A core set of patient-reported outcomes for population-based cancer survivorship research: a consensus study

Machine learning models including patient-reported outcome data in oncology: a systematic literature review and analysis of their reporting quality

PURPOSE

To critically examine the current state of machine learning (ML) models including patient-reported outcome measure (PROM) scores in cancer research, by investigating the reporting quality of currently available studies and proposing areas of improvement for future use of ML in the field.

METHODS

PubMed and Web of Science were systematically searched for publications of studies on patients with cancer applying ML models with PROM scores as either predictors or outcomes. The reporting quality of applied ML models was assessed utilizing an adapted version of the MI-CLAIM (Minimum Information about CLinical Artificial Intelligence Modelling) checklist. The key variables of the checklist are study design, data preparation, model development, optimization, performance, and examination. Reproducibility and transparency complement the reporting quality criteria.

RESULTS

The literature search yielded 1634 hits, of which 52 (3.2%) were eligible. Thirty-six (69.2%) publications included PROM scores as a predictor and 32 (61.5%) as an outcome. Results of the reporting quality appraisal indicate a potential for improvement, especially in the areas of model examination. According to the standards of the MI-CLAIM checklist, the reporting quality of ML models in included studies proved to be low. Only nine (17.3%) publications present a discussion about the clinical applicability of the developed model and reproducibility and only three (5.8%) provide a code to reproduce the model and the results.

CONCLUSION

The herein performed critical examination of the status quo of the application of ML models including PROM scores in published oncological studies allowed the identification of areas of improvement for reporting and future use of ML in the field.

[Patient-reported outcomes-the role of the patient's subjective perspective for research and clinical care]

Because only patients can adequately assess symptoms, disability, and quality of life, concordance between a patient's and physician's assessment is often low. Accordingly, patient-reported outcomes (PROs) are increasingly used in research and routine clinical care. In daily practice, PROs are not only applied to measure the patient's perceived outcome of medical treatments, but also to assess their health status before intervention starts. Typically, several patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs), which are reliable and valid, are available for the assessment of the most important PROMs. In daily clinical practice, the integration of PROs can be useful for clinical assessment and treatment planning or for quality management. Currently, the most promising application is routine patient monitoring using digital PROMs (ePROMs). Systematic reviews have revealed that the routine use of PROMs in daily clinical care is associated with, among others, improved physician-patient communication, higher patient satisfaction, reduced symptom burden, higher quality of life, and improved survival. This effect is especially strong if health care professionals continuously receive the results of the PRO monitoring. Patients are usually inclined to disclose their health status, and the positive effects of routine patient monitoring are widely recognized. However, several barriers to using PROs and PROMs still exist.

Validity of the Musculoskeletal Tumor Society Score for lower extremity in patients with bone sarcoma or giant cell tumour of bone undergoing bone resection and reconstruction surgery in hip and knee

BACKGROUND

The Musculoskeletal Tumor Society Score (MSTS) is widely used to evaluate functioning following surgery for bone and soft-tissue sarcoma. However, concerns have been raised about its content validity due to the lack of patient involvement during item development. Additionally, literature reports inconsistent results regarding data quality and structural validity. This study aimed to evaluate content, structural and construct validity of the Danish version of the MSTS for lower extremity (MSTS-LE).

METHODS

The study included patients from three complete cohorts (n = 87) with bone sarcoma or giant cell tumour of bone who underwent bone resection and reconstruction surgery in hip and knee. Content validity was evaluated by linking MSTS items to frameworks of functioning, core outcome sets and semi-structured interviews. Data quality, internal consistency and factor analysis were used to assess the underlying structure of the MSTS. Construct validity was based on predefined hypotheses of correlation between the MSTS and concurrent measurements.

RESULTS

Content validity analysis revealed concerns regarding the MSTS. The MSTS did not sufficiently cover patient-important functions, the item Emotional acceptance could not be linked to the framework of functioning, the items Pain and Emotional acceptance pertained to domains beyond functioning and items' response options did not match items. A two-factor solution emerged, with the items Pain and Emotional acceptance loading highly on a second factor distinct from functioning. Internal consistency and construct validity showed values below accepted levels.

CONCLUSION

The Danish MSTS-LE demonstrated inadequate content validity, internal consistency, and construct validity. In addition, our analyses did not support unidimensionality of the MSTS. Consequently, the MSTS-LE is not a simple reflection of the construct of functioning and the interpretation of a sum score is problematic. Clinicians and researcher should exercise caution when relying solely on MSTS scores for assessing lower extremity function. Alternative outcome measurements of functioning should be considered for the evaluation of postoperative function in this patient group.

A core outcome set for patient-reported dysphagia for use in head and neck cancer clinical trials: An international multistakeholder Delphi study

BACKGROUND

Measuring dysphagia-related patient-reported outcomes (PROs) in Head and Neck Cancer (HNC) patients is challenging due to dysphagia's multidimensional impact, causing inconsistency in outcome reporting. To address this issue, this study derived a consensus-based core outcome set (COS) for patient-reported dysphagia in HNC clinical trials where swallowing is a primary or secondary endpoint.

METHODS

A sample of HNC clinicians, researchers, patients, and caregivers participated in a 2-Round Delphi technique. A Delphi survey, containing a comprehensive list of dysphagia-related PROs, was developed. In Round 1, participants rated item importance on a 5-point scale. Items rated ≥4 by >70% advanced to Round 2, where a consensus meeting addressed items with varied opinions, and the Delphi survey with remaining items was completed. Items rated ≥4 by >70% formed the final COS.

RESULTS

Forty-five participants from nine countries were recruited. After Round 1, 40 items were excluded and 64 advanced to Round 2. After Round 2, a 7-outcome COS was established, comprising the domains of dysphagia symptoms, health status and quality of life.

CONCLUSION

This study achieved consensus among HNC stakeholders on essential dysphagia PROs for HNC clinical trials. It is advisable to include these 7-core concepts in clinical trials involving people with HNC to facilitate treatment comparisons and data synthesis.

Patient-reported outcome measurement implementation in cancer survivors: a systematic review

PURPOSE

Patient-reported outcome measurements (PROMs) are increasingly used for cancer patients receiving active treatment, but little is known about the implementation and usefulness of PROMs in cancer survivorship care. This systematic review evaluates how cancer survivors and healthcare providers (HCPs) perceive PROM implementation in survivorship care, and how PROM implementation impacts cancer survivors' health outcomes.

METHODS

We systematically searched PubMed/MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL, Web of Science, and Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews from database inception to February 2022 to identify randomized and nonrandomized studies of PROM implementation in cancer survivors.

RESULTS

Based on prespecified eligibility criteria, we included 29 studies that reported on 26 unique PROMs. The studies were heterogeneous in study design, PROM instrument, patient demographics, and outcomes. Several studies found that cancer survivors and HCPs had favorable impressions of the utility of PROMs, and a few studies demonstrated that PROM implementation led to improvements in patient quality of life (QoL), with small to moderate effect sizes.

CONCLUSIONS

We found implementation of PROMs in cancer survivorship care improved health outcomes for select patient populations. Future research is needed to assess the real-world utility of PROM integration into clinical workflows and the impact of PROMs on measurable health outcomes.

IMPLICATIONS FOR CANCER SURVIVORS

Cancer survivors accepted PROMs. When successfully implemented, PROMs can improve health outcomes after completion of active treatment. We identify multiple avenues to strengthen PROM implementation to support cancer survivors.

Developing a core outcome set (COS) for Dementia with Lewy bodies (DLB)

Background: Dementia with Lewy bodies (DLB) is an important cause of dementia with a range of clinical manifestations, including motor, neuropsychiatric, and autonomic symptoms. Compared with more common forms of dementia such as Alzheimer's disease, DLB has been the focus of significantly fewer treatment studies, often with diverse outcome measures, making comparison and clinical implementation difficult. A core outcome set (COS) can address this by ensuring that data are comparable, relevant, useful, and usable for making the best healthcare decisions. Methods: Using a multi-stage approach, development of the DLB-COS will include the following stages: (1) A systematic review, following PRISMA guidelines to create an initial long list of outcomes; (2) A two-round online Delphi including clinicians, scientists, policymakers, and individuals with lived experience of DLB and their representatives; (3) An online consensus meeting to agree on the final core list of outcomes (the final DLB-COS) for use in research and clinical practice; (4) A systematic review to identify appropriate measurement instruments for the DLB-COS outcomes; (5) A final consensus meeting of the professional stakeholders who attended the online consensus meeting to agree on the instruments that should be used to measure the outcomes in the DLB-COS; and (6) Global dissemination. Discussion: This is a multi-stage project to develop a COS to be used in treatment trials for DLB. A DLB-COS will ensure the selection of relevant outcomes and will identify the instruments to be used to measure DLB globally. Keywords: Dementia, Dementia with Lewy Bodies, Core Outcome Set, Delphi, Systematic Review, Ageing, Cognition, Memory.

Rehabilitation interventions for young adult cancer survivors: A scoping review

OBJECTIVE

To map existing research concerning rehabilitation interventions for young adult cancer survivors (YACS) that address at least one factor from the biopsychosocial health model.

DESIGN

Scoping review.

DATA SOURCES

Searches were performed in EMBASE, MEDLINE, PsycINFO, CINAHL and Cochrane in January 2022 and updated in March 2023, and grey literature between February and April 2022.

METHODS

The review followed Joanna Briggs Institute's methodology for scoping reviews. Quantitative, qualitative and mixed methods studies evaluating interventions for YACS of any cancer who had completed primary treatment and were between 18 and 39 years old at diagnosis were included. Two authors independently screened studies for eligibility, and standardised forms were used for data extraction. Descriptive statistics, narrative summaries and thematic analysis were used to analyse the data.

RESULTS

The search revealed 5706 records, of which 70 were full-text screened. The 20 included studies represented a heterogeneous group of 444 young adults with different cancer types, mean age above 25, and an overrepresentation of females. Most studies were feasibility and pilot studies. The 20 studies consisted of 14 unique interventions focusing primarily on one dimension of the biopsychosocial health model like biological or psychological factors. In the 14 interventions, the most frequent intervention element was peer-to-peer support (n = 12). The interventions were often delivered online (n = 9), lasting 3-12 months (n = 8). A wide variety of theories, providers and outcome measures were used.

CONCLUSION

The results show that current research on multicomponent, biopsychosocial and age-specific rehabilitation for YACS remains at an early stage.

International development of a patient-centered core outcome set for assessing health-related quality of life in metastatic breast cancer patients

PURPOSE

For patients living with metastatic breast cancer (MBC), achieving best possible health-related quality of life, along with maximizing survival, is vital. Yet, we have no systemic way to determine if we achieve these goals. A Core Outcome Set (COS) that allows standardized measurement of outcomes important to patients, but also promotes discussing these outcomes during clinical encounters, is long overdue.

METHODS

An international expert group (EG) of patient advocates, researchers, medical specialists, nurse specialists, and pharmaceutical industry representatives (n = 17) reviewed a list of relevant outcomes retrieved from the literature. A broader group (n = 141: patients/patient advocates (n = 45), health care professionals/researchers (n = 64), pharmaceutical industry representatives (n = 28), and health authority representatives (n = 4)) participated in a modified Delphi procedure, scoring the relevance of outcomes in two survey rounds. The EG finalized the COS in a consensus meeting.

RESULTS

The final MBC COS includes 101 variables about: (1) health-related quality of life (HRQoL, n = 26) and adverse events (n = 24); (2) baseline patient characteristics (n = 9); and (3) clinical variables (n = 42). Many outcome that cover aspects of HRQoL relevant to MBC patients are included, e.g. daily functioning (including ability to work), psychosocial/emotional functioning, sexual functioning, and relationship with the medical team.

CONCLUSION

The COS developed in this study contains important administrative data, clinical records, and clinician-reported measures that captures the impact of cancer. The COS is important for standardization of clinical research and implementation in daily practice and has received accreditation by the International Consortium for Health Outcomes Measurement (ICHOM).

Perceived COVID-19 pandemic impact and protective factors predicting patient-reported depression and anxiety in individuals living with cancer

BACKGROUND

The COVID-19 pandemic presents a unique, amplified threat to those living with a cancer diagnosis, but personal factors may play a role in how this affects well-being. This cross-sectional study (1) describes the impacts of COVID-19 on cancer patients' lives, and (2) explores the extent to which specific impacts of COVID-19 and noted protective factors, hope and resilience, predict two crucial patient-reported outcomes, depression and anxiety, after controlling for relevant sociodemographic and clinical factors.

METHODS

520 cancer patients and survivors in the U.S. completed an online survey during the first year of the pandemic and answered questions about COVID-19 areas of impact, psychological well-being, hope, and resilience. Hierarchical regression analyses were used to analyze the unique impact of each group of variables on patient-reported levels of depression and anxiety during the pandemic.

RESULTS

Participants strongly endorsed COVID-19 impact across several areas of life, especially social activity, well-being, and ability to acquire basic essentials. Regression models explained a substantial amount of variance in patient-reported depression (R² = .50, p < .001) and anxiety (R² = .44, p < .001), revealing COVID-19 financial impact as a significant predictor of depression (β = 0.07), and COVID-19 family impact as a significant predictor of anxiety (β = 0.14), even after controlling for the effects of relevant sociodemographic and clinical variables. Additionally, resilience and hope were the largest predictors of both depression (β = - 0.19 and - 0.37, respectively) and anxiety (β = - 0.18 and - 0.29), suggesting that they account for unique variance in patient-reported mental health during the COVID-19 pandemic and might serve as important protective factors.

CONCLUSIONS

The current results add to existing literature documenting the significant effect of COVID-19 on those living with cancer. COVID-19 impact, including financial and family well-being, as well as positive psychological constructs, hope and resilience, play a crucial role in levels of patient-reported depression and anxiety during the pandemic. As COVID-19 continues to evolve, health care providers should routinely assess psychological well-being and needs related to COVID-19 financial and family impact in an effort to appropriately align individuals with resources and support, and consider how hope and resilience can be fostered to serve as psychological buffers during this time.

Trajectories of participation in daily life among individuals newly diagnosed with cancer: A 5-month longitudinal study

PURPOSE

To determine how participation in daily life is impacted during the first six months following a new cancer diagnosis and to identify risk factors for participation restrictions. Patient-reported outcomes (PROs) were used to suggest referrals to rehabilitation services.

METHODS

Participants (n = 123) were adults (> 18 years) with the newly diagnosed primary brain, breast, colorectal, or lung cancer. PROs were collected at baseline (within 30 days of diagnosis/treatment initiation), two and five months post baseline. Daily life participation was assessed through the community participation indicators (CPI) (score range: 0-1) and patient-reported outcome measurement information system (PROMIS) ability to participate, (score range: 20-80; mean: 50, SD: 10). PROMIS-43 profile was also completed. Linear mixed-effect models with random intercept evaluated change in participation over time.

RESULTS

The baseline total sample mean CPI score was 0.56; patients reported mildly impaired participation based on PROMIS scores (baseline: 46.19, 2-month follow-up: 44.81, 5 months: 44.84). However, no statistically significant changes in participation were observed over the study period. Risk factors for lower participation included receiving chemotherapy, lower physical function, higher anxiety and fatigue, and reduction in employment, p < 0.05. PROs indicated that roughly half of the participants may benefit from physical or occupational therapy or mental health support, but only 20-36% were referred by their medical team.

CONCLUSION

People newly diagnosed with cancer experience impaired participation, but they are infrequently referred to supportive services such as rehabilitation. The use of PROs to assess participation, physical function, and mental health can promote access to supportive care services by identifying patients who may benefit from rehabilitation beyond those identified through routine clinical care.

Surveillance of Symptom Burden Using the Patient-Reported Outcome Version of the Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events in Patients With Various Types of Cancers During Chemoradiation Therapy: Real-World Study

BACKGROUND

Over 90% of patients with cancer experience 1 or more symptoms caused directly by cancer or its treatment. These symptoms negatively impact on the completion of planned treatment as well as patients' health-related quality of life (HRQoL). It often results in serious complications and even life-threatening outcomes. Thus, it has been recommended that surveillance of symptom burden should be performed and managed during cancer treatment. However, differences in symptom profiles in various patients with cancer have not been fully elucidated for use in performing surveillance in the real world.

OBJECTIVE

This study aims to evaluate the burden of symptoms in patients with various types of cancers during chemotherapy or radiation therapy using the PRO-CTCAE (Patient-Reported Outcome Version of the Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events) and its impact on quality of life.

METHODS

We performed a cross-sectional study of patients undergoing outpatient-based chemotherapy, radiation therapy, or both at the National Cancer Center at Goyang or at the Samsung Medical Center in Seoul, Korea between December 2017 and January 2018. To evaluate cancer-specific symptom burden, we developed 10 subsets for using the PRO-CTCAE-Korean. To measure HRQoL, we used the European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer Core Quality of Life Questionnaire Core 30 (EORTC QLQ-C30). Participants answered questions prior to their clinic appointments on tablets. Multivariable linear regression was used to analyze symptoms based on cancer type and to evaluate the association between the PRO-CTCAE items and the EORTC QLQ-C30 summary score.

RESULTS

The mean age (SD) of the patients was 55.0 (11.9) years, and 39.94% (540/1352) were male. Overall, symptoms in the gastrointestinal category were the most dominant in all cancers. Fatigue (1034/1352, 76.48%), decreased appetite (884/1352, 65.38%), and numbness and tingling (778/1352, 57.54%) were the most frequently reported. Patients reported more local symptoms caused by a specific cancer. In terms of nonsite-specific symptoms, patients commonly reported concentration (587/1352, 43.42%), anxiety (647/1352, 47.86%), and general pain (605/1352, 44.75%). More than 50% of patients with colorectal (69/127, 54.3%), gynecologic (63/112, 56.3%), breast (252/411, 61.3%), and lung cancers (121/234, 51.7%) experienced decreased libido, whereas 67/112 (59.8%) patients with gynecologic cancer and lymphoma/myeloma reported pain during sexual intercourse. Patients with breast, gastric, and liver cancers were more likely to have the hand-foot syndrome. Worsening PRO-CTCAE scores were associated with poor HRQoL (eg, fatigue: coefficient -8.15; 95% CI -9.32 to -6.97), difficulty in achieving and maintaining erection (coefficient -8.07; 95% CI -14.52 to -1.61), poor concentration (coefficient -7.54; 95% CI -9.06 to -6.01), and dizziness (coefficient -7.24; 95% CI -8.92 to -5.55).

CONCLUSIONS

The frequency and severity of symptoms differed by cancer types. Higher symptom burden was associated with poor HRQoL, which suggests the importance of appropriate surveillance of PRO symptoms during cancer treatment. Considering patients had comprehensive symptoms, it is necessary to include a holistic approach in the symptom monitoring and management strategies based on comprehensive patient-reported outcome measurements.

Patient-Reported Outcome Measures in Key Sub-Saharan African Languages to Promote Diversity: A Scoping Review

OBJECTIVES

Sub-Saharan Africa is a world region rich and diverse in cultures and languages; yet, it is also challenged with regard to resources that may facilitate the cultural adaptation or development of patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs). Systematic exclusion of patients' "voices," because of gaps in the availability of PROMs, may perpetuate health inequity. Hence, the objective is to describe the availability of PROMs in the non-English, sub-Saharan African languages.

METHODS

A scoping review was conducted to identify PROMs that had been translated, validated, or developed for use in 32 selected, non-English, sub-Saharan African languages pertaining to health outcomes. Four databases were searched (May 7, 2021), and additional articles were identified through reference screening and via corresponding authors. Data were extracted in terms of country, language, population, construct, and PROM characteristics (eg, number of items).

RESULTS

A total of 220 unique articles were included from 7451 records, leading to the identification of 126 unique PROMs. Most studies were conducted in either Ethiopia, Nigeria, or South Africa. As such, prevalent languages included Amharic, Yoruba, and non-English languages common to South Africa (eg, Setswana, Xhosa, and Zulu). No PROMs were identified in any of the languages for 27 sub-Saharan African countries or 10 of the 32 included languages.

CONCLUSIONS

There are significant gaps in the availability of PROMs across the non-English African languages included. Nevertheless, the PROMs that were identified largely align with core outcome sets relevant to the prevalent disease burden in this world region. Consensus-based priority setting may inform the most pertinent gaps to be addressed.

5-Fluorouracil Induces an Acute Reduction in Neurogenesis and Persistent Neuroinflammation in a Mouse Model of the Neuropsychological Complications of Chemotherapy

The neuropsychological symptoms associated with chemotherapy treatment remain a major challenge with their prevention hampered by insufficient understanding of pathophysiology. While long-term neuroimmune changes have been identified as a hallmark feature shared by neurological symptoms, the exact timeline of mechanistic events preceding neuroinflammation, and the relationship between the glial cells driving this neuroinflammatory response, remain unclear. We therefore aimed to longitudinally characterize the neuroimmunological changes following systemic 5-fluorouracil (5-FU) treatment to gain insight into the timeline of events preceding the well-documented chronic neuroinflammation seen following chemotherapy. Eighteen female C57Bl/6 mice received a single intraperitoneal dose of 5-FU and groups were killed at days 1 and 2 (acute timepoint), days 4 and 8 (subacute timepoint), and days 16 and 32 (chronic timepoint). A further six mice were administered with vehicle control with tissues collected from three mice on day 1 and day 32 of the study. The expression of key genes of interest, BCL2, BDNF, TIMP1, MMP-9, MMP-2, TNFα, IL-1β, and IL-6R were assessed using real time polymerase chain reaction. Levels of neurogenesis were determined through immunofluorescent staining of doublecortin (DCX). The density of microglia and astrocytes were assessed using immunofluorescence staining of Iba1 and GFAP respectively. 5-FU treatment caused significant decreases to DCX staining at acute timepoints (p = 0.0030) which was positively correlated with BCL2 expression levels. An increase to microglial density was observed in the prefrontal cortex (p = 0.0256), CA3 region (p = 0.0283), and dentate gyrus (p = 0.0052) of the hippocampus at acute timepoints. 5-FU caused increases to astrocyte density, across multiple brains regions, at subacute and chronic timepoints which were positively correlated with TNFα, TIMP-1, MMP-2, and IL-6R expression. This study has identified acute objective neuroinflammatory changes suggesting that the role of early intervention should be explored to prevent the development of neuropsychological deficits in the longer-term following chemotherapy.

Effectiveness and implementation of models of cancer survivorship care: an overview of systematic reviews

PURPOSE

To critically assess the effectiveness and implementation of different models of post-treatment cancer survivorship care compared to specialist-led models of survivorship care assessed in published systematic reviews.

METHODS

MEDLINE, CINAHL, Embase, and Cochrane CENTRAL databases were searched from January 2005 to May 2021. Systematic reviews that compared at least two models of cancer survivorship care were included. Article selection, data extraction, and critical appraisal were conducted independently by two authors. The models were evaluated according to cancer survivorship care domains, patient and caregiver experience, communication and decision-making, care coordination, quality of life, healthcare utilization, costs, and mortality. Barriers and facilitators to implementation were also synthesized.

RESULTS

Twelve systematic reviews were included, capturing 53 primary studies. Effectiveness for managing survivors' physical and psychosocial outcomes was found to be no different across models. Nurse-led and primary care provider-led models may produce cost savings to cancer survivors and healthcare systems. Barriers to the implementation of different models of care included limited resources, communication, and care coordination, while facilitators included survivor engagement, planning, and flexible services.

CONCLUSIONS

Despite evidence regarding the equivalent effectiveness of nurse-led, primary care-led, or shared care models, these models are not widely adopted, and evidence-based recommendations to guide implementation are required. Further research is needed to address effectiveness in understudied domains of care and outcomes and across different population groups.

IMPLICATIONS FOR CANCER SURVIVORS

Rather than aiming for an optimal "one-size fits all" model of survivorship care, applying the most appropriate model in distinct contexts can improve outcomes and healthcare efficiency.

Systemic Oncological Treatments versus Supportive Care for Patients with Advanced Hepatobiliary Cancers: An Overview of Systematic Reviews

BACKGROUND

The trade-off between systemic oncological treatments (SOTs) and UPSC in patients with primary advanced hepatobiliary cancers (HBCs) is not clear in terms of patient-centred outcomes beyond survival. This overview aims to assess the effectiveness of SOTs (chemotherapy, immunotherapy and targeted/biological therapies) versus UPSC in advanced HBCs.

METHODS

We searched for systematic reviews (SRs) in PubMed, EMBASE, the Cochrane Library, Epistemonikos and PROSPERO. Two authors assessed eligibility independently and performed data extraction. We estimated the quality of SRs and the overlap of primary studies, performed de novo meta-analyses and assessed the certainty of evidence for each outcome.

RESULTS

We included 18 SRs, most of which were of low quality and highly overlapped. For advanced hepatocellular carcinoma, SOTs showed better overall survival (HR = 0.62, 95% CI 0.55-0.77, high certainty for first-line therapy; HR = 0.85, 95% CI 0.79-0.92, moderate certainty for second-line therapy) with higher toxicity (RR = 1.18, 95% CI 0.87-1.60, very low certainty for first-line therapy; RR = 1.58, 95% CI 1.28-1.96, low certainty for second-line therapy). Survival was also better for SOTs in advanced gallbladder cancer. No outcomes beyond survival and toxicity could be meta-analysed.

CONCLUSION

SOTs in advanced HBCs tend to improve survival at the expense of greater toxicity. Future research should inform other patient-important outcomes to guide clinical decision making.

Development of an updated, standardized, patient-centered outcome set for lung cancer

BACKGROUND

In 2016, the International Consortium for Health Outcomes Measurement (ICHOM) defined an international consensus recommendation of the most important outcomes for lung cancer patients. The European Health Outcomes Observatory (H2O) initiative aimed to develop an updated patient-centered core outcome set (COS) for lung cancer, to capture the patient perspective of the impact of lung cancer and (novel) treatments using a combination of patient-reported outcome (PRO) instruments and clinical data as a means to drive value-based health-care.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

An international, expert team of patient representatives, multidisciplinary healthcare professionals, academic researchers and pharmaceutical industry representatives (n = 17) reviewed potential outcomes generated through literature review. A broader group of patients/patient representatives (n = 31), healthcare professionals / academic researchers (n = 83), pharmaceutical industry representatives (n = 26), and health authority representatives (n = 6) participated in a Delphi study. In two survey rounds, participants scored the relevance of outcomes from a preliminary list. The threshold for consensus was defined as ≥ 70 % of participants scoring an outcome as 'highly relevant'. In concluding consensus-meeting rounds, the expert multidisciplinary team finalized the COS.

RESULTS

The preliminary list defined by the core group consisted of 102 outcomes and was prioritized in the Delphi procedure to 64. The final lung cancer COS includes: 1) case-mix factors (n = 27); 2) PROs related to health-related quality of life (HRQoL) (n = 25); 3) clinical outcomes (n = 12). Patient-reported symptoms beyond domains included in the ICHOM lung cancer set in 2016 were insomnia, nausea, vomiting, anxiety, depression, lack of appetite, gastric problems, constipation, diarrhoea, dysphagia, and haemoptysis.

CONCLUSIONS

We will implement the lung cancer COS in Europe within the H2O initiative by collecting the outcomes through a combination of clinician-reported measures and PRO measures. The COS will support the adoption and reporting of lung cancer measures in a standardized way across Europe and empower patients with lung cancer to better manage their health care.

Developing a core outcome set (COS) for Dementia with Lewy bodies (DLB)

Background: Dementia with Lewy bodies (DLB) is an important cause of dementia with a range of clinical manifestations, including motor, neuropsychiatric, and autonomic symptoms. Compared with more common forms of dementia such as Alzheimer's disease, DLB has been the focus of significantly fewer treatment studies, often with diverse outcome measures, making comparison and clinical implementation difficult. A core outcome set (COS) can address this by ensuring that data are comparable, relevant, useful, and usable for making the best healthcare decisions. Methods: Using a multi-stage approach, development of the DLB-COS will include the following stages: (1) A systematic review, following PRISMA guidelines to create an initial long list of outcomes; (2) A two-round online Delphi including clinicians, scientists, policymakers, and individuals with lived experience of DLB and their representatives; (3) An online consensus meeting to agree on the final core list of outcomes (the final DLB-COS) for use in research and clinical practice; (4) A literature search to identify appropriate measurement instruments for the DLB-COS outcomes; (5) A final consensus meeting of the professional stakeholders who attended the online consensus meeting to agree on the instruments that should be used to measure the outcomes in the DLB-COS; and (6) Global dissemination. Discussion: This is a multi-stage project to develop a COS to be used in treatment trials for DLB. A DLB-COS will ensure the selection of relevant outcomes and will identify the instruments to be used to measure DLB globally.

The critical role of mixed methods research in developing valid and reliable patient-reported outcome measures

Randomised controlled clinical trials provide the gold standard for evidence underpinning clinical guidelines and patient centred care. However, this is only true when they are robustly designed, conducted and reported and then only if they include outcomes that are important to patients and clinicians. Important outcomes include those that measure impact on patient experience, quality of life, overall well-being, and physical, social, cognitive and emotional functioning, all of which require patient reported outcome measures (PROMs). Patient centred care must be underpinned by objective evidence of the effect of interventions on outcomes that are important to patients. Evidence for patient reported outcomes must be supported by valid and reliable PROMs. Importantly the PROM must reflect patient experience of the impact of the intervention on the outcome and enable quantitative evaluation of that impact. The purpose of this paper is to highlight the critical role of mixed methods research in developing PROMs that are valid (measure what they purport to measure), acceptable to those reporting the outcome and able to reliably detect meaningful differences between individuals with different conditions or severity and with time. This can only be achieved through a structured mixed methods program combining qualitative and quantitative research techniques.

A Narrative Review on the Collection and Use of Electronic Patient-Reported Outcomes in Cancer Survivorship Care with Emphasis on Symptom Monitoring

Electronic patient-reported outcome (ePRO) applications promise great added value for improving symptom management and health-related quality of life. The aim of this narrative review is to describe the collection and use of ePROs for cancer survivorship care, with an emphasis on ePRO-symptom monitoring. It offers many different perspectives from research settings, while current implementation in routine care is ongoing. ePRO collection optimizes survivorship care by providing insight into the patients' well-being and prioritizing their unmet needs during the whole trajectory from diagnosis to end-of-life. ePRO-symptom monitoring can contribute to timely health risk detection and subsequently allow earlier intervention. Detection is optimized by automatically generated alerts that vary from simple to complex and multilayered. Using ePRO-symptoms during in-hospital consultation enhances the patients' conversation with the health care provider before making informed decisions about treatments, other interventions, or self-management. ePRO(-symptoms) entail specific implementation issues and complementary ethics considerations. The latter is due to privacy concerns, digital divide, and scarcity of adequately representative data for particular groups of patients.

Quality of patient-reported outcome reporting in trials of diabetes in pregnancy: A systematic review

AIMS

Patient-reported outcomes (PROs) are reports of the patient's health status that come directly from the patient without interpretation by the clinician or anyone else. They are increasingly used in randomised controlled trials (RCTs). In this systematic review we identified RCTs conducted in women with diabetes in pregnancy which included PROs in their primary or secondary outcomes. We then evaluated the quality of PRO reporting against an internationally accepted reporting framework (Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials (CONSORT-PRO) guidelines).

METHODS

We searched online databases for studies published 2013-2021 using a combination of keywords. Two authors reviewed all abstracts independently. Data on study characteristics and the quality of PRO reporting were extracted from relevant studies. We conducted a multiple regression analysis to identify factors associated with high quality reporting.

RESULTS

We identified 7122 citations. Thirty-five articles were included for review. Only 17% of RCTs included a PRO as a primary or secondary outcome. Out of a maximum score of 100 the median score was 46, indicating sub-optimal reporting. A multiple regression analysis did not reveal any factors associated with high quality reporting.

CONCLUSIONS

Researchers should be mindful of the importance of PRO inclusion and reporting and include reliable PROs in trials.

Engaging the Arts for Wellbeing in the United States of America: A Scoping Review

There is increasing interest today in how the arts contribute to individual and community wellbeing. This scoping review identified and examined ways in which the arts have been used to address wellbeing in communities in the United States. The review examined 44 publications, with combined study populations representing a total of 5,080 research participants, including marginalized populations. It identified the types of artistic practices and interventions being conducted, research methods, and outcomes measured. It highlights positive associations found across a broad spectrum of psychological, physical, and social outcomes, including improvements in self-esteem and identity formation, cognition, physical balance, and physical conditioning. It also reports negative outcomes of arts interventions that may be underreported. The study identifies the need for core outcomes sets and reporting guidelines for advancing evidence synthesis in this area.

Anticipating mental health needs after chemotherapy in early-stage breast cancer using patient-reported symptom screening

PURPOSE

Many patients with breast cancer experience depression and anxiety for years after completing systemic chemotherapy, which negatively impact overall symptom burden, quality of life, and treatment outcomes. The objective of this study was to examine the utility of patient-reported outcome (PRO) measures to predict mental health needs in patients with breast cancer during post-chemotherapy follow-up care.

METHODS

In a sample of women with non-metastatic breast cancer, associations between patient-reported depression and anxiety at end of chemotherapy and post-chemotherapy mental health needs were evaluated using log-binomial regression adjusted for functional status, social activity limitations, and time from chemotherapy.

RESULTS

In a sample of 149 women, 40% reported at least mild depressive symptoms and 52% reported at least mild anxiety at the end of chemotherapy. Over an average 3.2 years post-chemotherapy (range: 0.7-5.6 years), 23% received new psychiatric diagnoses, 21% engaged in mental health specialty care, and 62% were prescribed psychotropic medications. End of chemotherapy depression and anxiety were associated with future prescription of psychotropic medications (RR 1.52; 95% CI 1.14-2.03), as well as greater number of psychotropics. Associations were strongest with serotonin-norepinephrine reuptake inhibitors [(depression: RR 4.75; 95% CI 2.06-10.95); (anxiety: RR 3.68; 95% CI 1.62-8.36); (depression and anxiety: RR 2.98; 95% CI 1.65-5.36)].

CONCLUSION

Diagnosis of and treatment for depression and anxiety are common among women with breast cancer after completing chemotherapy. Prescriptions for psychotropic medications during the initial years after systemic chemotherapy can be anticipated by depression and anxiety screening at end of chemotherapy.

What Matters in Cancer Survivorship Research? A Suite of Stakeholder-Relevant Outcomes

The outcomes assessed in cancer survivorship research do not always match the outcomes that survivors and health system stakeholders identify as most important in the post-treatment follow-up period. This study sought to identify stakeholder-relevant outcomes pertinent to post-treatment follow-up care interventions. We conducted a descriptive qualitative study using semi-structured telephone interviews with stakeholders (survivors, family/friend caregivers, oncology providers, primary care providers, and cancer system decision-/policy-makers) across Canada. Data analysis involved coding, grouping, detailing, and comparing the data by using the techniques commonly employed in descriptive qualitative research. Forty-four participants took part in this study: 11 survivors, seven family/friend caregivers, 18 health care providers, and eight decision-makers. Thirteen stakeholder-relevant outcomes were identified across participants and categorized into five outcome domains: psychosocial, physical, economic, informational, and patterns and quality of care. In the psychosocial domain, one’s reintegration after cancer treatment was described by all stakeholder groups as one of the most important challenges faced by survivors and identified as a priority outcome to address in future research. The outcomes identified in this study provide a succinct suite of stakeholder-relevant outcomes, common across cancer types and populations, that should be used in future research on cancer survivorship care.

How Do We Define and Measure Optimal Care for Cancer Survivors? An Online Modified Reactive Delphi Study

This research sought to answer the question 'what quality criteria do survivorship experts consider to be important in achieving optimal cancer survivorship care?'. An online modified reactive Delphi survey consisting of two rounds was completed with experts including consumers, clinicians, researchers, policymakers and quality and accreditation professionals. Survey items were based on international literature and considered three domains: Policy, process and outcome. In round 1 (R1), experts ranked the importance of 68 criteria on a five-point Likert scale. Criteria were retained if scored 4 (important) or 5 (very important) by >75% participants. In round 2 (R2), experts ranked top 10 criteria per domain. Response rates were 79% (70/89) and 84% (76/91), respectively. After R1, six criteria were removed and six were added. From R2, ten items for each domain were retained. These 30 items formed the Quality Framework. A consensus meeting considered priority items from the Quality Framework and feasibility of data collection. Prioritized items included having a policy on survivorship care; the existence of a multidisciplinary survivorship program (policy); appropriate processes to assess survivors' emotional, psychological and physical needs following treatment and stratification to appropriate models of care (process); and collecting patient-reported outcomes, quality of life and survival rates (outcome).