple promising therapeutics with myriad antitumor actions, have led to significant growth in the number of clinical trials for patients with HGG. Appropriate clinical trial design and the incorporation of optimal end points are imperative to efficiently and effectively evaluate such agents and continue to advance outcome. Growing recognition of limitations weakening the reliability of traditional clinical trial primary end points has generated increasing uncertainty of how best to evaluate promising therapeutics for patients with HGG. The phenomena of pseudoprogression and pseudoresponse have made imaging-based end points, including overall radiographic response and progression-free survival, problematic. Although overall survival is considered the "gold-standard" end point, recently identified active salvage therapies such as bevacizumab may diminish the association between presalvage therapy and overall survival. Finally, advances in imaging as well as the assessment of patient function and well being have strengthened interest in auxiliary end points assessing these aspects of patient care and outcome. Better appreciation of the strengths and limitations of primary end points will lead to more effective clinical trial strategies. Technical advances in imaging as well as improved survival for patients with HGG support the further development of auxiliary end points evaluating novel imaging approaches as well as measures of patient function and well being.

Measuring the symptom burden of lung cancer: the validity and utility of the lung cancer module of the M. D. Anderson Symptom Inventory

We conducted a study to establish the psychometric properties of a module of the M. D. Anderson Symptom Inventory (MDASI) developed specifically for patients with lung cancer (MDASI-LC). The MDASI measures 13 common "core" symptoms of cancer and its treatment. The MDASI-LC includes the 13 core MDASI symptom items and three lung cancer-specific items: coughing, constipation, and sore throat. MDASI-LC items were administered to three cohorts of patients with lung cancer undergoing either chemotherapy or chemoradiotherapy. Known-group validity and criterion (concurrent) validity of the MDASI-LC were evaluated using the Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status and the 12-item Short-Form Health Survey. The internal consistency and test-retest reliability of the module were adequate, with Cronbach coefficient α-values of 0.83 or higher for all module items and subscales. The sensitivity of the MDASI-LC to changes in patient performance status (disease progression) and to continuing cancer treatment (effects of treatment) was established. Cognitive debriefing of a subset of participants provided evidence for content validity and indicated that the MDASI core items and three additional lung cancer-specific items were clear, relevant to patients, and easy to understand; only two patients suggested additional symptom items. As expected, the item "sore throat" was sensitive only for patients receiving chemoradiotherapy. The MDASI-LC is a valid, reliable, and sensitive symptom-assessment instrument whose use can enhance clinical studies of symptom status in patients with lung cancer and epidemiological and prevalence studies of symptom severity across various cancer types.

The impact of symptom interference using the MD Anderson Symptom Inventory-Brain Tumor Module (MDASI-BT) on prediction of recurrence in primary brain tumor patients

BACKGROUND

Tumor grade, age, extent of resection, and performance status are established prognostic factors for survival in primary brain tumor (PBT) patients. Development of disease-related symptoms is predictive of tumor recurrence in other cancers but has not been reported in the PBT population.

METHODS

A cross-sectional sample of 294 PBT patients participated. Progression was based on the radiologist report of the magnetic resonance imaging (MRI). The relation of clinical variables (age, extent of resection, tumor grade, and Karnofsky performance status [KPS]) and MD Anderson Symptom Inventory-Brain Tumor Module (MDASI-BT) mean symptom and interference subscales with progression was examined using logistic regression.

RESULTS

The study enrolled more men (60%, n = 175); median age was 46 years. The majority had less than a gross total resection (n = 186, 64%), and a good KPS (KPS ≥ 90) (N = 208). The majority had a grade 3 or 4 tumor (n = 199) and 24% of patients had recurrence. Tumor grade and activity-related interference were significantly related to progression. Patients with tumor grade 4 were 2.4 times more likely to have recurrence (95% CI, 1.2-5.; P < .015). Patients with significant (ratings of ≥ 5) activity-related interference were 3.8 times more likely to have recurrence (95% CI, 2.14-6.80; P < .001). Mean activity-related score was 4.8 for those with progression on MRI and 2.2 for those with stable disease.

CONCLUSIONS

Significant activity-related interference and tumor grade were associated with recurrence but not KPS, age, or extent of resection. These results provide preliminary support for the use of symptom interference in assessment of disease status. Because the authors used a cross-sectional sample, future studies evaluating change over time are needed.

Risk factors for fatigue severity in primary brain tumor patients

BACKGROUND

In addition to neurologic symptoms, fatigue is commonly reported in patients with primary brain tumors during radiation therapy and in long-term survivors of low-grade brain tumors. Other factors have not been explored. The aim of this study was to identify demographic and clinical factors that predict fatigue severity and to evaluate the association of fatigue with other symptoms throughout the disease trajectory.

METHODS

Two hundred one patients with primary brain tumors completed the M. D. Anderson Symptom Inventory-Brain Tumor Module and a demographic checklist. Clinical data, including treatment, tumor grade, and performance status, were also collected. Correlations among fatigue and other recorded symptoms were evaluated. Logistic regression modeling was performed to evaluate factors associated with fatigue severity.

RESULTS

Fatigue severity was associated with symptoms including pain, drowsiness, distress, difficulty sleeping, and weakness as well as overall symptom severity and interference. Poor performance status (Karnofsky scale) (odds ratio [OR], 5.73; P = .001), female sex (OR, 2.48; P = .005), and disease status (OR, 2.20; P = .013) were the strongest predictors of fatigue. Severity of fatigue for women was primarily predicted by disease status (OR, 3.33; P = .01) For men, antidepressant use (OR, 4.43; P = .013) in addition to opioids (OR, 3.46; P = .017) and performance status (OR, 12.47; P = .0001) predicted fatigue severity.

CONCLUSIONS

Fatigue should not be considered a solitary symptom with 1 root cause, but a complex symptom related to the severity of other symptoms and potentially having various etiologies. Future studies should consider these factors in planning interventions and assessing response.

Review on quality of life issues in patients with primary brain tumors

Health-related quality of life (HRQOL) has become an important outcome measure in clinical trials in primary brain tumor (i.e., glioma) patients, because they have an incurable disease. HRQOL is assessed using self-reported, validated questionnaires, addressing physical, psychological, emotional, and social issues. In addition to generic HRQOL instruments, disease-specific questionnaires have been developed, including for brain tumor patients. For the analysis and interpretation of HRQOL measurements, low compliance and missing data are methodological challenges. HRQOL in glioma patients may be negatively affected by the disease itself as well as by side effects of treatment. But treatment with surgery, radiotherapy, and chemotherapy may improve patient functioning and HRQOL, in addition to extending survival. Although HRQOL has prognostic significance in brain tumor patients, it is not superior to well-known clinical parameters, such as age and performance status. In clinical practice, assessing HRQOL may be helpful in the communication between doctor and patient and may facilitate treatment decisions.

Validation and application of a module of the M. D. Anderson Symptom Inventory for measuring multiple symptoms in patients with gastrointestinal cancer (the MDASI-GI)

BACKGROUND

The M. D. Anderson Symptom Inventory (MDASI) was developed as a brief yet comprehensive tool to assess patient-reported symptom severity and interference in patients with cancer. The authors report the development of an MDASI module for use in patients with gastrointestinal (GI) cancer (the MDASI-GI).

METHODS

Patients with GI cancer (N = 184) participated in module development and validation. The process included: 1) generating GI-specific candidate items with input from GI oncologists and from qualitative interviews with patients and adding those items to the core MDASI for testing; 2) dropping candidate GI items that lacked sensitivity; 3) validating the psychometric properties (validity, reliability, sensitivity) of the resulting MDASI-GI; and 4) conducting cognitive debriefing interviews with patients to confirm the questionnaire's ease of comprehension, relevance, and acceptability.

RESULTS

Five GI-specific symptom items (constipation, diarrhea, difficulty swallowing, change in taste, and feeling bloated) were added to the original 19 MDASI symptom and interference items to form the MDASI-GI. Sixty-one percent of the sample had 1 or more moderate-to-severe symptom(s) (>or=5 on a severity scale from 0 to 10). Cronbach alpha values were .80 and .87 for symptom severity items and interference items, respectively. Known-group validity (sensitivity) was supported by the ability of the MDASI-GI to detect significant differences in symptom and interference levels according to performance status (P < .001). Cognitive debriefing demonstrated that, for patients, the MDASI-GI was an easy-to-use and understandable tool.

CONCLUSIONS

The current results indicated that the MDASI-GI is a valid, reliable, and concise tool for measuring symptom severity and interference with function in patients with GI cancer.

Symptom cluster patterns during the first year after diagnosis with cancer

CONTEXT

Research about clusters of symptoms in oncology is an emerging field of study. However, there is still conceptual confusion about clusters of symptoms and little agreement across studies.

OBJECTIVES

The aim of the present study was to explore clusters of symptoms over time in a large heterogeneous group of patients with cancer and thereby contribute to the conceptual and methodological debate in this research area.

METHODS

A longitudinal design was used to assess symptoms in cancer patients over four time points during the first year after diagnosis using the Memorial Symptom Assessment Scale. The study recruited 143 patients from five U.K. cancer centers and provided 504 symptom assessments at the beginning of treatment and 3, 6, and 12 months later.

RESULTS

Six symptom clusters were identified at the first assessment, which were maintained across the assessment points with slight variations. These included gastrointestinal, hand/foot, body image, respiratory, nutritional, and emotional symptom clusters. The behavior of the clusters over time highlighted the complexities of symptom cluster assessment and the dynamic relationships between symptoms. Frequency, severity, and distress from symptoms were significantly higher (up to 75% higher) in patients who experienced a cluster of symptoms than in the overall sample, suggesting that symptom assessments in unselected patients underestimate the symptom burden in subgroups of patients.

CONCLUSION

We propose attention to symptom clusters that are stable across time and include core or defining symptoms within the cluster, and we further discuss the usefulness and applicability of conceptual and methodological criteria used in this study for future symptom cluster research.

Reliability and validity of the M. D. Anderson Symptom Inventory-Spine Tumor Module

OBJECT

Tumors involving the spine have unique associated neurological symptoms. The occurrence of spine-related symptoms has been shown to predict treatment course and survival in several studies conducted in patients with solid tumors and consequent spinal cord dysfunction. Currently, no instrument that measures both neurological and cancer-related symptoms exists for patients with spine tumors. The objective of this study was to develop a reliable and valid self-reporting instrument for patients with spine tumors.

METHODS

Patients with diagnosed tumors involving the spine (both primary and metastatic) participated in this study. Data collection tools included a patient-completed demographic data sheet, an investigator-completed clinician checklist, and the core M. D. Anderson Symptom Inventory to which were added 16 neurological symptoms (M. D. Anderson Symptom Inventory-Spine Tumor Module [MDASI-SP]). The authors evaluated the reliability and validity of the MDASI-SP in patients with spine tumors.

RESULTS

One hundred twenty-six patients participated in the study. Participants were primarily white (73%) males (53%) with metastatic spine tumors (76%). They ranged in age from 18-81 years (median 56 years). Cognitive debriefing of the MDASI-SP was conducted showing the instrument was clear, concise, and easily understood by patients. The most severe core symptoms were pain, fatigue, numbness, disturbed sleep, and distress. The most severe spine module symptoms were spine pain, numbness, weakness in the legs, neck stiffness, and changes in bowel or sexual function. The mean symptom severity of items as well as a cluster analysis was used to reduce the number of total items to 18 (5 spine module items). Regression analysis showed that 57.4% of the variability in symptom interference with daily function was explained by the final instrument. Factor analysis was performed to determine the underlying constructs being evaluated by the symptom items. The 18-item MDASI-SP measures 4 underlying constructs including a disease, an autonomic, a constitutional/treatment, and an emotional factor. The internal consistency (reliability) of the MDASI-SP was 0.946, and the instrument was sensitive to disease severity based on the Karnofsky Performance Scale (KPS). The mean symptom severity was 1.52 for those with good KPS scores (80-100) versus 2.46 for those with poor scores (p < 0.01). The instrument was also sensitive to neurological status according to the Frankel grade (p < 0.001) and inpatient status (p < 0.01).

CONCLUSIONS

The 18-item MDASI-SP demonstrated validity and reliability in patients with spine tumors as a composite measure of disease-related symptoms. This instrument can be used to describe symptom occurrence throughout the disease trajectory and to evaluate interventions designed for symptom management.

Symptom experience in patients with primary brain tumours: a longitudinal exploratory study

PURPOSE

This study was undertaken to further understand the symptom experience and the impact of symptoms in daily life in people treated for brain tumours.

METHODS

A qualitative prospective longitudinal design was used with 9 people who were interviewed over 4 time points (soon after diagnosis, 3 months, 6 months and 12-months post-diagnosis), providing 21 interviews in total.

RESULTS

Key issues for these participants were ongoing fatigue, memory loss and inability to drive. Fatalistic views about the outcomes of their disease were the norm. Participants made adjustments to their lives to accommodate their functional limitations. These included making home alterations, introducing regular exercise to their lives and using complementary therapies. Their expectations did not always match with the reality of the situation, which made several participants angry and dissatisfied with health care professionals.

CONCLUSIONS

Issues of quality of life are paramount in this group of poor prognosis patients, therefore, health professionals should provide preparatory information to patients on what to expect from the illness and its treatments. Health professionals should also assist patients to manage debilitating symptoms such as fatigue and cognitive impairment.

Multivariate methods to identify cancer-related symptom clusters

Multivariate methods are required to assess the interrelationships among multiple, concurrent symptoms. We examined the conceptual and contextual appropriateness of commonly used multivariate methods for cancer symptom cluster identification. From 178 publications identified in an online database search of Medline, CINAHL, and PsycINFO, limited to articles published in English, 10 years prior to March 2007, 13 cross-sectional studies met the inclusion criteria. Conceptually, common factor analysis (FA) and hierarchical cluster analysis (HCA) are appropriate for symptom cluster identification, not principal component analysis. As a basis for new directions in symptom management, FA methods are more appropriate than HCA. Principal axis factoring or maximum likelihood factoring, the scree plot, oblique rotation, and clinical interpretation are recommended approaches to symptom cluster identification.

The relationships between depression and brain tumors

Depression is a common complication/co-morbidity in patients with brain tumors. Better understanding of the relationships between brain tumors and depression should lead to improvement in patient care. This paper reviews these relationships in order to direct further study to improve patient care, and hopefully, outcome. Both anatomic and physiological perturbations in the brain are likely involved in the associations between depression and brain tumors. Tumor treatments are also associated with depression. Depression has a significant negative impact on outcome in brain tumor patients. The role of treatment of depression in brain tumor patients has been scantly studied. Further investigation directed to these areas of knowledge deficit should benefit depressed patients with brain tumors.

Quality of life in adults with brain tumors: current knowledge and future directions

Quality of life is an important area of clinical neurooncology that is increasingly relevant as survivorship increases and as patients experience potential morbidities associated with new therapies. This review of quality-of-life studies in the brain tumor population aims to summarize what is currently known about quality of life in patients with both low-grade and high-grade tumors and suggest how we may use this knowledge to direct future research. To date, reports on quality of life have been primarily qualitative and focused on specific symptoms such as fatigue, sleep disorders, and cognitive dysfunction, as well as some symptom clusters. However, the increasing interest in exploring quality of life as a primary end point for cancer therapy has established a need for prospective, controlled studies to assess baseline and serial quality-of-life parameters in brain tumor patients in order to plan and evaluate appropriate and timely interventions for their symptoms.

Unmet supportive care needs and interest in services among patients with a brain tumour and their carers

OBJECTIVES

To assess the supportive care needs and interest in related services among brain tumour patients and their carers and to compare the level of unmet needs to other cancer populations.

METHODS

A cross-sectional survey was posted to 363 households who were subscribed to the Queensland Cancer Fund Brain Tumour Support Service in 2005. Overall, 75 patients and 70 carers (response rate 29.8%) returned completed questionnaires. Measures were the Supportive Care Needs Survey (SCNS-34) and a brain tumour specific subscale for patients and carers, as well as the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS).

RESULTS

Patients most frequently reported requiring support to overcome fatigue, uncertainty about the future and not being able to do the things they used to do. Carers wanted help dealing with fears about the patients mental or physical deterioration, with the impact caring had on their own life, and with reducing stress in the patient's life. Among patients, 30% reported anxious mood and 17% depressed mood on the HADS, while corresponding numbers for carers were 40% and 10%, respectively. Patients and/or carers with higher than average supportive care needs expressed greater interest in support services, such as those to improve physical activity, using community services more effectively and to manage stress. Greater emotional distress predicted higher supportive care needs (e.g. odds ratio depressed patients=2.11; (95% confidence interval 1.10-4.03), while no association was detected between patients' or carers' demographic characteristics, or patients' self-reported medical status and higher than average supportive care needs.

CONCLUSION

The level of unmet supportive care needs observed among patients with a brain tumour and their carers is similar to that observed among cancer populations with metastatic disease.

PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS

Interventions for this group should integrate lifestyle, coping support, and neuropsychological rehabilitation.

Measuring head and neck cancer symptom burden: The development and validation of the M. D. Anderson symptom inventory, head and neck module

BACKGROUND

The aim of this study was to develop and validate a symptom inventory for patients with head and neck cancer and to assess the occurrence and severity of symptoms, the overall symptom burden, and the interference the symptoms cause in daily life.

METHODS

Items were generated from a comprehensive literature review, our prior work, and focus groups with head and neck cancer patients, symptom researchers, and a multidisciplinary group of head and neck cancer health care workers. We selected 11 provisional head and neck cancer-specific items for addition to the core M. D. Anderson Symptom Inventory (MDASI), and conducted a cross-sectional validation study among patients with head and neck cancer.

RESULTS

Construct validity was established using principal axis factoring with direct oblimin rotation, and tests of concurrent and known-groups validity were conducted. Two items were dropped because of low severity scores and low frequency of complaint, leaving 9 final head and neck cancer-specific items. The coefficient alpha reliabilities were 0.88, 0.83, and 0.92 for the 13 core MDASI items, the 9 head and neck cancer-specific items, and the 6 interference items, respectively. The most prevalent severe symptoms were problems with mucus, mouth/throat sores, tasting food, difficulty with chewing or swallowing, dry mouth, pain, and fatigue.

CONCLUSIONS

The M. D. Anderson Symptom Inventory-Head and Neck (MDASI-HN) is a reliable and valid instrument to measure head and neck cancer symptom burden, and the interference symptoms cause in the major aspects of a patient's daily life. A subset of specifically distressing symptoms was identified, many of which are not included in commonly used head and neck cancer quality of life instruments.

Net clinical benefit: Functional endpoints in brain tumor clinical trials

Primary brain tumors are associated with a poor prognosis and recognized impact on physical and neurologic function. In an effort to improve poor prognosis, novel therapeutic approaches have been pursued. The impact of therapy on function has not been fully evaluated in the past, with clinical trials focused on traditional survival endpoints. Therapies to date have been associated with incremental improvements in survival that may not have been associated with improvement in functional status. Methods for evaluating this impact include health-related quality of life symptom burden and evaluation of neurocognitive function. Each approach has associated benefits and limitations based on the type of treatment and the potential impact on functional status. An essential component of trial design evaluating functional endpoints is the development of clear hypotheses, specific aims, and predefined metrics of functional change related to each measure. This paper reviews these three approaches and discusses their potential use in evaluation of therapies for patients with primary brain tumors.