A conceptual framework for patient-reported outcomes in non-muscle invasive bladder cancer

Patient-reported outcomes in non-muscle invasive bladder cancer: a mixed-methods systematic review

OBJECTIVE

Non-muscle invasive bladder cancer (NMIBC) is a chronic condition requiring repeated treatment and endoscopic examinations that can occur life-long. In this context, patient-reported outcomes (PROs) are important considerations to patients and managing clinicians. We undertook a systematic review to synthesise PRO results relevant to NMIBC treatment to explore trajectories overtime and differences between treatment options.

METHODS

We searched databases AMED, MEDLINE, EMbase, PsycINFO, Web of Knowledge and Scopus (inception to 5th December 2019), reference lists and contacted key authors to identify studies that reported PROs after NMIBC treatment. Two reviewers independently applied inclusion and quality criteria and extracted findings. Results for PROs were synthesised for treatment groups across three time periods: acute/during induction therapy; during maintenance therapy; and long-term follow-up (> 1 year).

RESULTS

Of 3193 papers screened, 29 were eligible. These provided evidence about induction treatment effects, but few reported maintenance or long-term evidence, and evidence about differences between NMIBC treatment options was lacking. A range of symptoms (pain in bladder area, urinary frequency and urgency, pain or burning during urination) were commonly experienced during and soon after treatment for NMIBC. Less common symptoms included fatigue, disrupted sleep and gastrointestinal problems.

CONCLUSIONS

Treatments for NMIBC can cause symptoms and functional impairment during the acute treatment phase and reduce quality of life. Clinicians should be aware of these impairments to prepare patients for short-term sequelae and enable those with treatment options to exercise preferences in choosing among them. However, gaps in current evidence limit our understanding of PRO trajectories from diagnosis through to long-term survivorship and treatment effects.

Supportive Care Needs of Patients on Surveillance and Treatment for Non-Muscle-Invasive Bladder Cancer

OBJECTIVE

This literature review provides an overview of non-muscle-invasive bladder cancer diagnosis (NMIBC), treatment, and surveillance. Existing evidence is reviewed to identify the NMIBC patient pathway, highlight its effect on quality of life, and identify supportive care needs of this patient group. A framework to guide nurses in the care of this underserved population is proposed.

DATA SOURCES

Electronic databases including CINAHL, Medline, PsychInfo, Cochrane, and Google Scholar were searched.

CONCLUSION

NMIBC is a chronic disease with high recurrence and progression rates with most patients requiring invasive treatment and burdensome surveillance schedules with frequent hospital visits. Treatment-related side effects may interrupt therapy and possibly result in its discontinuation. Patients' quality of life can be negatively affected at various stages of the cancer trajectory. Specialist nurses provide holistic care throughout all stages of the patient journey to optimize supportive care, information provision, and delivery of appropriate treatment and surveillance protocols. NMIBC research is historically underfunded with a paucity of evidence identifying the supportive care needs of this population. Further research is urgently required to fill the gaps identified.

IMPLICATIONS FOR NURSING PRACTICE

This timely paper raises the profile of unmet supportive care needs in an underserved research cancer population. Suggestions are proposed to improve the quality of nursing care through standardized practices and the development and integration of patient pathways. Evidence of the effect of NMIBC on family members or carers is absent from the literature. Future research implications and directions are proposed.

How Do We Meet the Supportive Care and Information Needs of Those Living With and Beyond Bladder Cancer?

This perspective paper presents the case for adopting a new approach to the design and delivery of supportive care for those with bladder cancer. It is our assertion that the design and delivery of supportive care for those diagnosed with bladder cancer needs to (1) build on existing research and available tools and (2) address current limitations due to lack of use of said tools, lack of understanding of research and needs, lack of a shared language, and method of assessment and evaluation. This, we argue, can be achieved through a network-based approach (1) focussed on the structure, process, and outcome of supportive care.

Simultaneously Quantifying Both Young's Modulus and Specific Membrane Capacitance of Bladder Cancer Cells with Different Metastatic Potential

Both Young's modulus and specific membrane capacitance (SMC) are two important physical parameters for characterizing cell status. In this paper, we utilized a thin-neck-micropipette aspiration system to simultaneously quantify Young's modulus and SMC value of six types of cell lines in different progression grades, which include four grades from the lowest metastatic potential G1 to the highest potential G4. We investigated how these two physical properties possess heterogeneities in bladder cancer cells with different grades and what roles they might play in grading bladder cancer. The characterization results of these cells of different cancer grades is linearly correlated with the cancer grades, showing that the Young's modulus is negatively linearly correlated with bladder cancer grades, while SMC shows a positive linear correlation. Furthermore, the combination of these two physical properties on a scatter diagram clearly shows the cell groups with different cancer grades, which means that this combination could be a potential tumor grading marker to identify cancer cells with different metastatic potential.

Integration of Patient Reported Outcomes in Drug Development in Genitourinary Cancers

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Patient reported outcomes (PROs) are increasingly utilized in cancer drug development, and are of particular importance in genitourinary cancers due to symptom burden, multiple treatment options with similar efficacy, and often prolonged duration of disease. Here we review current data and perspectives related to use of PROs in drug development for genitourinary cancers, including insights on the regulatory process for drug approval.

RECENT FINDINGS

The FDA is committed to incorporating PRO data into the regulatory process for development and approval of new cancer drugs, but challenges exist due to lack of standardization of PRO instrument choice and analytic approach, missing data, and difficulty isolating treatment effect from disease-related effects. We review guidance for standardization of PRO methodology that is nonetheless tailored to disease state and anticipated effects of treatment. PRO and efficacy data should be simultaneously analyzed and reported for best clinical practice. Multiple disease-specific PRO instruments exist for genitourinary cancers. While clinicians, researchers, and regulatory bodies alike recognize the importance of PROs in cancer drug development, challenges remain regarding implementation of best practices.

Health-related quality of life among non-muscle-invasive bladder cancer survivors: a population-based study

OBJECTIVE

To examine the effect of non-muscle-invasive bladder cancer (NMIBC) diagnosis and treatment on survivors' quality of life (QoL).

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Of the 5979 patients with NMIBC diagnosed between 2010 and 2014 in North Carolina, 2000 patients were randomly selected to be invited to enroll in this cross-sectional study. Data were collected by postal mail survey. The European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Questionnaire-Core (QLQ-C30) and the NMIBC-specific module were included in the survey to measure QoL. Descriptive statistics, t-tests, anova, and Pearson's correlation were used to describe demographics and to assess how QoL varied by sex, cancer stage, time since diagnosis, and treatment.

RESULTS

A total of 398 survivors returned questionnaires (response rate: 23.6%). The mean QoL score for QLQ-C30 (range 0-100, higher = better QoL in all domains but symptoms) for global health status was 73.6, function domain scores ranged from 83.9 to 86.5, and scores for the top five symptoms (insomnia, fatigue, dyspnoea, pain, and financial difficulties) ranged from 14.1 to 24.3. The lowest NMIBC-specific QoL domain was sexual issues including sexual function, enjoyment, problems, and intimacy. Women had worse bowel problems, sexual function, and sexual enjoyment than men but better sexual intimacy and fewer concerns about contaminating their partner. Stage Ta had the highest global health status, followed by T1 and Tis. QoL did not vary by time since diagnosis except for sexual function. The cystectomy group (n = 21) had worse QoL in sexual function, discomfort with sexual intimacy, sexual enjoyment, and male sexual problems than the non-cystectomy group (n = 336).

CONCLUSION

Survivors of NMIBC face a unique burden associated with their diagnosis and the often-lifelong surveillance and treatment regimens. The finding has important implications for the design of tailored supportive care interventions to improve QoL for NMIBC survivors.

Patient-reported outcomes in randomised clinical trials of bladder cancer: an updated systematic review

BACKGROUND

Despite international recommendations of including patient-reported outcomes (PROs) in randomised clinical trials (RCTs), a 2014 review concluded that few RCTs of bladder cancer (BC) report PRO as an outcome. We therefore aimed to update the 2014 review to synthesise current evidence-based knowledge of PROs from RCTs in BC. A secondary objective was to examine whether quality of PRO reporting has improved over time and to provide evidence-based recommendations for future studies in this area.

METHODS

We conducted a systematic literature search using PubMed/Medline, from April 2014 until June 2018. We included the RCTs identified in the previous review as well as newly published RCTs. Studies were evaluated using a predefined electronic-data extraction form that included information on basic trial demographics, clinical and PRO characteristics and standards of PRO reporting based on recommendation from the International Society of Quality of Life Research.

RESULTS

Since April 2014 only eight new RCTs for BC included PROs as a secondary outcome. In terms of methodology, only the proportion of RCTs documenting the extent of missing PRO data (75% vs 11.1%, p = 0.03) and the identification of PROs in trial protocols (50% vs 0%, p = 0.015) improved. Statistical approaches for dealing with missing data were not reported in most new studies (75%).

CONCLUSION

Little improvement into the uptake and assessment of PRO as an outcome in RCTs for BC has been made during recent years. Given the increase in (immunotherapy) drug trials with a potential for severe adverse events, there is urgent need to adopt the recommendations and standards available for PRO use in bladder cancer RCTs.

Evaluating patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) for bladder cancer: a systematic review using the COnsensus-based Standards for the selection of health Measurement INstruments (COSMIN) checklist

Patient‐reported outcome measures (PROMs) are important tools used to understand patient‐focused outcomes from care. Various PROMs have been developed for patients with bladder cancer (BC), although the disease's heterogeneity makes selection difficult. Accurate measurement of health‐related quality of life (HRQL) can only be achieved if the PROM chosen is ‘fit for purpose’ (i.e. psychometrically sound). Systematic reviews of psychometric properties are useful for selecting the best PROM for a specific purpose. The COnsensus‐based Standards for the selection of health Measurement INstruments (COSMIN) developed a checklist to improve the selection of health measurement instruments as part of a review process. Our aims were to undertake a systematic review, using the COSMIN criteria, to assess the quality of studies that report the psychometric properties of PROMs used with people with BC and determine the psychometric quality of these PROMs. An electronic search of seven databases including PubMed, MEDLINE and EMBASE (PROSPERO reference CRD42016051974) was undertaken to identify English language publications, published between January 1990 and September 2017 that evaluated psychometric properties of PROMs used in BC research. Two researchers independently screened abstracts and selected full‐text papers. Studies were rated on methodological quality using the COSMIN checklist. Overall, 4663 records were screened and 23 studies, reporting outcomes in 3568 patients, were evaluated using the COSMIN checklist. Most PROMs had limited information reported about their psychometric properties. Studies reporting on the Bladder Cancer Index (BCI) and Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy Vanderbilt Cystectomy Index (FACT‐VCI) provided the most detail and these PROMs could be evaluated on the most COSMIN properties. Based on the available evidence, no existing PROM stands out as the most appropriate to measure HRQL in BC populations. This is due to two factors; (i) the heterogeneity of BC and its treatments (ii) no PROM was evaluated on all COSMIN measurement properties due to a lack of validation studies. We suggest future evaluation of generic, cancer generic and BC‐specific PROMs to better understand their application with BC populations and propose strategies to help clinicians and researchers.

Assessment of content validity for patient-reported outcome measures used in patients with non-muscle invasive bladder cancer: a systematic review

OBJECTIVE

Non-muscle invasive bladder cancer (NMIBC) is a chronic condition requiring ongoing treatment and endoscopic examinations that are frequent and can be life-long. To ensure the comprehensive assessment of the benefits and harms of treatments for NMIBC, the impact on important and relevant patient-reported outcomes (PROs) should be determined. We systematically reviewed the NMIBC PRO literature to determine the suitability of available PRO measures (PROMs) for use in evaluating patient outcomes in NMIBC research.

METHODS

We searched six electronic databases, reference lists, and key authors. Two reviewers independently applied inclusion and quality criteria and extracted findings. PROM domains, item content, and content coverage and relevance were determined for identified PROMs. Content validity was assessed against an empirically derived NMIBC-specific conceptual framework that includes 11 PRO domains and 19 sub-domains.

RESULTS

Seventeen studies assessed PROs related to NMIBC and treatment impact. From these studies, 11 PROMs were identified, including three generic, three cancer-specific, and five symptom-specific. None of the PROMs cover all PRO domains important in NMIBC as assessed against our conceptual framework. The EORTC QLQ-C30 plus the NMIBC24 module was best aligned to the conceptual model, but failed to represent six outcomes important to NMIBC patients.

CONCLUSIONS

Currently, some outcomes important in NMIBC are inadequately covered by generic and cancer-specific measures despite similar conceptual models. This review identified gaps in the literature regarding assessment of symptoms and other PROs considered important by NMIBC patients. Careful consideration of PROM item content is required when selecting outcome measures for use in future NMIBC clinical trials to ensure that appropriate measures are used to assess outcomes that matter to patients.

Defining Priorities to Improve Patient Experience in Non-Muscle Invasive Bladder Cancer

Background:

Although approximately 75% of bladder cancers are non-muscle invasive (NMIBC) at diagnosis, most research tends to focus on invasive disease (e.g., experiences related to radical cystectomy and urinary diversion). There is a lack of studies on quality of life, and especially qualitative research, in bladder cancer generally. As a result, relatively little is known about the experiences and needs of NMIBC patients.

Objective:

To understand patient experience, define care priorities, and identify targets for care improvement in NMIBC across the cancer continuum.

Methods:

Through focus groups, patients treated for NMIBC (stage <T2) were invited to share their care experiences including diagnosis, treatment, and survivorship. Transcripts were analyzed using conventional content analysis to identify themes and subthemes.

Results:

Twenty patients (16 male, 4 female, all white) participated in three focus groups. Five primary themes emerged: access to care, provider characteristics and communication, quality of life, goals of care/influences on decision-making, and role of social support. Patients with NMIBC desired timely access to care and honest and caring provider communication. They described urinary function and emotional quality of life changes resulting from diagnosis and treatment. Avoiding cystectomy and being alive for family were the major decision influencers.

Conclusion:

In this qualitative study, we identified access to care, provider characteristics and communication, quality of life, values/influences on decision-making, and social support as priority areas to improve patient experience in NMIBC. Care redesign efforts should focus on improving access, enhancing provider communication, reducing side effects, and supporting caregiver roles.

Psychometric Evaluation of a Patient-Reported Symptom Index for Nonmuscle Invasive Bladder Cancer: Field Testing Protocol

Background

Nonmuscle invasive bladder cancer (NMIBC) is a chronic condition requiring intensive follow-up, repeated endoscopic examinations, tumor resections, and intravesical treatments that can occur every 3 months for life. In this clinical context, patient-reported outcomes (PROs) are a critical concern for patients and their managing clinicians. PROs have enormous potential to be integral to treatment assessment and recommendations for NMIBC; however, current PRO measures are inadequate for NMIBC because they lack key NMIBC-specific symptoms and side effects associated with contemporary treatments.

Objective

The overarching aim of this study was to develop and evaluate a patient-reported symptom index (SI) for individuals with NMIBC (the NMIBC-SI) that is acceptable to patients; reliable, valid, and responsive to differences between contemporary treatments for NMIBC; and fit for purpose as an endpoint in clinical trials.

Methods

The NMIBC-SI will be evaluated in 2 field tests across a total of 3 years. Field test 1 is a cross-sectional study design involving 225 adult NMIBC patients recruited while undergoing active treatment or those who completed final treatment within the past week. Data collected include patient demographics, clinical features of the tumor, risk category, treatment type, comorbidity, and PROs. Field test 2 is a prospective longitudinal study involving 225 newly diagnosed NMIBC-SI patients. Clinical data and patient-completed questionnaires will be collected at 4 time points during treatment: before tumor resection, 1 week after resection, end-of-induction intravesical therapy, and 1-year follow-up. Standard psychometric tests will be performed to assess the reliability, validity, responsiveness, and clinical utility of the NMIBC-SI.

Results

Participant recruitment to field test 1 commenced in February 2017. Recruitment for field test 2 is planned to commence in January 2018. Final results are expected to be published in 2019. The NMIBC-SI will be freely available for use via registration.

Conclusions

This study protocol contains detailed methods that will be used across multiple international sites. Phase 2 in the development of the NMIBC-SI will enable a comprehensive evaluation of its reliability, validity, and responsiveness to ensure that the NMIBC-SI is fit for purpose in clinical research and provides an evidence base for the ongoing improvement of future therapies for NMIBC.

Trial Registration

ClinicalTrials.gov NCT03091764; http://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/showNCT03091764 (Archived by WebCite at http://www.webcitation.org/6umBhQeNX)