The prognostic association of health-related quality of life scores with survival in breast cancer

Association between quality of life and mortality risk in patients with breast cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Patients with breast cancer present with various problems that have an adverse effect on the quality of life (QOL). However, the association between the QOL and mortality among patients with breast cancer remains controversial. Therefore, this systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to determine whether QOL impacts prognosis in patients with breast cancer.

METHODS

The databases of CINAHL, Scopus, and PubMed databases were searched to retrieve observational studies that assessed the QOL and mortality risk in patients with breast cancer published before December 2022.

RESULTS

Among the 119,061 articles retrieved, six observational studies were included in the meta-analysis. Physical QOL (hazard ratio [HR]: 1.04, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.01-1.07, p = 0.003), emotional QOL (HR: 1.01, 95% CI: 1.00-1.03, p = 0.05), and role QOL (HR: 1.01, 95% CI: 1.00-1.01, p = 0.007) showed significant associations with mortality risk. In contrast, global QOL, cognitive QOL, and social QOL showed no associations with mortality risk. Subgroup analysis performed according to treatment time points revealed that the post-treatment physical QOL was associated with mortality risk.

CONCLUSIONS

Physical QOL, emotional QOL, and role QOL are associated with mortality risk in patients with breast cancer. Furthermore, post-treatment physical QOL showed a more significant association with prolonged survival than pre-treatment physical QOL.

Global quality of life and mortality risk in patients with cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis

PURPOSE

This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to examine the impact of global quality of life (QOL) on mortality risk in patients with cancer, considering cancer type and timepoint of QOL assessment.

METHODS

A systematic search was conducted using Cumulated Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature, PubMed/MEDLINE, and Scopus databases from inception to December 2022. Observational studies that assessed QOL and examined mortality risk in patients with cancer were extracted. Subgroup analyses were performed for cancer types and timepoints of QOL assessment.

RESULTS

Overall, global QOL was significantly associated with mortality risk (hazard ratio: 1.06, 95% confidence interval: 1.05-1.07; p < 0.00001). A subgroup analysis based on cancer type demonstrated that lung, head and neck, breast, esophagus, colon, prostate, hematologic, liver, gynecologic, stomach, brain, bladder, bone and soft tissue, and mixed type cancers were significantly associated with mortality risk; however, melanoma and pancreatic cancer were not significantly associated with mortality risk. Additionally, global QOL was associated with mortality risk at all timepoints (pretreatment, posttreatment, and palliative phase); pretreatment QOL had the largest impact, followed by posttreatment QOL.

CONCLUSION

These findings provide evidence that QOL is associated with mortality risk in patients with cancer at any timepoint. These results indicate the importance of evaluating the QOL and supportive interventions to improve QOL in any phase.

Long-Term Patient Satisfaction and Quality of Life After Breast-Conserving Therapy: A Prospective Study Using the BREAST-Q

Background

Poor patient-reported satisfaction after breast-conserving therapy (BCT) has been associated with impaired health-related quality of life (HRQOL) and subsequent depression in retrospective analysis. This prospective cohort study aimed to assess the HRQOL of patients who have undergone BCT using the BREAST-Q, and to identify clinical risk factors for lower patient satisfaction.

Methods

Patients with primary breast cancer undergoing BCT were asked to complete the BREAST-Q preoperatively (T1) for baseline evaluation, then 3 to 4 weeks postoperatively (T2), and finally 1 year after surgery (T3). Clinicopathologic data were extracted from the patients’ charts. Repeated measures analysis of variance (ANOVA) was used to determine significant differences in mean satisfaction and well-being levels among the test intervals. Multiple linear regression was used to evaluate risk factors for lower satisfaction.

Results

The study enrolled 250 patients. The lowest baseline BREAST-Q score was reported for “satisfaction with breast” (mean, 61 ± 19), but this increased postoperatively (mean, 66 ± 18) and was maintained at the 1 year follow-up evaluation (mean, 67 ± 21). “Physical well-being” decreased from T1 (mean, 82 ± 17) to T2 (mean, 28 ± 13) and did not recover much by T3 (mean, 33 ± 13), being the lowest BREAST-Q score postoperatively and in the 1-year follow-up evaluation. In multiple regression, baseline psychosocial well-being, body mass index (BMI), and type of incision were risk factors for lower “satisfaction with breasts.”

Conclusion

Both the aesthetic/surgery-related and psychological aspects are equally important with regard to “satisfaction with breasts” after BCT. The data could serve as the benchmark for future studies.

Prognostic Value of Post-diagnosis Health-Related Quality of Life for Overall Survival in Breast Cancer: Findings from a 10-Year Prospective Cohort in Korea

Purpose

We aimed to evaluate health-related quality of life (HRQOL) at 1-year post-diagnosis in breast cancer (BC) patients and its association with overall survival using data from the National Cancer Center Hospital.

Materials and Methods

Data of a BC cohort were first obtained between 2004 and 2006 and followed up. HRQOL was assessed using EORTC QLQ-C30 and BC specific module QLQ-BR23 few days after diagnosis and 1 year after that. We examined and compared the difference in the two HRQOL scores measured for each patient by the patient’s current survival status. The Cox proportional hazards model was fitted to evaluate the impact of HRQOL on survival, with adjustment for baseline HRQOL and other factors.

Results

Of 299 enrolled patients, 206 responded at 1-year post-diagnosis (80.6%) and were followed up for 11.6 years on average. At 1-year post-diagnosis, survivors had better HRQOL scores than those who died, although their health status was similar at baseline. Survivors reported significant increase 1 year after diagnosis in global health status and emotional scales. Between the groups, functional scales such as physical, role, and emotional were significantly different. Functional scales, including physical (adjusted hazard ratio [aHR], 0.70), role (aHR, 0.68), emotional (aHR, 0.72), and symptom scales, including fatigue (aHR, 1.34), dyspnea (aHR, 1.29), appetite loss (aHR, 1.24) were significantly associated with overall survival. Patients who were less worried about future health had favorable survival(aHR, 0.83).

Conclusion

Besides treatment-related symptoms, non-medical aspects at 1-year post-diagnosis, including functional well-being and future perspective, are predictive of long-term survival. Intervention to enhance physical, role, and emotional support for women soon after their BC diagnosis might help to improve disease survival outcomes afterwards.

Personalized Prognostic Prediction Models for Breast Cancer Recurrence and Survival Incorporating Multidimensional Data

Background

In this study, we developed integrative, personalized prognostic models for breast cancer recurrence and overall survival (OS) that consider receptor subtypes, epidemiological data, quality of life (QoL), and treatment.

Methods

A total of 15 314 women with stage I to III invasive primary breast cancer treated at The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center between 1997 and 2012 were used to generate prognostic models by Cox regression analysis in a two-stage study. Model performance was assessed by calculating the area under the curve (AUC) and calibration analysis and compared with Nottingham Prognostic Index (NPI) and PREDICT.

Results

Host characteristics were assessed for 10 809 women as the discovery population (median follow-up = 6.09 years, 1144 recurrence and 1627 deaths) and 4505 women as the validation population (median follow-up = 7.95 years, 684 recurrence and 1095 deaths). In addition to the known clinical/pathological variables, the model for recurrence included alcohol consumption while the model for OS included smoking status and physical component summary score. The AUCs for recurrence and OS were 0.813 and 0.810 in the discovery and 0.807 and 0.803 in the validation, respectively, compared with AUCs of 0.761 and 0.753 in discovery and 0.777 and 0.751 in validation for NPI. Our model further showed better calibration compared with PREDICT. We also developed race-specific and receptor subtype-specific models with comparable AUCs. Racial disparity was evident in the distributions of many risk factors and clinical presentation of the disease.

Conclusions

Our integrative prognostic models for breast cancer exhibit high discriminatory accuracy and excellent calibration and are the first to incorporate receptor subtype and epidemiological and QoL data.

The experience of treatment barriers and their influence on quality of life in American Indian/Alaska Native breast cancer survivors

BACKGROUND

American Indian and Alaska Native (AI/AN) breast cancer survivors experience disparities in breast cancer incidence and age-adjusted mortality compared with non-Hispanic white (NHW) breast cancer survivors. In addition, mortality-to-incidence rates indicate that AI/ANs continue to have the poorest survival from breast cancer compared with other racial groups. "Native American Cancer Education for Survivors" (NACES) is a cultural education and support intervention for AI/AN patients with cancer that collects data from voluntary participants through the NACES quality-of-life (QOL) survey regarding their cancer experience and survivor journey.

METHODS

Data from the NACES QOL survey were analyzed to determine whether barriers accessing and during initial cancer treatment impacted QOL domains for AI/AN cancer survivors. Exploratory analyses of selected variables were conducted and were followed by Kruskal-Wallis tests to determine whether these barriers influenced survivorship QOL for AI/AN breast cancer survivors.

RESULTS

AI/AN breast cancer survivors' social QOL was significantly affected by barriers to accessing cancer treatment. Many respondents experienced barriers, including a lack of cancer care at local clinics and the distance traveled to receive cancer care. During treatment, too much paperwork and having to wait too long in the clinic for cancer care were the most frequently reported barriers.

CONCLUSIONS

Treatment barriers influence AI/AN breast cancer survivors' social QOL. Mediating these barriers is crucial to ameliorating AI/AN survivors' disparities when accessing and completing cancer treatment and improving survivorship QOL. Cancer 2017;123:861-68. © 2016 American Cancer Society.

[Survival for ten years and prognostic factors for women with breast cancer in Joinville in the State of Santa Catarina, Brazil]

Breast cancer has the highest incidence among women, and reduces survival among female sufferers. This article aims to evaluate the survival and its prognostic factors in women with breast cancer, treated by public sector, in Joinville, Santa Catarina, Brazil. Retrospective cohort study nested in a case-control. The data has been obtained by a questionnaire, by the review of records and death certifications. In the analysis of survival it has been applied the Kaplan-Meier's statistical method and the Cox's method. 170 women have been evaluated. The survival in ten years was 83.1% (95% CI 74.1 to 89.3%), and 21 (12.4%) deaths were identified at the time period. The probability of being alive was smaller for those in advanced stages of cancer; the risk of death was higher among those who had another kinds of cancer associated, and among those unsatisfied with life. The death's ratio was 17.1 times bigger among women diagnosed in advanced stages. The variable staging presented higher association with the survival in evaluated women. Detecting the disease early minimizes the mortality by breast cancer.

Patient-reported pain and other quality of life domains as prognostic factors for survival in a phase III clinical trial of patients with advanced breast cancer

Background

Patient-reported outcomes have been associated with survival in numerous studies across cancer types, including breast cancer. However, the Brief Pain Inventory-Short Form (BPI-SF) and the Rotterdam Symptom Checklist (RSCL) have rarely been investigated in this regard in breast cancer.

Methods

Here we describe a post hoc analysis of the prognostic effect of baseline scores of these instruments on survival in a phase III trial of patients with advanced breast cancer who received gemcitabine plus paclitaxel or paclitaxel alone after anthracycline-based adjuvant or neoadjuvant therapy. The variables for this analysis were baseline BPI-SF “worst pain” and BPI-SF “pain interference” scores, and four RSCL subscales (each transformed to 0–100). Univariate and multivariate Cox models were used, the latter in the presence of 11 demographic/clinical variables. Kaplan-Meier curves and log-rank tests were used to compare survival for patients by BPI-SF or RSCL scores.

Results

Of 529 randomized patients, 286 provided BPI-SF data and 336 provided RSCL data at baseline. Univariate analyses identified BPI-SF worst pain and pain interference (both hazard ratios [HR], 1.07 for a 1-point increase; both p ≤ 0.0061) and three of four RSCL subscales [activity level, physical distress, and health-related quality of life (HRQOL) (HR, 0.86–0.91 for 10-point increase all p ≤ 0.0104)], to have significant prognostic effect for survival. BPI-SF worst pain (p = 0.0342) and RSCL activity level (p = 0.0004) were prognostic in the multivariate analysis. Median survival for patients categorized by BPI-SF worst pain score was 23.8 (n = 91), 17.9 (n = 94) and 14.6 (n = 94) months for scores 0, 1–4, and 5–10, respectively (log-rank p = 0.0065). Median survival was 23.8 and 14.6 months for patients (n = 330) with above- and below-median RSCL activity level scores respectively (log-rank p < 0.0001).

Conclusion

Pretreatment BPI-SF worst pain and RSCL activity scores provide distinct prognostic information for survival in patients receiving paclitaxel or gemcitabine plus paclitaxel for advanced breast cancer even after controlling for multiple demographic and clinical factors.

Trial registration

Clinicaltrials.gov, NCT00006459.

Self-rated health supersedes patient satisfaction with service quality as a predictor of survival in prostate cancer

Background

We have previously reported that higher patient satisfaction (PS) with service quality is associated with favorable survival outcomes in a variety of cancers. However, we argued that patients with greater satisfaction might be the ones with better self-rated health (SRH), a recognized predictor of cancer survival. We therefore investigated whether SRH can supersede patient satisfaction as a predictor of survival in prostate cancer.

Methods

Nine hundred seventeen prostate cancer treated at four Cancer Treatment Centers of America® hospitals between July 2011 and March 2013. PS was measured on a 7-point scale ranging from “completely dissatisfied” to “completely satisfied”. SRH was measured on a 7-point scale ranging from “very poor” to “excellent”. Both were dichotomized into two categories: top box response (7) versus all others (1–6). Patient survival was the primary end point. Cox regression was used to evaluate the association between PS and survival controlling for covariates.

Results

The response rate for this study was 72 %. Majority of patients (n = 517) had stage II disease. Seven hundred eighty-seven (85.8 %) patients were “completely satisfied”. Three hundred nineteen (34.8 %) patients had “excellent” SRH. There was a weak but significant correlation between satisfaction and SRH (Kendall’s tau b = 0.18; p < 0.001). On univariate analysis, “completely satisfied” patients had a significantly lower risk of mortality (HR = 0.46; 95 % CI: 0.25-0.85; p = 0.01). Similarly, patients with “excellent” SRH had a significantly lower risk of mortality (HR = 0.25; 95 % CI: 0.11-0.58; p = 0.001). On multivariate analysis, SRH was found to be a significant predictor of survival (HR = 0.31; 95 % CI: 0.12-0.79; p = 0.01) while patient satisfaction was not (HR = 0.76; 95 % CI: 0.40-1.5; p = 0.40).

Conclusions

SRH supersedes patient satisfaction with service quality as a predictor of survival in prostate cancer. SRH should be used as a control variable in analyses involving patient satisfaction as a predictor of clinical cancer outcomes.

The Relationship between Patient Satisfaction with Service Quality and Survival in Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer - Is Self-Rated Health a Potential Confounder?

BACKGROUND/AIMS

Previously we reported that higher patient satisfaction (PS) with service quality is associated with favorable survival outcomes in a variety of cancers. However, we cautioned the readers that patients with greater satisfaction might be the ones with better self-rated health (SRH), a well-established prognosticator of cancer survival. In other words, SRH could potentially confound the PS and survival relationship. We investigated this hypothesis in non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC).

METHODS

778 NSCLC patients (327 males and 451 females; mean age 58.8 years) treated at 4 Cancer Treatment Centers of America hospitals between July 2011 and March 2013. PS was measured on a 7-point scale ranging from "completely dissatisfied" to "completely satisfied". SRH was measured on a 7-point scale ranging from "very poor" to "excellent". Both were dichotomized into 2 categories: top box response (7) versus all others (1-6). Patient survival was the primary end point. Cox regression was used to evaluate the association between PS and survival controlling for covariates.

RESULTS

74, 70, 232 and 391 patients had stage I, II, III and IV disease respectively. 631 (81.1%) patients were "completely satisfied". 184 (23.7%) patients had "excellent" SRH. There was a weak but significant correlation between overall PS and SRH (Kendall's tau b = 0.19; p<0.001). On univariate analysis, "completely satisfied" patients had a significantly lower risk of mortality (HR = 0.75; 95% CI: 0.57 to 0.99; p = 0.04). Similarly, patients with "excellent" SRH had a significantly lower risk of mortality (HR = 0.61; 95% CI: 0.46 to 0.81; p = 0.001). On multivariate analysis controlling for stage at diagnosis, treatment history and gender, SRH was found to be a significant predictor of survival (HR = 0.67; 95% CI: 0.50 to 0.89; p = 0.007) while PS was not (HR = 0.86; 95% CI: 0.64 to 1.2; p = 0.32). Among the individual PS items, the only significant independent predictor of survival was "teams communicating with each other concerning your medical condition and treatment" (HR = 0.59; 95% CI: 0.36 to 0.94; p = 0.03).

CONCLUSION

SRH appears to confound the PS-survival relationship in NSCLC. SRH should be used as a control/stratification variable in analyses involving PS as a predictor of clinical cancer outcomes.

Quality of cancer follow-up care: a focus on Latina breast cancer survivors

INTRODUCTION

Receiving quality cancer follow-up care influences survivorship outcomes. Among Latinas, breast cancer is the number one cause of cancer death; yet Latinas do not receive adequate follow-up care. This study examined quality of cancer follow-up care among Latina breast cancer survivors (BCS) and whether it differs by participant language and healthcare system variables (provider specialty, and medical setting).

METHODS

Two hundred thirty-two (95 English-speaking Latina and 137 Spanish-speaking) Latina BCS were recruited from the California Cancer Registry, hospital cancer registries, and community agencies.

RESULTS

English-speaking Latina BCS were more likely to report receiving cancer follow-up care at a doctor's office (p < 0.001). BCS without a regular place for cancer follow-up care were more likely to report not seeing a primary care provider (p < 0.05) or cancer specialist (p < 0.001) in the past 12 months. English-speaking Latina BCS (p < 0.001), BCS who saw a cancer specialist in the past 12 months (p < 0.001), and received follow-up care at a doctor's office (p < 0.05) reported higher quality of care. Speaking English, having seen a cancer specialist, and receiving follow-up care at a doctor's office were independently associated with higher quality of care, explaining 44 % of the variance.

CONCLUSIONS

Our study findings suggest that examining the influence of ethnic and linguistic factors on quality of cancer follow-up care is necessary to address health disparities. Improved access to cancer follow-up care for Spanish-speaking Latina BCS is of particular concern.

IMPLICATION OF CANCER SURVIVORS

Identifying follow-up care needs of Latina BCS may contribute to providing high-quality care and improved survivorship outcomes.

Quality of life as a predictor of overall survival after breast cancer treatment

PURPOSE

To describe quality of life (QoL) in a cohort of surviving women 4 years after breast cancer treatment and to analyze its role as a predictor of mortality within 2 years.

METHODS

This is a prospective cohort study of 544 women who have undergone surgical treatment, from 2001 to 2002 and who answered a questionnaire about QoL in 2006. After, we conducted a survival study to evaluate the association between QoL and mortality within 2 years with the same population. We conducted factor analysis between the variables of the scales of function and symptoms. Survival analysis was conducted by Kaplan-Meier, and differences in survival curves were assessed with the log-rank test, assuming significant statistical level of 5 %. The Cox proportional hazards regression model was used to explore the relationship between QoL variables (functional scales) and prognostic value for survival.

RESULTS

The mean age of the women was 59.1 years (SD 11.66). The mean of overall QoL score was 75.16 (SD 20.93). Using factor analysis, we identified three conditions that made up the construct of QoL in this group of patients: social, psycho-emotional, and physical. Social condition was the most important factor. After assessment of QoL, the mean survival was 23 months (SD 3.90). Women who reported worse future perspective had higher chance of death compared with women better prospect of future (HR = 3.46; 95 % CI 1.36-8.79; p value = 0.009).

CONCLUSION

Future perspectives were predictors of mortality, which reinforce the relevance of social support and psychological aspects for these women.

Health-related quality of life supersedes other psychosocial predictors of long-term survival in cancer patients undergoing radiotherapy

BACKGROUND

To investigate the prognostic value of several psychosocial factors for long-term survival in cancer patients.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

Baseline data were gathered in routine radiotherapy practice during 44 months. The analysis is based on 938 patients for whom follow-up data were available. Baseline psychosocial distress, depression, health-related quality of life (HRQOL), and life satisfaction were assessed using Questionnaire on Stress in Cancer Patients (QSC-R23), Self-Rating Depression Scale (SDS), Functional Assessment of Therapy - General (FACT-G) questionnaire, and Questions on Life Satisfaction (FLZ(M)). Patients were followed up for 7 to 10 years. Kaplan-Meier plots and Cox proportional hazards models were used to investigate associations between sociodemographic, clinical, psychosocial factors and overall survival (OS).

RESULTS

Patients' median survival time was 35 months (95% CI 28.9-41.1). Significant multivariate predictors of OS were age, health insurance type, Karnofsky performance status, cancer site, and cancer stage. Controlling for these variables, HRQOL was the only psychosocial predictor of survival (hazard ratio 0.988, 95% CI 0.979-0.997, p =0.009). The physical well-being and the functional well-being subscales of the FACT-G emerged as the relevant HRQOL facets predictive of survival.

CONCLUSION

HRQOL has incremental predictive value for long-term survival in cancer patients.

Impact of a telephone-based physical activity intervention upon exercise behaviors and fitness in cancer survivors enrolled in a cooperative group setting

Observational studies demonstrate an association between physical activity and improved outcomes in breast and colon cancer survivors. To test these observations with a large, randomized clinical trial, an intervention that significantly impacts physical activity in these patients is needed. The Active After Cancer Trial (AACT) was a multicenter pilot study evaluating the feasibility of a telephone-based exercise intervention in a cooperative group setting. Sedentary (engaging in <60 min of recreational activity/week) breast and colorectal cancer survivors were randomized to a telephone-based exercise intervention or usual care control group. The intervention was delivered through the University of California at San Diego; participants received ten phone calls over the course of the 16-week intervention. All participants underwent assessment of physical activity, fitness, physical functioning, fatigue and exercise self-efficacy at baseline and after the 16-week intervention. One hundred and twenty-one patients were enrolled through ten Cancer and Leukemia Group B (CALGB) institutions; 100 patients had breast cancer and 21 had colorectal cancer. Participants randomized to the exercise group increased physical activity by more than 100 versus 22% in controls (54.5 vs. 14.6 min, P = 0.13), and experienced significant increases in fitness (increased 6-min walk test distance by 186.9 vs. 81.9 feet, P = 0.006) and physical functioning (7.1 vs. 2.6, P = 0.04) as compared to the control group. Breast and colorectal cancer survivors enrolled in a multicenter, telephone-based physical activity intervention increased physical activity and experienced significant improvements in fitness and physical functioning. Lifestyle intervention research is feasible in a cooperative group setting.

The association of quality-of-life measures with malignancy and survival in patients with pancreatic pathology

OBJECTIVES

This study assessed whether pretreatment quality-of-life (QoL) scores could predict the presence of pancreatic malignancy and survival.

METHODS

Patients with pancreatic lesions completed the SF-36, containing 8 domains: physical functioning, role-physical, role-emotional, bodily pain, vitality, mental health, social functioning, and general health. Data obtained included age, sex, resectability, additional antineoplastic therapy, stage, pathology, and survival. Patients were categorized by pathology (benign vs malignant), stage (local, regional, or distant), resectability (resected vs not), survival (<1 vs >1 year), and their pretreatment QoL scores.

RESULTS

Of the 323 patients assessed, 210 had malignancies. In 6 of the 8 domains, patients with malignancies had lower median QoL scores compared with patients with benign lesions. Of the patients with malignancies, patients surviving at 1 year or less had lower pretreatment scores in all domains. Stage, resection, adjuvant therapy, and vitality score were independent predictors of survival.

CONCLUSIONS

Patients with pancreatic malignancies had lower QoL scores than patients with benign pancreatic disease. Patients with malignancies surviving at 1 year or less had lower scores, even after controlling for stage. This suggests that pretreatment QoL scores are associated with pancreatic malignancy and survival.

Association between symptoms and their severity with survival time in hospitalized patients with far advanced cancer

OBJECTIVE

To assess the significance of symptoms and their severity for predicting survival of hospitalized patients with far advanced cancer.

METHODS

Two hundred fifty-six patients with far advanced cancer at the Cancer Center of Tongji Hospital, China were assessed by the Chinese version of the M.D. Anderson Symptom Inventory (MDASI-C). A Cox regression model was used to determine symptoms that could predict survival time. The log-rank test was used to compare the survival of patients accompanied by significant symptoms at different intensities.

RESULTS

Median survival was 49 days. Fatigue was the most common and severe symptom, followed by lack of appetite, disturbed sleep, and pain. Multivariate analysis showed that fatigue, shortness of breath, lack of appetite, and feeling sad were independent prognostic factors for survival time (p  < 0.05), with a hazard ratio of dying of 1.39, 1.13, 1.33, and 1.16, respectively. The survival time for patients with different intensities of the four symptoms showed significant differences (p  <  0.01).

CONCLUSIONS

Fatigue, lack of appetite, feeling sad, and shortness of breath could be predictive factors for survival time of hospitalized patients with far advanced cancer. The more severe these symptoms are, the shorter will be survival time.

The prognostic role of quality of life assessment in breast cancer

While the use of quality of life (QoL) assessments has been increasing in oncology, few studies have examined the prognostic significance of QoL in breast cancer. We investigated the association between QoL at presentation and survival in breast cancer. We examined 1,511 breast cancer patients treated at two single-system cancer centers between January 2001 and December 2008. QoL was evaluated using the validated survey instrument EORTC-QLQ-C30. Patient survival was defined as the time interval between the date of first patient visit and the date of death from any cause/date of last contact. Univariate and multivariate Cox regression analyses were performed to evaluate the prognostic significance of QoL after controlling for the effects of age, tumor stage, and prior treatment history. Mean age at presentation was 52.5 years. There were 590 analytic and 921 non-analytic patients. Patient stage of disease at diagnosis was I, 335; II, 591; III, 290; IV, 159; and 136 indeterminate. Median overall survival was 32.8 months (95% CI: 27.6-38.0). On univariate analysis, QoL function and symptom scales that were predictive of survival were physical (p < 0.001), role (p < 0.001), cognitive (p = 0.003), social (p < 0.001), fatigue (p < 0.001), nausea/vomiting (p < 0.001), pain (p < 0.001), dyspnea (p < 0.001), loss of appetite (p < 0.001), and constipation (p < 0.001). On multivariate analyses, only role function (degree of impairment of work and/or leisure/hobby related activities) was significantly associated with survival. This study suggests that baseline QoL (in particular, the role function) provides useful prognostic information in breast cancer.

Quality of life assessment as a predictor of survival in non-small cell lung cancer

BACKGROUND

There are conflicting and inconsistent results in the literature on the prognostic role of quality of life (QoL) in cancer. We investigated whether QoL at admission could predict survival in lung cancer patients.

METHODS

The study population consisted of 1194 non-small cell lung cancer patients treated at our institution between Jan 2001 and Dec 2008. QoL was evaluated using EORTC-QLQ-C30 prior to initiation of treatment. Patient survival was defined as the time interval between the date of first patient visit and the date of death from any cause/date of last contact. Univariate and multivariate Cox regression evaluated the prognostic significance of QoL.

RESULTS

Mean age at presentation was 58.3 years. There were 605 newly diagnosed and 589 previously treated patients; 601 males and 593 females. Stage of disease at diagnosis was I, 100; II, 63; III, 348; IV, 656; and 27 indeterminate. Upon multivariate analyses, global QoL as well as physical function predicted patient survival in the entire study population. Every 10-point increase in physical function was associated with a 10% increase in survival (95% CI = 6% to 14%, p < 0.001). Similarly, every 10-point increase in global QoL was associated with a 9% increase in survival (95% CI = 6% to 11%, p < 0.001). Furthermore, physical function, nausea/vomiting, insomnia, and diarrhea (p < 0.05 for all) in newly diagnosed patients, but only physical function (p < 0.001) in previously treated patients were predictive of survival.

CONCLUSIONS

Baseline global QoL and physical function provide useful prognostic information in non-small cell lung cancer patients.

Quality of life and performance status in patients with pancreatic and periampullary tumors

BACKGROUND

To determine if pretreatment quality of life is associated with performance status in patients with pancreatic and periampullary tumors.

METHODS

Eighty consecutive patients evaluated for surgical treatment of pancreatic or periampullary tumors completed the social functioning SF-36, a generic quality of life instrument. This instrument measures 8 domains of quality of life: physical functioning (PF), role-physical (RP), role-emotional, bodily pain, vitality, mental health, social functioning, and general health (GH). The best possible score is 100 and the worst possible score is 0. Each patient was then assigned a Karnofsky performance score (KPS), with the best possible score of 100 (normal, no complaints, no evidence of disease) and worst score of 0 (dead). Data recorded included age, gender, pathology, stage, resection, use of chemotherapy, and radiation therapy. Statistical analysis was done using single and multiple linear regression analysis, correlation coefficients (r) and coefficient of determination (r (2)).

RESULTS

KPS was significantly associated with all domains of the SF-36 by single linear regression. By multiple linear regression, KPS was significantly associated with the PF domain (p < 0.001, r = 0.74), and nearly significantly associated with the RP (p = 0.07, r = 0.62) and GH (p = 0.06, r = 0.64) domains. This appears to be independent of tumor pathology and stage.

CONCLUSION

The results imply that pretreatment quality of life and performance status are related concepts in patients with pancreatic and periampullary tumors. This is primarily true for the physical component of the SF-36. However, despite statistical significance, coefficients of determination (r (2) values) suggest that there are additional factors determining both quality of life and performance status in patients with pancreatic and periampullary tumors.

Quality of life after breast cancer diagnosis and survival

PURPOSE

To examine the association of quality of life (QOL) after diagnosis of breast cancer with mortality and recurrence.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

From 2002 to 2004, a total of 2,230 breast cancer survivors completed the General Quality of Life Inventory-74 6 months after diagnosis as part of the Shanghai Breast Cancer Survivor Study. Also collected at baseline was information on demographic and clinical characteristics. At 36 months postdiagnosis, 1,845 of these women were re-evaluated for QOL. Outcomes were ascertained by in-person interview and record linkage to the vital statistics registry. The association of QOL with total mortality and cancer recurrence was assessed by using Cox regression analysis.

RESULTS

During a median follow-up of 4.8 years after the 6-month postdiagnosis QOL assessment, 284 deaths were identified. Recurrence was documented in 267 patients after 108 patients with stage IV breast cancer or recurrence before study enrollment were excluded. Women with the highest tertile of social well-being QOL score, compared with those with the lowest score, had a 38% decreased risk of mortality (95% CI, 0.46 to 0.85; P for trend = .002) and a 48% decreased risk of breast cancer recurrence (95% CI, 0.38 to 0.71; P for trend < .001). QOL assessed at 36 months postdiagnosis was not significantly associated with subsequent risk of mortality or recurrence.

CONCLUSION

Social well-being in the first year after cancer diagnosis is a significant prognostic factor for breast cancer recurrence or mortality, suggesting a possible avenue of intervention by maintaining or enhancing social support for women soon after their breast cancer diagnosis to improve disease outcomes.

Health-related quality of life in women with breast cancer in Korea: do sociodemographic characteristics and time since diagnosis make a difference?

PURPOSE/OBJECTIVES

To describe whether levels of health-related quality of life (HRQOL) differ by sociodemographic characteristics and time since breast cancer diagnosis in women in Korea.

DESIGN

A descriptive, cross-sectional study of women with breast cancer.

SETTING

An outpatient clinic of one large hospital in Seoul, Republic of Korea.

SAMPLE

A convenience sample of 244 women with breast cancer after mastectomy.

METHODS

Study participants completed sociodemographic characteristics and HRQOL questionnaires. Medical charts were reviewed to determine time since breast cancer diagnosis.

MAIN RESEARCH VARIABLES

Sociodemographic characteristics (age, marital status, employment status, education, monthly household income, and religion), time since diagnosis, and HRQOL.

FINDINGS

The psychological well-being domain scored the lowest among domains of HRQOL. Women who are younger, married, unemployed, highly educated, or religious, with higher monthly household income or with greater than one year elapsed time since diagnosis, had higher HRQOL.

CONCLUSIONS

Study findings will be useful to establish priorities in planning nursing interventions to enhance HRQOL in care of women with breast cancer.

IMPLICATIONS FOR NURSING

Nursing interventions can be provided to Korean women with breast cancer who are not religious, who are older, single or widowed, or employed, with lower education level, with lower monthly household income, or with one year or less elapsed time since breast cancer diagnosis.

The quality-of-life impact of prostate cancer treatments

Many options exist for the treatment of localized prostate cancer. In the decision to choose a therapeutic option for localized disease, many variables need to be considered such as tumor characteristics, clinical stage, the patient's overall health and life expectancy, and preferences of both the physician and patient. Another important consideration is the health-related quality of life (HRQOL) implications of a given treatment option. The importance of HRQOL relative to the potential side effects of prostate cancer treatments has grown over the past few years. Although our collective awareness has increased, objective data on HRQOL for prostate cancer treatment are lacking due to a paucity of prospective clinical trial data. This review defines the concept of HRQOL, discusses what is currently known about the impact of various treatments on HRQOL, and summarizes the recent literature in this area relating to the management of localized prostate cancer.

Surviving cervical cancer: does health-related quality of life influence survival?

OBJECTIVE

This study investigates the association between health-related quality of life (HRQOL) outcomes and survival status among a population-based cohort diagnosed with invasive cancer of the cervix uteri.

METHODS

This study is based on data from 353 multiethnic cervical cancer survivors (CCS) recruited through the California Cancer Surveillance Program. The independent variable is HRQOL measured by the FACT-CX (FACT-G plus additional items) and the SF-12. The dependent variable is survival from date of the HRQOL survey. Kaplan-Meier estimates and univariate and multivariate Cox Proportional Hazards Regression models were used to examine the relationship between HRQOL and survival.

RESULTS

In the Kaplan-Meier analyses, the FACT-CX functional well-being score equal to or above the median score was significantly associated with improved overall survival (X(2)=7.19; p=0.007). Significant differences in survival were observed for the SF-12 physical and mental health component scores. In the multivariate Cox regression analyses, the final model indicated that the FACT-CX total scores, functional well-being, and additional cervical cancer concerns subscales, and the SF-12 physical and mental component summary scores significantly influenced survival, after controlling for medical characteristics. However, the FACT components that do not include cervical cancer specific items including mean standardized FACT-G and physical, emotional, and social/family well-being subscales were not predictors of survival before and after adjustment for covariates.

CONCLUSIONS

The results of this study advance the current scientific knowledge by confirming that HRQOL outcomes, in particular the physical, function and mental health dimensions are associated with survival for CCS. These findings highlight the utility of cancer site specific HRQOL data to inform the psychosocial and symptom management aspects, as well as the medical follow-up care practice and research that may extend life.

Does quality of life among breast cancer survivors one year after diagnosis differ depending on urban and non-urban residence? A comparative study

BACKGROUND

This study examined the quality of life (QOL), measured by the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy (FACT) questionnaire, among urban (n = 277) and non-urban (n = 323) breast cancer survivors and women from the general population (n = 1140) in Queensland, Australia.

METHODS

Population-based samples of breast cancer survivors aged < 75 years who were 12 months post-diagnosis and similarly-aged women from the general population were recruited between 2002 and 2007.

RESULTS

Age-adjusted QOL among urban and non-urban breast cancer survivors was similar, although QOL related to breast cancer concerns was the weakest domain and was lower among non-urban survivors than their urban counterparts (36.8 versus 40.4, P < 0.01). Irrespective of residence, breast cancer survivors, on average, reported comparable scores on most QOL scales as their general population peers, although physical well-being was significantly lower among non-urban survivors (versus the general population, P < 0.01). Overall, around 20%-33% of survivors experienced lower QOL than peers without the disease. The odds of reporting QOL below normative levels were increased more than two-fold for those who experienced complications following surgery, reported upper-body problems, had higher perceived stress levels and/or a poor perception of handling stress (P < 0.01 for all).

CONCLUSIONS

Results can be used to identify subgroups of women at risk of low QOL and to inform components of tailored recovery interventions to optimize QOL for these women following cancer treatment.

Quality of life data as prognostic indicators of survival in cancer patients: an overview of the literature from 1982 to 2008

BACKGROUND

Health-related quality of life and survival are two important outcome measures in cancer research and practice. The aim of this paper is to examine the relationship between quality of life data and survival time in cancer patients.

METHODS

A review was undertaken of all the full publications in the English language biomedical journals between 1982 and 2008. The search was limited to cancer, and included the combination of keywords 'quality of life', 'patient reported-outcomes' 'prognostic', 'predictor', 'predictive' and 'survival' that appeared in the titles of the publications. In addition, each study was examined to ensure that it used multivariate analysis. Purely psychological studies were excluded. A manual search was also performed to include additional papers of potential interest.

RESULTS

A total of 451 citations were identified in this rapid and systematic review of the literature. Of these, 104 citations on the relationship between quality of life and survival were found to be relevant and were further examined. The findings are summarized under different headings: heterogeneous samples of cancer patients, lung cancer, breast cancer, gastro-oesophageal cancers, colorectal cancer, head and neck cancer, melanoma and other cancers. With few exceptions, the findings showed that quality of life data or some aspects of quality of life measures were significant independent predictors of survival duration. Global quality of life, functioning domains and symptom scores - such as appetite loss, fatigue and pain - were the most important indicators, individually or in combination, for predicting survival times in cancer patients after adjusting for one or more demographic and known clinical prognostic factors.

CONCLUSION

This review provides evidence for a positive relationship between quality of life data or some quality of life measures and the survival duration of cancer patients. Pre-treatment (baseline) quality of life data appeared to provide the most reliable information for helping clinicians to establish prognostic criteria for treating their cancer patients. It is recommended that future studies should use valid instruments, apply sound methodological approaches and adequate multivariate statistical analyses adjusted for socio-demographic characteristics and known clinical prognostic factors with a satisfactory validation strategy. This strategy is likely to yield more accurate and specific quality of life-related prognostic variables for specific cancers.

Distribution and determinants of patient satisfaction in oncology with a focus on health related quality of life

BACKGROUND

Cancer patients usually undergo extensive and debilitating treatments, which make quality of life (QoL) and patient satisfaction important health care assessment measures. However, very few studies have evaluated the relationship between QoL and patient satisfaction in oncology. We investigated the clinical, demographic and QoL factors associated with patient satisfaction in a large heterogeneous sample of cancer patients.

METHODS

A cohort of 538 cancer patients treated at Cancer Treatment Centers of America (CTCA) was assessed. A patient satisfaction questionnaire developed in-house by CTCA was used. It covered the following dimensions of patient satisfaction: hospital operations and services, physicians and staff, and patient endorsements for themselves and others. QoL was assessed using the European Organization for the Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Questionnaire (QLQ-C30). The clinical, demographic and QoL factors were evaluated for predictive significance using univariate and multivariate logistic regression.

RESULTS

The mean age of our patient population was 54.1 years (SD = 10.5, range 17-86), with a slight preponderance of females (57.2%). Breast cancer (n = 124) and lung cancer (n = 101) were the most frequent cancer types. 481 (89.4%) patients were "very satisfied" with their overall experience. Age and several QoL function and symptom scales were predictive of overall patient satisfaction upon univariate analysis. In the multivariate modeling, only those with a score above the median on the fatigue measure (i.e. worse fatigue) had reduced odds of 0.28 of being very satisfied (p = 0.03).

CONCLUSION

Patient fatigue, as reported by the QoL fatigue scale, was an independent significant predictor of overall patient satisfaction. This finding argues for special attention and programs for cancer patients who report higher levels of fatigue given that fatigue is the most frequently reported symptom in cancer patients.

Predictive value of serial measurements of quality of life on all-cause mortality in prostate cancer patients: data from CaPSURE (cancer of the prostate strategic urologic research endeavor) database

INTRODUCTION

Health-related quality of life (HRQOL) is a legitimate construct for evaluating treatment and its side effects. Recently, predictive value of HRQOL on survival also has been of interest. In light of the longer survival in patients with prostate cancer and importance of quality of life, we seek to evaluate the association between HRQOL and survival using traditional and novel techniques.

METHODS

Patients from CaPSURE (Cancer of the Prostate Strategic Urologic Research Endeavor) who were treated within 6 months of diagnosis and had pre-treatment and sufficient post-treatment follow-up information constituted the study population. A sample consisting of 2,899 patients met the study criteria. SF-36 domains were used to measure HRQOL outcomes. Categorical variables were created for HRQOL based on the baseline distribution of the lower 10th percentile and the remainder of the patients. Association between HRQOL and survival (defined by all-cause mortality) in patients with prostate cancer was evaluated using Cox proportional hazards models controlling for age at diagnosis, type of treatment received, clinical risk classification, and number of comorbidities. Sequential bootstrap resampling was implemented to evaluate stability of the model. Univariate and multivariate Cox proportional hazards models were fit using various time points over the course of follow-up.

RESULTS

In the analysis looking at association of HRQOL baseline measurements, higher levels of physical function and general health were significantly associated with better survival (HR 0.49 95% CI 0.32-0.78 and HR 0.51 95% CI 0.35-0.75, respectively). Post-treatment analysis demonstrated similar results. In time-dependent analysis, higher levels of physical function, role physical, and general health were significantly associated with better survival (HR ranged from 0.57 to 0.65). In addition, analysis looking at change in HRQOL scores demonstrated an association between higher scores on physical function, role physical, vitality, social function, and general health and longer survival (HR ranged from 0.56 to 0.63).

CONCLUSION

This study demonstrated that several domains of HRQOL were significantly associated with survival in a large group of patients with localized prostate cancer. This association was maintained over the course of disease regardless of the time of the assessment. Results from our study have both research and clinical relevance. They could provide information that enable us to not only improve communication with patients and families, but also to develop interventions and treatments best suited for the patient.

A longitudinal study of the role of patient-reported outcomes on survival prediction of palliative cancer inpatients in Taiwan

GOALS OF WORK

This study explores the significance of patient-reported outcomes for predicting length of survival of palliative cancer patients.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Patients were recruited upon admission to the inpatient palliative care unit. Weekly assessment of 180 terminal cancer patients was carried out throughout their survival time using the Medical Outcome Study 36-Item Short-Form Health Survey, the Taiwanese version of the M.D. Anderson Symptom Inventory (MDASI-T), the Karnofsky Performance Status (KPS), the Brief Pain Inventory, and the Brief Fatigue Inventory. Generalized estimating equations (GEE) were utilized to analyze whether the patient-reported outcomes predicted survival time.

MAIN RESULTS

Of all patients, 64 had one assessment, 51 had two, 25 had three, and 40 had four or more assessments, up to a maximum of eight. The univariate analysis showed that gender (P < 0.01), KPS (P < 0.01), the physical component summary score (P = 0.02), the MDASI-T total score (P < 0.01), composite fatigue severity (P < 0.01), and composite pain severity (P < 0.01) were significantly associated with length of survival. The multivariate analysis showed that gender (P < 0.01), KPS (P < 0.01), and the MDASI-T total score (P = 0.01) were significant predictors of survival time.

CONCLUSIONS

This is the first study to explore the significance of patient-related outcomes for predicting length of survival of palliative cancer patients using the GEE method. This study confirms that overall symptom severity is a significant factor in assessing the length of survival of palliative cancer patients.

Patient satisfaction with health-related quality of life: implications for prognosis in prostate cancer

PURPOSE

The goal of this study was to evaluate the association between patient satisfaction with health-related quality of life (HRQOL), as measured by the Ferrans and Powers Quality of Life Index (QLI), and survival in patients with prostate cancer treated in an integrative cancer treatment setting.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

This is a case series of 230 histologically confirmed stage I-IV prostate cancers treated at Cancer Treatment Centers of America. Quality of Life Index measures overall HRQOL and HRQOL in 4 major subscales: health and physical, social and economic, psychological and spiritual, and family. Study patients were dichotomized into 2 groups based on the median scores for all QLI subscales. Kaplan- Meier and log-rank tests were used to evaluate survival. Multivariate Cox regression analyses were then performed to evaluate the joint prognostic significance of HRQOL and clinical factors.

RESULTS

Patient satisfaction with health and physical (P = .0001), psychological and spiritual (P = .03), family (P = .02), and overall HRQOL (P = .0001) were statistically significantly associated with survival upon univariate analysis. Upon multivariate analysis, patient satisfaction with the health and physical subscale was found to be predictive of survival (P = .04), independent of the effects of previous treatment history and Gleason score.

CONCLUSION

This study suggests that baseline patient satisfaction with health and physical function, as measured by the QLI, provides useful prognostic information in patients with prostate cancer, independent of previous treatment history and Gleason score. The QLI Index can be used as a stratification variable in the oncology clinic to aid in medical decision-making.