Quality of life as a clinical trial endpoint: determining the appropriate interval for repeated assessments in patients with advanced lung cancer

Quality of life after VATS lung resection and SABR for early-stage non-small cell lung cancer: A longitudinal study

INTRODUCTION

Video-assisted thoracoscopic (VATS) lung resection is the recommended curative treatment for early-stage non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). Patients considered at high surgical risk, are treated with stereotactic ablative body radiotherapy (SABR) as a lower morbidity alternative. This study aims to investigate the impact of SABR and VATS resection on patients' quality of life (QoL) over the first year after treatment.

METHODS

A prospective longitudinal observational study recruiting early-stage NSCLC patients from a single UK centre. QoL was assessed with EORTC QLQ-C30 and Lung Cancer Module LC13 at baseline, 6 weeks and 3, 6 and 12 months post-treatment.

RESULTS

From 01.03.2017 till 01.03.2018, 244/281 patients (87%) consented to participate, 225 (95 SABR and 130 VATS) were included in the analysis. SABR patients had significantly worse baseline QoL scores than VATS patients, even after adjusting for preoperative clinical factors (C-30 Global Health mean: SABR = 53.8, VATS = 71.2; Physical Functioning mean: SABR = 57, VATS = 82.2; Fatigue mean: SABR = 43.5, VATS = 23.7; C30 Dyspnea mean: SABR = 49.5, VATS = 26.2). During the 12 months post SABR treatment patients' QoL scores remained stable. In the VATS group, there was a deterioration 6-weeks after treatment in Role, Physical, Social Functions, Global Health, Fatigue, C30/LC13 Dyspnoea, Pain, Appetite loss, Constipation, LC13 Pain in Chest and Arms. The scores improved by 12 months without reaching the preoperative values.

CONCLUSIONS

Although QoL outcomes for SABR and VATS are not comparable due to different medical selection criteria, the QoL impact of the two treatments during the first year showed different trends which will inform patients and clinicians during decision-making discussions.

Patients' views of routine quality of life assessment following a diagnosis of early-stage non-small cell lung cancer

OBJECTIVES

There is an increasing interest in the quality of life (QoL) evaluation following video-assisted thoracoscopic anatomical lung resection or stereotactic ablative body radiotherapy for early-stage non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). A qualitative interview study was conducted to gain insight into the optimal methods of assessing and discussing QoL in clinical practice.

METHODS

A prospective observational longitudinal study of patients with early-stage NSCLC was conducted where repeated QoL measures were administered either online or on paper. A subset of participants was invited for qualitative interviews after the 6-month assessment or at the end of the study. The semi-structured interviews were transcribed verbatim and thematically analysed.

RESULTS

Twenty-three patients were interviewed. Generally, patients were content with recruitment and data collection procedures. Most opted to complete the assessments on paper instead of online; this choice was influenced by the level of technology literacy. Some found the questionnaires too generic to reflect their experiences. Barriers to questionnaire completion were mostly practical, and many acknowledged benefits of QoL assessment including allowing them to express problems and health issues, and following changes over time. Generally, participants would like to discuss QoL results during clinical consultations, but reported this rarely happened.

CONCLUSIONS

Lung cancer patient interviews confirm the acceptability of repeated QoL assessments, but online data capture is limited. Patients highlight the importance of discussing QoL aspects with their clinical team. Future strategies are needed to optimize the routine collection of patient-reported outcomes in clinical practice.

An Individualized, Interactive, and Advance Care Planning Intervention Promotes Transitions in Prognostic Awareness States Among Terminally Ill Cancer Patients in Their Last Six Months-A Secondary Analysis of a Randomized Controlled Trial

CONTEXT/OBJECTIVES

To examine whether an advance care planning intervention randomized controlled trial facilitates terminally ill cancer patients' transitions to accurate prognostic awareness (PA) and the time spent in the accurate PA state in patients' last six months.

METHODS

Participants (N = 460) were randomized 1:1 to experimental (interactive intervention tailored to participants' readiness for advance care planning/prognostic information) and control (symptom management education) arms with similar formats. PA was categorized into four states: 1) unknown and not wanting to know; 2) unknown but wanting to know; 3) inaccurate awareness; and 4) accurate awareness. Intervention effectiveness in the two outcomes was evaluated by intention-to-treat analysis with multistate Markov modeling (effect size ≥0.2 as minimal clinically important difference).

RESULTS

The final sample constituted 188 and 184 experimental arm and control arm participants who died and were repeatedly assessed, respectively. Experimental arm participants in States 1-3 had a higher probability of shifting to accurate PA (23.0%-35.4% vs. 15.2%-26.2%) than control arm participants, and all effect sizes met the minimal clinically important difference criterion (effect sizes 0.22-0.49). In their last six months, experimental arm participants spent more time in States 3 and 4 (0.18 vs. 0.08 and 2.94 vs. 2.38 months, respectively) but less time in States 1 and 2 (2.70 vs. 3.19 and 0.18 vs. 0.36 months, respectively) (effect sizes 0.11-0.19).

CONCLUSION

Our intervention meaningfully facilitated participants' transition toward accurate PA and more time spent in the accurate PA state (State 4). Our intervention can help health care professionals foster cancer patients' accurate PA earlier in the terminal illness trajectory to make informed end-of-life care decisions tailored to their readiness for prognostic information.

A randomized trial of the electronic Lung Cancer Symptom Scale for quality-of-life assessment in patients with advanced non-small-cell lung cancer

Introduction

Improving health-related quality of life (hrqol) is a key goal of systemic therapy in advanced lung cancer, although routine assessment remains challenging. We analyzed the impact of a real-time electronic hrqol tool, the electronic Lung Cancer Symptom Scale (elcss-ql), on palliative care (pc) referral rates, patterns of chemotherapy treatment, and use of other supportive interventions in patients with advanced non-small-cell lung cancer (nsclc) receiving first-line chemotherapy.

Methods

Patients with advanced nsclc starting first-line chemotherapy were randomized to their oncologist receiving or not receiving their elcss-ql data before each clinic visit. Patients completed the elcss-ql at baseline, before each chemotherapy cycle, and at subsequent follow-up visits until disease progression. Prospective data about the pc referral rate, hrqol, and use of other supportive interventions were collected.

Results

For the 95 patients with advanced nsclc who participated, oncologists received real-time elcss-ql data for 44 (elcss-ql arm) and standard clinical assessment alone for 51 (standard arm). The primary endpoint, the pc referral rate, was numerically higher, but statistically similar, for patients in the elcss-ql and standard arms. The hrqol scores over time were not significantly different between the two study arms.

Conclusions

The elcss-ql is feasible as a tool for use in routine clinical practice, although no statistically significant effect of its use was demonstrated in our study. Improving access to supportive care through the collection of patient-reported outcomes and hrqol should be an important component of care for patients with advanced lung cancer.

Extent and Determinants of Terminally Ill Cancer Patients' Concordance Between Preferred and Received Life-Sustaining Treatment States: An Advance Care Planning Randomized Trial in Taiwan

CONTEXT

Promoting patient value-concordant end-of-life care is a priority in health care systems but has rarely been examined in randomized clinical trials.

OBJECTIVES

To examine the effectiveness of an advance care planning intervention in facilitating concordance between cancer patients' preferred and received life-sustaining treatment (LST) states and to explore modifiable factors facilitating or impeding such concordance.

METHODS

Terminal cancer patients (N = 460) were randomly assigned 1:1 to the experimental and control arms of a randomized clinical trial, with 430 deceased participants comprising the final sample. States of preferred LSTs (cardiopulmonary resuscitation, intensive care unit care, chest compression, intubation with mechanical ventilation, intravenous nutrition, and nasogastric tube feeding) and LSTs received in the last month were examined by hidden Markov modeling. Concordance and its modifiable predictors were evaluated by kappa and multivariate logistic regression, respectively.

RESULTS

We identified three LST-preference states (uniformly preferring LSTs, rejecting LSTs except intravenous nutrition support, and mixed LST preferences) and three received LST states (uniformly receiving LSTs, received intravenous nutrition only, and selectively receiving LSTs). Concordance was not significantly higher in the experimental than the control arm (kappa [95% CI]: 0.126 [0.032, 0.221] vs. 0.050 [-0.028, 0.128]; arm difference: odds ratio [95% CI]: 1.008 [0.675, 1.5001]). Preferred-received LST-state concordance was facilitated by accurate prognostic awareness, better quality of life, and more depressive symptoms, whereas concordance was impeded by more anxiety symptoms.

CONCLUSIONS

Our advance care planning intervention did not facilitate concordance between terminally ill cancer patients' preferred and received LST states, but patient value-concordant end-of-life care may be facilitated by interventions to cultivate accurate prognostic awareness, improve quality of life, support depressive patients, and clarify anxious patients' overexpectations of LST efficacy.

An Individualized, Interactive Intervention Promotes Terminally Ill Cancer Patients' Prognostic Awareness and Reduces Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation Received in the Last Month of Life: Secondary Analysis of a Randomized Clinical Trial

CONTEXT/OBJECTIVE

Half of advanced cancer patients do not have accurate prognostic awareness (PA). However, few randomized clinical trials (RCTs) have focused on facilitating patients' PA to reduce their life-sustaining treatments at end of life (EOL). To address these issues, we conducted a double-blinded RCT on terminally ill cancer patients.

METHODS

Experimental-arm participants received an individualized, interactive intervention tailored to their readiness for advanced care planning and prognostic information. Control-arm participants received a symptom-management educational treatment. Effectiveness of our intervention in facilitating accurate PA and reducing life-sustaining treatments received, two secondary RCT outcomes, was evaluated by intention-to-treat analysis using multivariate logistic regression.

RESULTS

Participants (N = 460) were randomly assigned 1:1 to experimental and control arms, each with 215 participants in the final sample. Referring to 151-180 days before death, experimental-arm participants had significantly higher odds of accurate PA than control-arm participants 61-90, 91-120, and 121-150 days before death (adjusted odds ratio [95% CI]: 2.04 [1.16-3.61], 1.94 [1.09-3.45], and 1.93 [1.16-3.21], respectively), but not one to 60 days before death. Experimental-arm participants with accurate PA were significantly less likely than control-arm participants without accurate PA to receive cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) (0.16 [0.03-0.73]), but not less likely to receive intensive care unit care and mechanical ventilation in their last month.

CONCLUSION

Our intervention facilitated cancer patients' accurate PA early in their dying trajectory, reducing the risk of receiving CPR in the last month. Health care professionals should cultivate cancer patients' accurate PA early in the terminal-illness trajectory to allow them sufficient time to make informed EOL-care decisions to reduce CPR at EOL.

Cancer symptom response as an oncology clinical trial end point

Introduction

A critical challenge in oncology is interpreting clinical trial results to inform clinical decision making. Clinical trials typically focus on overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS) as primary endpoints, which do not reflect early signs of meaningful patient benefit or harm. Cancer symptom response (CSR) can provide information about early treatment response, and studies show that CSR predicts long-term health outcomes.

Areas covered

CSR requires careful consideration of its measurement and interpretation to facilitate integration into clinical practice. We describe considerations for the evaluation, analysis, and interpretation of CSR in clinical trials. To illustrate the potential clinical value of CSR, we performed a retrospective analysis of a three-arm randomized cooperative-group clinical trial.

Expert commentary

Evaluation of CSR provides a meaningful assessment of early cancer treatment effects. It can act as an early signal of disease progression and death and thus can identify which patients with stable disease will have a more favorable prognosis. Future research will include development of methods for more accurate assessment of CSR, reduction of the number of symptoms used as signals for disease progression or survival by tumor type, and statistical methods that effectively correct for missing data and informative censoring.

The use of EORTC measures in daily clinical practice-A synopsis of a newly developed manual

Cancer has increasingly become a chronic condition and the routine collection of patient-reported outcomes (PROs) like quality of life is widely recommended for clinical practice. Nonetheless, the successful implementation of PROs is still a major challenge, although common barriers to and facilitators of their beneficial use are well known. To support health care professionals and other stakeholders in the implementation of the EORTC PRO measures, the EORTC Quality of Life Group provides guidance on issues considered important for their use in daily clinical practice. Herein, we present an outline of the newly developed "'Manual for the use of EORTC measures in daily clinical practice", covering the following issues: * a rationale for using EORTC measures in routine care *selection of EORTC measures, timing of assessments, scoring and presentation of results * aspects of a strategic implementation * electronic data assessment and telemonitoring, and * further use of EORTC measures and ethical considerations. Next to an extensive overview of currently available literature, the manual specifically focuses on knowledge about EORTC measures to give evidence-based recommendations whenever possible and to encourage readers and end-users of EORTC measures to contribute to further needed high-quality research. The manual will be accessible on the EORTC Quality of Life Group website's homepage and will be periodically updated to take into account any new knowledge due to medical, technical, regulatory and scientific advances.

[Influence of tobacco smoking on quality of life in patients with lung cancer]

Tobacco smoking is the leading cause of lung cancer. This cancer is the most specific indicator of the effects of tobacco on health. Regardless of the type of lung cancer and the stage of the disease, continued smoking has a negative impact on its development and its treatment. For this reason, smoking cessation is an essential step in the management of patients with lung cancer who smoke. It has been clearly demonstrated that quality of life is worse in smokers than in non-smokers. The aim of this general review is to study the relationship between tobacco use and quality of life specifically in patients with lung cancer. Among the twelve studies selected, six of them clearly demonstrate a deleterious effect of continued smoking tobacco or a beneficial effect of smoking cessation on the quality of life in patients with lung cancer. These findings should lead clinicians to offer support to smokers with lung cancer in order to assist them to quit smoking.

Can a computerized format replace a paper form in PRO and HRQL evaluation? Psychometric testing of the computer-assisted LCSS instrument (eLCSS-QL)

PURPOSE

This trial assessed the ability to enhance health-related quality of life (HRQL) and patient-reported outcome (PRO) evaluation in trials and patient management using computer assistance with a handheld device, called a personal digital assistant. The study assessed ease of use and psychometric properties of this approach, comparing the Lung Cancer Symptom Scale (LCSS) paper form with the electronic (eLCSS-QL). Objectives were to: (1) measure completion times; (2) evaluate acceptability by patients, nurses, and physicians; (3) determine the correlation of the eLCSS-QL with the paper version; and (4) determine the feasibility of using a shorter visual analogue scale (VAS) in the electronic version.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Patients were entered at 12 COMET clinics. All had: (a) stage III or IV non-small cell lung cancer, (b) Karnofsky performance status (KPS)  ≥  60, (c) no prior chemotherapy, and (d) received initial courses of docetaxel + platinum. Of the 148 patients enrolled, characteristics were: men, 57 %; median, KPS 80 %; and median age, 67 years. Of these, 131 patients completed the evaluation form.

RESULTS

The eLCSS-QL had excellent acceptance by patients, nurses, and physicians. Patients required 2.2 min (mean) to complete the eLCSS-QL. Reliability coefficients using Cronbach's alpha were high for the paper (0.84) and electronic (0.88) versions. The correlation coefficient between forms was high (0.92). The length of the VAS on the handheld pc (53 mm versus 100 mm on the paper format) resulted in nearly identical scores.

CONCLUSIONS

The high acceptance rate by patients and professionals, the rapid completion time, ease of use, and strong psychometric properties confirm that the electronic LCSS (eLCSS-QL) is practical for use in trials and patient management. This study indicates that computer assistance helps overcome barriers associated with evaluating HRQL and PROs.

A psychometric analysis of quality of life tools in lung cancer patients who smoke

Lung cancer is the leading cause of cancer death for both men and women in the United States. Patient quality of life (QOL) prior to cancer treatment is known to be a strong predictor of survival and toleration of treatment toxicities. A lung cancer patient's self-assessment of QOL is highly valued among clinicians as it guides treatment-related decisions and impacts clinical outcomes. Smokers are known to report a lower QOL. Limited research has been conducted on QOL outcomes in lung cancer patients who continue to smoke. To assess QOL, a reliable and valid QOL measure specific to lung cancer is required. The functional assessment of cancer therapy-lung cancer (FACT-L) and lung cancer symptom scale (LCSS) are instruments that specifically examine QOL among lung cancer patients. The LCSS is a focused QOL instrument that includes physical and functional domains of QOL and disease symptomatology. The FACT-L is a broader QOL instrument that includes physical, functional, social and emotional domains and disease symptomatology. Both are psychometrically valid and are widely used in the literature, but have not been exclusively evaluated in smokers. Furthermore, there is no 'gold standard' instrument since there has never been a correlation study to compare estimates of reliability and validity between these instruments. The purpose of this study is to report the internal consistency and convergence validity of the FACT-L and the LCSS among newly diagnosed lung cancer patients who smoke. This data were collected and analyzed from a larger study examining smoking behavior among newly diagnosed lung cancer patients (n=51). Descriptive statistics were calculated on the FACT-L and LCSS scores, internal consistency was assessed by estimating Cronbach's alpha coefficients, and Pearson correlation coefficients were estimated between the two scales. Internal consistency coefficients demonstrated good reliability for both scales, and the two instruments demonstrated a strong correlation, suggesting good convergence validity. Either of these instruments are appropriate measures for QOL in lung cancer patients who smoke. Given the conceptual difference between the two instruments, it is important to carefully consider the research aims when selecting the appropriate QOL measurement instrument.

Lung Cancer Symptom Scale outcomes in relation to standard efficacy measures: an analysis of the phase III study of pemetrexed versus docetaxel in advanced non-small cell lung cancer

BACKGROUND

Patients with advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) require care that emphasizes symptom palliation in addition to extending survival. The low response rates and minimal survival gains observed in second-line studies underscore the need to assess treatment efficacy with symptomatic end points.

METHODS

To characterize the relationship between patient-reported health-related quality of life outcomes and efficacy end points (tumor response, overall survival [OS], progression-free survival [PFS]), retrospective analyses were performed on Lung Cancer Symptom Scale (LCSS) data (n = 488) from the phase III study of pemetrexed (500 mg/m2 once every 3 weeks) versus docetaxel (75 mg/m2 once every 3 weeks) in advanced NSCLC. The LCSS data consisted of patient ratings of six symptoms and three summary items using 100-mm visual analogue scales. The mean maximum improvement for each item was categorized according to best tumor response, with statistical analyses based on a two-factor interaction model (with treatment arm and response group as fixed factors). Additional analyses pooled data between treatment arms and examined correlation (nonparametric and Pearson's) of time to first worsening of symptoms (TWS) with PFS and OS.

RESULTS

All LCSS items, except hemoptysis, showed mean maximum improvement over baseline for responders and patients with stable disease (p < 0.01), with greater improvement associated with response. Median TWS for each LCSS item ranged between 2.3 months (fatigue) and 7.0 months (cough), with correlation between TWS and PFS and OS (all p values </=0.017).

CONCLUSIONS

For most NSCLC patients, second-line chemotherapy provides symptomatic improvement that is linked to standard efficacy outcomes. Health-related quality of life data provides complementary efficacy information that can guide routine clinical practice.

Prevalence and Predictors of Symptoms in the Terminal Stage of Lung Cancer

BACKGROUND

There is little knowledge concerning the prevalence and predictors of symptoms in the terminal stage of lung cancer.

METHODS

We examined, retrospectively, all cases of lung cancer diagnosed from 1990 to 1996 in a defined hospital area in Norway. All medical records from general practitioners, nursing homes, and hospitals were investigated. A total of 271 cases were diagnosed, and 247 of 253 deaths (98%) were analyzed.

RESULTS

In the terminal 8 weeks, pain was recorded in 85% of the patients, psychological symptoms (anxiety, insomnia, and/or depression) in 71%, dyspnea in 54%, neurologic symptoms in 28%, cough in 24%, nausea in 21%, and hemoptysis in 9%. Young age (p = 0.02) and small cell lung carcinoma (p = 0.03) were risk factors for psychological symptoms. Terminal dyspnea was more frequent in patients with stage III (p = 0.002) and nausea in stage IV (p = 0.02) at the time of diagnosis, while cough (p = 0.04) occurred more often in non-small cell lung carcinoma. Terminal pain was independent of gender, age, performance status, stage, and histology.

CONCLUSION

In a community health service encompassing all lung cancer patients, pain, psychological symptoms, and dyspnea were frequent complaints in the terminal phase. Terminal dyspnea and nausea were associated with staging at the time of diagnosis, and terminal cough and nausea were associated with histology.

Measuring quality of life in patients with pleural mesothelioma using a modified version of the Lung Cancer Symptom Scale (LCSS): psychometric properties of the LCSS-Meso

Health-related quality of life (QOL) assessment is a key component in patient assessment and the development of therapies for malignant pleural mesothelioma. However, no mesothelioma-specific instrument was available. The Lung Cancer Symptom Scale (LCSS), a site-specific instrument used to assess QOL in patients with lung cancer, was identified as an instrument that could be appropriate. A modified nine-item patient-reported and six-item observer-reported LCSS was incorporated into two clinical trials of pemetrexed in patients with pleural mesothelioma. Basic psychometric properties of feasibility, reliability, and validity were tested. Properties were stable or enhanced by deletion of the hemoptysis item. Feasibility was demonstrated with a high completion rate of 90% by 512 patients. Reliability was acceptable, with good internal consistency for the eight-item measure (alpha coefficient=0.86) and reasonably good for the five-item observer measure (alpha coefficient=0.66); there was also good stability for the patient measure using test-retest (r=0.87). Content validity was supported by a literature review and patient self-report of presenting symptoms (>90% of patients had three or more symptoms). Construct validity was well supported by finding better scores in the higher performance status groups and greater symptom improvement in patients with tumor response, good concordance with the LCSS conceptual model and good explanation of variance for summation items, and a high degree of convergence between the patient and observer forms (r=0.57). Criterion-related validity was supported by predicting survival time, time to progression, and tumor response rate; all three summary items and the total LCSS-Meso score were statistically significant predictors (p<0.005). The LCSS-Meso is a feasible, reliable, and valid instrument to assess health-related QOL in patients with pleural mesothelioma. One item, hemoptysis, was dropped from the original LCSS based on these findings.