A prospective comparison of quality of life measures for patients with esophageal cancer

Longitudinal patient-reported outcomes after minimally invasive McKeown esophagectomy for patients with esophageal squamous cell carcinoma

PURPOSE

Surgery for esophageal squamous cell carcinoma (ESCC) is characterized by a poor prognosis and high complication rate, resulting in a heavy symptom burden and poor health-related quality of life (QOL). We evaluated longitudinal patient-reported outcomes (PROs) to analyze the correlations between symptoms and QOL and their changing characteristics during postoperative rehabilitation.

METHODS

We investigated patients with ESCC who underwent minimally invasive McKeown esophagectomy at Sichuan Cancer Hospital between April 2019 and December 2019. Longitudinal data of the clinical characteristics and PROs were collected. The MD Anderson Symptom Inventory and European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) QOL questionnaires were used to assess symptoms and QOL and compare the trajectories of PROs during the investigation.

RESULTS

A total of 244 patients with ESCC were enrolled in this study. Regarding QOL, role and emotional functions returned to baseline at 1 month after surgery, and cognitive and social functions returned to baseline at 3 months after surgery. However, physical function and global QOL did not return to baseline at 1 year after surgery. At 7 days and 1, 3, 6, and 12 months after surgery, the main symptoms of the patients were negatively correlated with physical, role, emotional, cognitive, and social functions and the overall health status (P < 0.05).

CONCLUSION

Patients with ESCC experience reduced health-related QOL and persisting symptoms after minimally invasive McKeown esophagectomy, but a recovery trend was observed within 1 month. The long-term QOL after esophagectomy is acceptable.

Patient reported outcomes: integration into clinical practices

Patient-centered care is a growing focus of research and modern surgical practice. To this end, there has been an ever-increasing utilization of patient reported outcomes (PRO) and health-related quality of life metrics (HR-QOL) in thoracic surgery research. Here we describe reasons and methods for integration of PRO measurement into routine thoracic surgical practice, commonly utilized PRO measurement instruments, and several examples of successful integration.

Does it matter how we evaluate HRQOL? Longitudinal comparison of the EORTC QLQ-C30/QLQ-OG25 and FACT-E

PURPOSE

To determine whether EORTC QLQ-C30/QLQ-OG25 and FACT-E compared longitudinally provide similar reflections of health-related quality of life (HRQOL).

METHODS

Eighty-six esophageal cancer patients treated with curative intent, scheduled to complete both questionnaires at baseline and post-treatment time points until 36 months. A generalized estimating equation model utilizing a Gaussian family compared instruments longitudinally. The two-one-sided-test (TOST) method assessed equivalence between the instruments.

RESULTS

Trajectories for social domain and overall quality of life differed significantly between instruments. Also, FACT-G's functional well-being post-treatment returns to baseline 3-6 months earlier than the EORTC QLQ-C30's role functioning subscale, suggesting measurement of different components. Trajectories for physical and esophageal symptom subscales are similar and are deemed equivalent. Emotional domains are comparable and bear little resemblance to the physical domain trajectories indicating reflection of emotional experience rather than a physical proxy. EORTC QLQ-C30 subscales have a trajectory similar to its physical functioning scale except for the emotional and esophageal symptoms scales. Overall HRQOL in both instruments showed a consistent return to baseline/pre-treatment levels by 6 months post-treatment.

CONCLUSIONS

Overall HRQOL recovers earlier after curative-intent treatment than previously reported despite persistence of physical symptoms, with a consistent return to pre-treatment levels by 6 months after treatment. This supports the concept that HRQOL is not primarily defined by physical function. Based on this longitudinal comparison, FACT-E provides a more multidimensional assessment of HRQOL.

IMPLICATIONS FOR CANCER SURVIVORS

Curative intent treatment for esophageal cancer has adverse effects on HRQOL but despite intense treatment, overall HRQOL recovers within 6 months.

The RESTORE Randomized Controlled Trial: Impact of a Multidisciplinary Rehabilitative Program on Cardiorespiratory Fitness in Esophagogastric cancer Survivorship

OBJECTIVE

The Rehabilitation Strategies in Esophagogastric cancer (RESTORE) randomized controlled trial evaluated the efficacy of a 12-week multidisciplinary program to increase the cardiorespiratory fitness and health-related quality of life (HRQOL) of esophagogastric cancer survivors.

BACKGROUND

Patients following treatment for esophagogastric cancer are at risk of physical deconditioning, nutritional compromise, and sarcopenia. Accordingly, compelling rationale exists to target these impairments in recovery.

METHODS

Disease-free patients treated for esophagogastric cancer were randomized to either usual care or the 12-week RESTORE program (exercise training, dietary counseling, and multidisciplinary education). The primary outcome was cardiopulmonary exercise testing (VO2peak). Secondary outcomes included body composition (bioimpedance analysis), and HRQOL (EORTC-QLQ-C30). Outcomes were assessed at baseline (T0), postintervention (T1), and at 3-month follow-up (T2).

RESULTS

Twenty-two participants were randomized to the control group [mean (standard deviation) age 64.14 (10.46) yr, body mass index 25.67 (4.83) kg/m, time postsurgery 33.68 (19.56) mo], and 21 to the intervention group [age 67.19(7.49) yr, body mass index 25.69(4.02) kg/m, time postsurgery 23.52(15.23) mo]. Mean adherence to prescribed exercise sessions were 94(12)% (supervised) and 78(27)% (unsupervised). Correcting for baseline VO2peak, the intervention arm had significantly higher VO2peak at both T1, 22.20 (4.35) versus 21.41 (4.49) mL · min · kg, P < 0.001, and T2, 21.75 (4.27) versus 20.74 (4.65) mL · min · kg, P = 0.001, compared with the control group. Correcting for baseline values, no changes in body composition or HRQOL were observed.

CONCLUSIONS

The RESTORE program significantly improved cardiorespiratory fitness of disease-free patients after esophagogastric cancer surgery, without compromise to body composition. This randomized controlled trial provides proof of principle for rehabilitation programs in esophagogastric cancer.

CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

NCT03314311.

Quality of life in patients with upper GI malignancies managed by a strategy of chemoradiotherapy alone versus surgery

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES

Neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy (nCRT) induces a pathological complete response (pCR) in 25-85% of oesophago-gastric cancer. As surgery entails morbidity and mortality risks and quality of life (QL) impairment, its avoidance in patients without residual disease is desirable. This study aimed to compare quality of life of patients with a cCR who chose surveillance with those who chose surgery.

METHODS

Four groups of patients were studied. Group 1(n = 31) were controls; Group 2 (n = 26) had chemoradiotherapy only; Group 3 (n = 31) had oesophagectomy after nCRT; Group 4 (n = 26) had gastrectomy alone. A 33-point novel questionnaire was administered at two 3 month time points. Participants were also interviewed with a validated questionnaire.

RESULTS

Mean(±sd) quality of life scores in cCR patients offered surveillance (28.9 ± 4.5) were superior to patients undergoing oesophagectomy (32.3 ± 58. p=0.042) or gastrectomy (33.19 ± 5.9, p=0.004). This result was replicated in the validated questionnaire (p=0.017). There was a trend towards increased reflux-related respiratory symptoms in the oesophagectomy group (7.3 ± 2.2 vs 6.5 ± 1.9; p=0.396) and towards early dumping (8.2 ± 1.4 vs 7.1 ± 1.; p=0.239) and vagotomy-related symptoms (1.82 ± 0.9 vs 1.4 ± 0.6; p=0.438) in the gastrectomy group.

CONCLUSIONS

Avoidance of surgery in cCR patients is rewarded with a superior quality of life to those undergoing surgery.

Patient-reported outcomes in lung and esophageal cancer

Carcinomas of the lung and esophagus are associated with significant disease and treatment related morbidity. Measuring patients' self-perceived notion of their health-related quality of life (HRQOL), throughout the course of illness, is central to the delivery of comprehensive, patient-centered care. This article reviews commonly used HRQOL instruments in thoracic surgery and discusses the integral role of patient-reported outcomes (PROs) in comparative effectiveness research and prognostication in the realm of lung and esophageal cancer. We also highlight challenges and future directions for widespread implementation of PROs into clinical and research practice.

Health-Related Quality of Life Associated with Barrett's Esophagus and Cancer

BACKGROUND

Research assessing health-related quality of life (HRQoL) which can be applied to economic evaluation in Barrett's esophagus (BE) and esophageal cancer is limited. This study derived health state utilities for various 'stages' of BE and Cancer.

METHODS

A cross-sectional survey was conducted, including patients with non-dysplastic BE, low-grade dysplasia, high-grade dysplasia, or esophageal adenocarcinoma. HRQoL was assessed using generic instruments-EQ-5D-5L and SF-36, and a cancer-specific instrument-EORTC QLQ-C30. Outcomes were compared for health states following different treatments. Correlations and agreements for the three instruments were investigated using Spearman's correlation coefficient (r) and intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC).

RESULTS

A total of 97 respondents (80% male, mean age 68 years) returned questionnaires. The mean (standard deviation) health state utilities for the total sample were 0.79 (0.24) for the EQ-5D-5L, 0.57 (0.29) for the SF-6D (derived from SF-36) and 0.73 (0.20) for the QLU-C10D (derived from EORTC QLQ-C30). There were strong correlations (r > 0.80) and absolute agreement (except EQ-5D-5L and SF-6D with an ICC of 0.69) among the three instruments. No significant differences were observed for different stages of BE or interventions. However, following surgery for cancer patients reported better psychological well-being than those under surveillance or following endoscopic treatments.

CONCLUSION

HRQoL for BE surveillance and following cancer treatment was similar. Esophagectomy was associated with better psychological functioning, and this might be attributed to a reduction in the perceived risk of cancer. The correlation between the EORTC QLU-C10D and the other health state utility instruments supports the validity of this new instrument.

Impact of supplemental home enteral feeding postesophagectomy on nutrition, body composition, quality of life, and patient satisfaction

The aim of this prospective cohort study is to analyze the impact of supplemental home enteral nutrition (HEN) post-esophageal cancer surgery on nutritional parameters, quality of life (QL), and patient satisfaction. A systematic review reported that over 60% of patients lose >10% of both body weight and BMI by 6 months after esophagectomy. Enteral feeding (EF) is increasingly a modern standard postoperatively; however, the impact of extended HEN postdischarge has not been systematically studied. One hundred forty-nine consecutive patients [mean age 62 ± 9, 80% male,76% adenocarcinoma, 66% on multimodal protocols, and 69% with BMI ≥ 25 kg/m2] were studied. Jejunal EF commenced day 1 postoperatively, and supplemental overnight HEN (764 kcal; 32g protein) continued on discharge for a planned further 4 weeks. Weight, BMI, and body composition analysis (bioimpedance analysis) were measured at baseline, preoperatively and at 1, 3, and 6 months, along with the EORTC QLQ-C30/OES18 QL measures. A patient satisfaction questionnaire addressed eight key items in relation to HEN (max score 100/item). Median (range) total duration of EF was 49 days (28-96). Overall compliance was 96%. At 6 months, compared with preoperatively, 58 (39%) patients lost >10% weight, with median (IQR) loss of 6.8 (4-9) kg, and 62 (41%) patients lost >10% BMI. Lean body mass and body fat were significantly (p < 0.001) decreased. Mean global QL decreased (p < 0.01) from 82 to 72. A high mean satisfaction score (>70 ± 11/100) was reported, >80 for practical training, activities of daily living, pain, anxiety, recovery and impact on caregivers, with lower scores for appetite (33 ± 24) and sleep (63 ± 30). Supplemental HEN for a minimum of one month postdischarge is associated with high compliance and patient satisfaction. Weight and BMI loss may still be substantial, however this may be less than published literature, in addition the impact on HR-QL may be attenuated. HEN has both subjective and objective rationale and merits further validation toward optimizing nutritional recovery and overall wellbeing.

Quality of Life after Open or Minimally Invasive Esophagectomy in Patients With Esophageal Cancer-A Systematic Review

Although esophageal cancer is rare in the United States, 5-year survival and quality of life (QoL) are poor following esophageal cancer surgery. Although esophageal cancer has been surgically treated with esophagectomy through thoracotomy, an open procedure, minimally invasive surgical procedures have been recently introduced to decrease the risk of complications and improve QoL after surgery. The current study is a systematic review of the published literature to assess differences in QoL after traditional (open) or minimally invasive esophagectomy. We hypothesized that QoL is consistently better in patients treated with minimally invasive surgery than in those treated with a more traditional and invasive approach. Although global health, social function, and emotional function improved more commonly after minimally invasive surgery compared with open surgery, physical function and role function, as well as symptoms including choking, dysphagia, eating problems, and trouble swallowing saliva, declined for both surgery types. Cognitive function was equivocal across both groups. The potential small benefits in global and mental health status among those who experience minimally invasive surgery should be considered with caution given the possibility of publication and selection bias.

Systematic review of patient-reported outcome measures in the surgical treatment of patients with esophageal cancer

Esophageal cancer is currently the eighth most common cancer worldwide. Improvements in operative techniques and neoadjuvant therapies have led to improved outcomes. Resection of the esophagus carries a high risk of severe complications and has a negative impact on health-related quality of life (QOL). The aim of this study was to assess which patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) are used to measure QOL after esophagectomy for cancer. A comprehensive search of original articles was conducted investigating QOL after surgery for esophageal carcinoma. Two authors independently selected relevant articles, conducted clinical appraisal, and extracted data (PJ and JS). Out of 5893 articles, 58 studies were included, consisting of 41 prospective and 17 retrospective cohort studies, including a total of 6964 patients. These studies included 11 different PROMs. The existing PROMs could be divided into generic, symptom-specific, and disease-specific questionnaires. The European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) QOL Questionnaire Core 30 (QLQ C-30) along with the EORTC QLQ-OESophagus module OES18 was the most widely used; in 42 and 32 studies, respectively. The EORTC and the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy (FACT) questionnaires use an oncological module and an organ-specific module. One validation study was available, which compared the FACT and EORTC, showing moderate to poor correlation between the questionnaires. A great variety of PROMs are being used in the measurement of QOL after surgery for esophageal cancer. A questionnaire with a general module along with a disease-specific module for assessment of QOL of different treatment modalities seem to be the most desirable, such as the EORTC and the FACT with their specific modules (EORTC QLQ-OES18 and FACT-E). Both are developed in different treatment modalities, such as in surgical patients. With regard to reproducibility of current results, the EORTC is recommended.

Patient-reported outcomes evaluating palliative radiotherapy and chemotherapy in patients with oesophageal cancer: a systematic review

BACKGROUND

Patient-reported outcomes (PROs) and assessments of treatment-related toxicity provide important information on the effect of palliative chemotherapy and/or radiotherapy. The aim of this study was to review the effect of palliative radiotherapy and/or chemotherapy on symptoms and quality of life assessed by PROs and measurement of toxicity for patients with oesophageal cancer.

METHODS

The Central, Medline and Embase databases (1990 to November 2011) were systematically searched for prospective studies of palliative chemotherapy and/or radiotherapy in patients with advanced oesophageal cancer with PRO- and/or toxicity outcomes. The risks of bias were assessed.

RESULTS

Of 2677 records identified, only 32 included PROs, of which eight were randomised controlled trials. In studies with sufficient standard of PRO (n = 18), either Health Related Quality of Life (HRQL) (n = 14) or patient-reported dysphagia (n = 4), were assessed. Docetaxel added to cisplatin + fluorouracil (CF) improved HRQL compared to CF only, even though toxicity increased. Epirubicin added to CF resulted in longer preserved HRQL than its comparator in two trials, and non-inferiority in one. All phase II chemotherapy studies reported maintained HRQL or improved dysphagia combined with low level of toxicity. Brachytherapy resulted in better HRQL compared to stent placement in two trials, and external radiotherapy relieved dysphagia. The quality of the HRQL methodology and the interpretation and presentation of the PRO results varied, and clinical significance was seldom discussed.

CONCLUSION

PRO endpoints are seldom used and further studies of homogenous patient groups with valid measures and methodology of PROs should be encouraged in the evaluation of palliative treatment. Brachytherapy, external radiotherapy and combination chemotherapy improved HRQL and dysphagia in the few identified studies with sufficient PRO methodology.

Systematic review of health-related quality of life after esophagectomy for esophageal cancer

This study is aimed to assess the long-term health-related quality of life (HRQL) of patients after esophagectomy for esophageal cancer in comparison with es-tablished norms, and to evaluate changes in HRQL during the different stages of follow-up after esophageal resection. A systematic review was performed by searching medical databases (Medline, Embase and the Cochrane Library) for potentially relevant studies that appeared between January 1975 and March 2011. Studies were included if they addressed the question of HRQL after esophageal resection for esophageal cancer. Two researchers independently performed the study selection, data extraction and analysis processes. Twenty-one observational studies were included with a total of 1282 (12-355) patients. Five studies were performed with short form-36 (SF-36) and 16 with European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) QLQ C30 (14 of them also utilized the disease-specific OES18 or its previous version OES24). The analysis of long-term generic HRQL with SF-36 showed pooled scores for physical, role and social function after esophagectomy similar to United States norms, but lower pooled scores for physical function, vitality and general health perception. The analysis of HRQL conducted using the Global EORTC C30 global scale during a 6-mo follow-up showed that global scale and physical function were better at the baseline. The symptom scales indicated worsened fatigue, dyspnea and diarrhea 6 mo after esophagectomy. In contrast, however, emotional function had significantly improved after 6 mo. In conclusion, short- and long-term HRQL is deeply affected after esophagectomy for cancer. The impairment of physical function may be a long-term consequence of esophagectomy involving either the respiratory system or the alimentary tract. The short- and long-term improvement in the emotional function of patients who have undergone successful operations may be attributed to the impression that they have survived a near-death experience.

Translation and validation of Korean Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-Esophageal (FACT-E) scale with squamous cell carcinoma and chemoradiation-only patients

PURPOSE

The Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-Esophageal (FACT-E) Scale version 4 has been used to assess quality of life in patients with squamous cell carcinoma undergoing chemoradiation. We sought to determine whether this scale can be used to assess quality of life in Korean patients with esophageal cancer undergoing chemoradiation.

METHODS

The FACT-E scale version 4 was cross-culturally translated into Korean. Its reliability and validity were assessed in a group of 146 esophageal cancer patients who were scheduled for neoadjuvant chemoradiation (CRT). This procedure was followed by esophagectomy that took place between 2007 and 2010 at Asan Medical Center. All patients completed the FACT-E, Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS) and Functional Living Index-Cancer (FLIC) questionnaires at baseline (pre-treatment) and 1 month after two cycles of induction chemotherapy followed by CRT.

RESULTS

In validating the FACT-E, we found high internal consistency coefficients ranging from 0.72 to 0.91. Good convergent and divergent validities were demonstrated by the FLIC and HADS scales. The FACT-E showed good clinical validity and effectively differentiated between patient groups with different performance status ratings and stages. Changes in clinical status were reflected by changes in FACT-E scores, demonstrating responsiveness to neoadjuvant CRT.

CONCLUSION

The FACT-E has been shown to be a reliable and valid instrument that can now be used to prospectively evaluate the quality of life of Korean patients with esophageal cancer.

Postoperative quality of life: development and validation of the "Dysfunction After Upper Gastrointestinal Surgery" scoring system

BACKGROUND

Although postoperative quality of life is an important outcomes measure, few tools exist to evaluate patients specifically after upper gastrointestinal surgery. The previously developed Dysfunction After Upper Gastrointestinal Surgery (DAUGS)32 scoring system has been further refined to include just 20 items. This study was undertaken to validate the refined evaluation tool.

STUDY DESIGN

The study was performed as a survey, administered to patients after upper gastrointestinal resection at 3 separate institutions.

RESULTS

The DAUGS20 score after gastrectomy (n = 662) was 27.8 and that after esophagectomy (n = 221) was 36.1, showing a significant difference (p < 0.05). The score after distal gastrectomy (n = 282) was 25.4 and that after total gastrectomy (n = 149) was 32.0, showing a significant (p < 0.05) difference. The α coefficient of all items on the DAUGS20 system was 0.904 and Cronbach's α coefficients of the subscales were 0.612 to 0.856, demonstrating high reliability of this evaluation tool. In addition, 7 factors were extracted from the 20 items using definitive factor analysis, to verify validity.

CONCLUSIONS

Patient quality of life should be evaluated as an outcomes measure after surgical resection for cancer, just as overall survival is analyzed. The DAUGS20 score is reliable, has validity in the evaluation of postoperative patients, and is a valuable tool to assess patient quality of life after upper gastrointestinal surgery for cancer.

Choosing between the EORTC QLQ-C30 and FACT-G for measuring health-related quality of life in cancer clinical research: issues, evidence and recommendations

BACKGROUND

This review aims to assist cancer clinical researchers in choosing between the two most widely used measures of cancer-specific health-related quality of life: the European Organisation for the Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Questionnaire Core 30 and Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-General (FACT-G).

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Information on QLQ-C30 and FACT-G content, scale structure, accessibility and availability was collated from websites and manuals. A systematic review was undertaken to identify all articles reporting on psychometric properties and information to assist interpretability. Evidence for reliability, validity and responsiveness was rated using a standardised checklist. Instrument properties were compared and contrasted to inform recommendations.

RESULTS

Psychometric evidence does not recommend one questionnaire over the other in general. However, there are important differences between the scale structure, social domains and tone that inform choice for any particular study.

CONCLUSIONS

Where research objectives are concerned with the impact of a specific tumour type, treatment or symptom, choice should be guided by the availability, content, scale structure and psychometric properties of relevant European Organisation for the Research and Treatment of Cancer versus Functional Assessment of Chronic Illness Therapy modules. Because the FACT-G combines symptoms and concerns within each scale, individual items should always be reviewed within the context of specific research objectives. Where these issues are indecisive, researchers are encouraged to use an algorithm at the end of the current article.

Assessing health-related quality of life in gynecologic oncology: a systematic review of questionnaires and their ability to detect clinically important differences and change

OBJECTIVES

Researchers wishing to assess the health-related quality of life (HRQoL) of women with gynecologic cancers have a range of questionnaires to choose from. In general, disease-, treatment-, or symptom-specific questionnaires are assumed to be better able to identify between-group differences (sensitivity) and changes over time (responsiveness) than are cancer-specific or generic questionnaires. However, little work has tested this assumption in oncology. We set out to (a) identify all multidimensional HRQoL questionnaires used in studies with women with gynecologic cancer and (b) evaluate their track records in identifying minimal clinically important differences (MCIDs), with a view to making recommendations.

METHODS

We searched MEDLINE using the term quality of life and each gynecologic cancer type, as well as the names of identified questionnaires. We used 10% of the scale range as the threshold for an MCID.

RESULTS

We identified 1 generic (SF-36/SF-12), 3 cancer-specific (European Organisation for the Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Questionnaire [EORTC QLQ] C30, Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-General [FACT-G], and short-form Cancer Rehabilitation Evaluation System [CARES-SF]), and 1 disease-specific (QOL-Ovarian Cancer Patient Version) HRQoL questionnaires and 5 disease-specific (QLQ-OV28, FACT-O for ovarian, QLQ-CX24, FACT-Cx for cervical and FACT-V for vulvar), 1 treatment-specific (FACT and Gynecologic Oncology Group-Ntx for neurotoxicity), and 2 symptom-specific (FACT-Anemia and Functional Assessment of Chronic Illness and Therapy [FACIT]-Fatigue) modules. Twenty-seven articles reported results from 26 studies in which an MCID had been identified. The FACIT's anemia and fatigue subscales were more sensitive, and the neurotoxicity subscale more sensitive and responsive than the FACT-G on at least 1 comparison. However, we found no evidence for superior performance by the FACT-G compared with the SF-36 or EORTC and FACIT disease-specific modules versus the QLQ-C30 and FACT-G. There was also little evidence to favor EORTC versus FACIT questionnaires or vice versa.

CONCLUSIONS

The evidence we reviewed offered little support for the hypothesis that disease-, symptom-, or treatment-specific instruments are more sensitive and responsive than cancer-specific or generic questionnaires. However, conclusions were limited by the small number of head-to-head comparisons available. We summarize the clinical contexts in which each instrument identified an MCID to inform choice of questionnaire(s), sample size calculations, and interpretation of results in future studies.

Health-related quality of life assessment after breast reconstruction

Background

Health-related quality of life (HRQL) is an important outcome following breast reconstruction. This study evaluated current methods of HRQL assessment in patients undergoing latissimus dorsi breast reconstruction, hypothesizing that early surgical morbidity would be reflected by poorer HRQL scores.

Methods

Patients completed the European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) QLQ-C30 and breast module (QLQ-BR23), the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy (FACT) general measure, and breast module and arm subscale (FACT-B + 4), and the Body Image Scale and Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS) 3 months after surgery. They also reported additional HRQL problems not included in the questionnaires. HRQL scores were compared between patients with and without early surgical morbidity.

Results

Sixty women completed the questionnaires, of whom 25 (42 per cent) experienced complications. All EORTC and FACT subscale and HADS scores were similar in patients with or without morbidity. Women with complications were twice as likely to report feeling less feminine and dissatisfied with the appearance of their scar than those without problems. Thirty-two women (53 per cent) complained of problems not covered by the questionnaires, most commonly donor-site morbidity.

Conclusion

Existing HRQL instruments are not sufficiently sensitive to detect clinically relevant problems following breast reconstruction.

Is a change in patient-reported dysphagia after induction chemotherapy in locally advanced esophageal cancer a predictive factor for pathological response to neoadjuvant chemoradiation?

GOALS OF WORK

In patients with locally advanced esophageal cancer, only those responding to the treatment ultimately benefit from preoperative chemoradiation. We investigated whether changes in subjective dysphagia or eating restrictions after two cycles of induction chemotherapy can predict histopathological tumor response observed after chemoradiation. In addition, we examined general long-term quality of life (QoL) and, in particular, eating restrictions after esophagectomy.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Patients with resectable, locally advanced squamous cell- or adenocarcinoma of the esophagus were treated with two cycles of chemotherapy followed by chemoradiation and surgery. They were asked to complete the EORTC oesophageal-specific QoL module (EORTC QLQ-OES24), and linear analogue self-assessment QoL indicators, before and during neoadjuvant therapy and quarterly until 1 year postoperatively. A median change of at least eight points was considered as clinically meaningful.

MAIN RESULTS

Clinically meaningful improvements in the median scores for dysphagia and eating restrictions were found during induction chemotherapy. These improvements were not associated with a histopathological response observed after chemoradiation, but enhanced treatment compliance. Postoperatively, dysphagia scores remained low at 1 year, while eating restrictions persisted more frequently in patients with extended transthoracic resection compared to those with limited transhiatal resection.

CONCLUSIONS

The improvement of dysphagia and eating restrictions after induction chemotherapy did not predict tumor response observed after chemoradiation. One year after esophagectomy, dysphagia was a minor problem, and global QoL was rather good. Eating restrictions persisted depending on the surgical technique used.

Health-related quality-of-life assessment in gastrointestinal cancer: are results relevant for clinical practice?

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Health-related quality-of-life studies are now recognized as critical to understand the burden of disease and treatments on patients' well being. Significant advances have been recently achieved in gastrointestinal cancers, including the development and clinical use of new robust quality-of-life instruments. We review recent literature to evaluate whether quality-of-life assessment contributes to optimal patient information and helps treatment choices.

RECENT FINDINGS

Treatments of gastrointestinal cancers have changed in the last few years with increasing use of multimodal therapies and advances in surgical techniques, especially for low-lying rectal cancers. Concurrent to the development of sphincter-saving procedures, however, the long-term consequences of a permanent stoma on quality of life have been debated. Results of new palliative treatments should also be considered looking at preservation or improvement of quality of life and not only prolongation of life.

SUMMARY

Gastrointestinal malignancies impact strongly on patient quality of life due to the aggressiveness of the treatments. Short-term negative effects of surgery and specific deficits in survivors were recently described in gastrointestinal cancers. Baseline quality-of-life data predict length of survival in hepatocarcinoma and metastatic colorectal cancer. Generally, quality-of-life results help to fully inform the patients of the advantages or disadvantages of therapeutic options, including adjuvant and palliative treatments.

Postoperative gastrointestinal dysfunction after 2-field versus 3-field lymph node dissection in patients with esophageal cancer

PURPOSE

Using an instrument we developed to assess postoperative dysfunction objectively (Surg Today 2005;35:535-42), we compared postoperative dysfunction after 2 - field versus 3 - field lymph node dissection retrospectively, in patents undergoing esophageal cancer surgery.

METHODS

Subjects were selected randomly from among patients who had undergone radical surgery for squamous cell carcinoma of the thoracic esophagus followed by reconstruction with a gastric tube and a cervical anastomosis. Patients rated 32 items related to postoperative dysfunction according to a 5-grade scale. Postoperative gastrointestinal dysfunction was evaluated on the basis of the total score and the scores for seven symptom categories: decreased physical activity, symptoms of reflux, dumping-like syndrome, nausea and vomiting, passage dysfunction, pain, and diarrhea or soft feces.

RESULTS

We studied 42 patients, 22 of whom underwent 2-field lymph node dissection and 20 of whom underwent 3-field dissection. The total gastrointestinal dysfunction score was significantly higher in the 3-field group than in the 2-field group (78.4 +/- 14.1 points vs 67.9 +/- 16.9 points, P = 0.038). When we analyzed the data according to the symptom categories, the 3-field group had higher scores for decreased physical activity, symptoms of reflux, dumping-like syndrome, nausea and vomiting, and passage dysfunction.

CONCLUSION

Three-field lymph node dissection was associated with greater postoperative gastrointestinal dysfunction than 2-field lymph node dissection. Thus, the preoperative identification of those patients with esophageal cancer who are most likely to benefit from concurrent cervical lymph node dissection is essential.

Quality of life in patients with oesophageal and gastric cancer: an overview

An accurate assessment of health-related quality of life (QoL) in patients with oesophageal or gastric cancer (OGC) is essential to inform clinical decisions by providing insights into patients' experiences of the impact of the disease and its treatments on physical, social and emotional health. Robust QoL questionnaires have been developed and validated in the past decade to measure the QoL of OGC patients. Baseline QoL variables are also prognostic for survival in patients with oesophageal cancer or metastatic gastric cancer. This article reviews the impact of surgery and reconstructive techniques, as well as of adjuvant and palliative treatments on the QoL of patients with OGC.

The proteolysis-inducing factor: in search of its clinical relevance in patients with metastatic gastric/esophageal cancer

The proteolysis-inducing factor is a putative mediator of cancer-associated weight loss. The goal of this study was to examine for the first time: (i) its prevalence in patients with metastatic gastric/esophageal cancer; and (ii) whether it possibly correlated with weight loss and anorexia and whether it predicted tumor response and patient survival. This study recruited 41 patients as part of a phase II therapeutic, chemotherapy protocol for patients with metastatic gastric/esophageal cancer. Patient eligibility criteria were designed to select a group of patients who would tolerate treatment with the drugs capecitabine and oxaliplatin. Urine for assaying the proteolysis-inducing factor was obtained at registration and then 6 weeks later. Patients completed the FACT-E questionnaire every 6 weeks and had their weights checked at the same interval. Patients were followed prospectively for tumor response and patient survival. Twenty-three (56%) patients had the proteolysis-inducing factor in their urine at registration, and 18 (64%) had it at 6 weeks. There was no statistically significant correlation between the presence of the proteolysis-inducing factor and weight loss or between its presence and anorexia. Moreover, there was no evidence that the presence of the proteolysis-inducing factor in urine was able to predict tumor response or patient survival. The proteolysis-inducing factor in urine does not appear to be tied to weight loss, anorexia, tumor response, or patient survival in the clinical setting of metastatic gastric/esophageal cancer.

Oxaliplatin and capecitabine in patients with metastatic adenocarcinoma of the esophagus, gastroesophageal junction and gastric cardia: a phase II study from the North Central Cancer Treatment Group

PURPOSE

The synergic combination of oxaliplatin and capecitabine has demonstrated activity against various gastrointestinal cancers, including colon cancer. We therefore undertook this phase II study to test this first-line combination in patients with metastatic adenocarcinoma of the esophagus, gastroesophageal junction and gastric cardia.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Forty-three patients with histologic or cytologic confirmation of the above malignancy were recruited. The cohort had Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance statuses of 0, 1 and 2 in 47%, 51%, and 2%, respectively. Median age was 61 years (range 32-80). All had adequate organ function. Initially, patients were prescribed 130 mg/m2 intravenously on day 1 and capecitabine 1000 mg/m2 orally twice a day, on days 1-14 of a 21-day cycle. Four treatment-related deaths in the first 24 patients led to a reduction in capecitabine to 850 mg/m2 orally twice a day, days 1-14, for the remainder of the cohort.

RESULTS

The tumor response rate was 35% [95% confidence intervals (CI) 23% to 50%]. All responses were partial; seven of 24 occurred before the capecitabine dose reduction, and eight of 19 after. Median time to tumor progression was 4 months (95% CI 3.1-4.6), and median survival 6.4 months (95% CI 4.6-10). To date, there have been 36 deaths. Four were treatment-related (one infection, two myocardial infarctions, one respiratory failure), and all occurred before the capecitabine dose reduction. Notable grade 4 events from the entire cohort included diarrhea (two patients), vomiting (three), dyspnea (one), thrombosis (two) and anorexia (two). Grade 3 events included nausea (12 patients), diarrhea (12), fatigue (10), abdominal pain (seven), vomiting (six), dyspnea (six), hypokalemia (six), dehydration (five), hypokalemia (five) and infection (four).

CONCLUSIONS

Oxaliplatin and capecitabine in combination demonstrates activity in metastatic adenocarcinoma of the esophagus, gastroesophageal junction and gastric cardia. The lower dose (capecitabine 850 mg/m2 orally twice a day, days 1-14, and oxaliplatin 130 mg/m2 intravenously on day 1) yielded an acceptable toxicity profile and merits further study.