Meta-analysis provides evidence-based effect sizes for a cancer-specific quality-of-life questionnaire, the FACT-G

Study protocol for a pragmatic randomised controlled trial of comparing enhanced acceptance and commitment therapy plus (+) added to usual aftercare versus usual aftercare only, in patients living with or beyond cancer: SUrvivors' Rehabilitation Evaluation after CANcer (SURECAN) trial

BACKGROUND

Two million people in the UK are living with or beyond cancer and a third of them report poor quality of life (QoL) due to problems such as fatigue, fear of cancer recurrence, and concerns about returning to work. We aimed to develop and evaluate an intervention based on acceptance and commitment therapy (ACT), suited to address the concerns of cancer survivors and in improving their QoL. We also recognise the importance of exercise and vocational activity on QoL and therefore will integrate options for physical activity and return to work/vocational support, thus ACT Plus (+).

METHODS

We will conduct a multi-centre, pragmatic, theory driven, randomised controlled trial. We will assess whether ACT+ including usual aftercare (intervention) is more effective and cost-effective than usual aftercare alone (control). The primary outcome is QoL of participants living with or beyond cancer measured using the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy: General scale (FACT-G) at 52 weeks. We will recruit 344 participants identified from secondary care sites who have completed hospital-based treatment for cancer with curative intent, with low QoL (determined by the FACT-G) and randomise with an allocation ratio of 1:1 to the intervention or control. The intervention (ACT+) will be delivered by NHS Talking Therapies, specialist services, and cancer charities. The intervention consists of up to eight sessions at weekly or fortnightly intervals using different modalities of delivery to suit individual needs, i.e. face-to-face sessions, over the phone or skype.

DISCUSSION

To date, there have been no robust trials reporting both clinical and cost-effectiveness of an ACT based intervention for people with low QoL after curative cancer treatment in the UK. We will provide high quality evidence of the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of adding ACT+ to usual aftercare provided by the NHS. If shown to be effective and cost-effective then commissioners, providers and cancer charities will know how to improve QoL in cancer survivors and their families.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ISRCTN: ISRCTN67900293 . Registered on 09 December 2019. All items from the World Health Organization Trial Registration Data Set for this protocol can be found in Additional file 2 Table S1.

A two-arm non-randomised trial of MedEx IMPACT: a community-based, physical activity behaviour change intervention for survivors of cancer

PURPOSE

This two-arm non-randomised trial examined the short- and long-term effects of a usual care (UC) community-based exercise programme (MedEx Move On (MMO)), and UC combined with a physical activity (PA) behaviour change (BC) intervention (MedEx IMproved PA after Cancer Treatement (MedEx IMPACT)) on PA levels, cardiorespiratory fitness (CRF) and quality of life (QoL) among survivors of cancer.

METHODS

Cancer survivors referred to MMO were recruited (n = 191; mean age (± SD) 56 (± 10y), 73% female). Eighty-seven participants were assigned to UC, and 104 participants were assigned to the MedEx IMPACT intervention group (MI). UC and MI both received twice-weekly supervised exercise classes for 12-weeks. MI also received an independent PA programme, 4 PA information sessions and a 1:1 exercise consultation during the 12-week programme. Assessments of physical and psycho-social health, including 6-day accelerometry, the 6-min time trial and the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-General QoL questionnaire, were conducted at baseline (T1), post-intervention (T2) and 3 months following programme completion (T3).

RESULTS

Linear mixed-model analyses of variance demonstrated significant main effects for time for both groups from T1 to T2 with increases in objectively measured daily steps (p < 0.05), CRF (p < .001) and QoL (p < .01), which were maintained for CRF (p < .001) at T3. MI participants also maintained increases achieved at T2, in steps and QoL, at T3 (p < 0.01).

CONCLUSION

Twelve weeks of twice-weekly supervised exercise was effective in increasing PA, CRF and QoL among survivors of cancer. MI resulted in the maintenance of all improvements achieved 3 months following programme completion.

Managing Symptom Distress: Key Factors for Patients on Adjuvant Endocrine Therapy for Breast Cancer

CONTEXT

Patients with breast cancer taking adjuvant endocrine therapy (AET) experience significant symptoms impacting mood, quality of life (QOL), and AET adherence and satisfaction.

OBJECTIVES

The aim of this study was to examine the extent to which coping ability and self-efficacy for symptom management moderate the relationships between patients' symptom distress and their mood, QOL, and AET adherence and satisfaction.

METHODS

As part of a randomized controlled trial, participants completed baseline measures including: sociodemographics, symptom distress (breast cancer prevention trial symptom checklist), coping skills (measure of current status), self-efficacy (self-efficacy for managing symptoms), anxiety and depression (hospital anxiety and depression scale), QOL (functional assessment of cancer therapy - general), AET adherence (medication adherence report scale), and AET satisfaction (cancer therapy satisfaction questionnaire). We conducted moderated regression analyses to examine whether coping and self-efficacy moderated the associations of symptom distress with baseline measures.

RESULTS

Coping skills moderated the associations of symptom distress with depression and QOL. Among those with lower coping, higher symptom distress was associated with worse depression symptoms (p=.04) and worse QOL (p < 0.001). Self-efficacy moderated the associations of symptom distress with depression symptoms and AET adherence and satisfaction. Among those with higher self-efficacy, higher symptom distress was associated with worse depression symptoms (p < 0.001), worse AET adherence (p < 0.001), and less AET satisfaction (p = 0.01).

CONCLUSION

Coping skills may buffer the effect of AET symptom distress. Findings indicate the relationship between symptom distress and self-efficacy is more nuanced and requires further research to better understand.

Health-Related Quality of Life With Nivolumab Plus Chemotherapy Versus Chemotherapy in Patients With Advanced Gastric/Gastroesophageal Junction Cancer or Esophageal Adenocarcinoma From CheckMate 649

PURPOSE

In CheckMate 649, first-line nivolumab plus chemotherapy prolonged overall survival versus chemotherapy in patients with advanced/metastatic non-human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2)-positive gastric/gastroesophageal junction cancer (GC/GEJC) or esophageal adenocarcinoma (EAC). We present exploratory patient-reported outcomes (PROs).

METHODS

In patients (N = 1,581) concurrently randomly assigned 1:1 to nivolumab plus chemotherapy or chemotherapy and in those with tumor PD-L1 expression at a combined positive score (CPS) of ≥5, health-related quality of life (HRQoL) was assessed using the EQ-5D and Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-Gastric (FACT-Ga), which included the FACT-General (FACT-G) and Gastric Cancer subscale (GaCS). The FACT-G GP5 item assessed treatment-related symptom burden. Longitudinal changes in HRQoL were assessed using mixed models for repeated measures in the PRO analysis population (randomly assigned patients with baseline and ≥1 postbaseline assessments). Time to symptom or definitive deterioration analyses were also conducted.

RESULTS

In the PRO analysis population (n = 1,360), PRO questionnaire completion rates were mostly >80% during treatment. Patient-reported symptom burden was not increased with nivolumab plus chemotherapy versus chemotherapy. Mean improved changes from baseline were greater with nivolumab plus chemotherapy versus chemotherapy for FACT-Ga total, GaCS, and EQ-5D visual analog scale in patients with a CPS of ≥5; results were similar for the overall PRO analysis population. In CPS ≥5 and all randomly assigned populations, nivolumab plus chemotherapy reduced the risk of symptom deterioration versus chemotherapy, on the basis of FACT-Ga total score and GaCS; time to definitive deterioration was longer, and the risk of definitive deterioration in HRQoL was reduced with nivolumab plus chemotherapy across EQ-5D and most FACT-Ga measures (hazard ratio [95% CI] <1).

CONCLUSION

Compared with chemotherapy alone, first-line nivolumab plus chemotherapy showed stable or better on-treatment HRQoL in patients with advanced/metastatic non-HER2-positive GC/GEJC/EAC and also showed decreased risk of definitive HRQoL deterioration.

Effectiveness and safety of nintedanib in prevention of pulmonary fibrosis induced by bleomycin in malignant ovarian germ cell tumour: study protocol for a randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial

INTRODUCTION

Bleomycin is a crucial and irreplaceable chemotherapy regimen for malignant ovarian germ cell tumours (MOGCTs) but its toxicities especially pulmonary fibrosis have limited the dose of treatment efficacy and decreased the patients' quality of life (QoL). Nintedanib has been approved for treating progressive fibrosing interstitial lung diseases and has shown potential anti-tumour effects. This study aims to evaluate the effectiveness and safety of nintedanib in the prevention of pulmonary fibrosis induced by bleomycin in MOGCTs patients.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

This is a multicentre, randomised, double-blinded, placebo-controlled clinical trial. We will enrol a total of 128 patients who will be randomly assigned to the nintedanib group and placebo group in a 1:1 ratio. Standard bleomycin, etoposide and cisplatin chemotherapy will be given to each MOGCT patient. In addition, patients assigned to nintedanib and the control group will be given oral nintedanib 150 mg two times per day and placebo one tablet two times per day until 1 month after the last cycle of bleomycin therapy, respectively. The primary outcome is the decline of forced vital capacity (FVC). The secondary outcomes are the decline of other pulmonary function indices (forced expiratory volume in 1 s; FVC pred%, carbon monoxide diffusion capacity) and the patients' QoL, oncological and fertility outcomes. We will use electronic case report forms to record all the participants' data and SPSS V.27.0/STATA V.16.0/Graphpad Prism V.8.0 to conduct statistical analysis.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

The Ethics Committee of Peking Union Medical College Hospital has approved the study (I-23PJ400). Written informed consent will be obtained from all participants/guardians. Study results will be submitted to peer-reviewed medical journals for publication and presented at academic conferences.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

ChiCTR2300070492.

Meta-analysis of quality of life in patients with cancer treated with antibody-drug conjugates in randomized controlled trials

Purpose: To evaluate the patient-reported outcomes of patients treated with commercially approved antibody-drug conjugates (ADC) reported in randomized controlled trials (RCT) published up to September 2023. Methods: A meta-analysis of 6430 patients from 12 randomized controlled trials was conducted. Results: No significant change was observed between the groups from baseline to end of treatment and end of follow-up, with a standardized mean difference of -0.08 (95% CI: -0.27-0.12) and 0.01 (95% CI: -0.11-0.12), respectively. Treatment with ADCs delayed the deterioration of patients' clinical condition compared with treatment with non-ADCs, with a hazard ratio of 0.78 (95% CI: 0.67-0.92). Conclusion: ADCs have a good correlation with delay of clinical deterioration in patients with cancer.

2-weekly versus 3-weekly docetaxel for metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer: complete quality of life results from the randomised, phase-III PROSTY trial

INTRODUCTION

Treatment with 2-weekly docetaxel 50 mg/m² was shown to improve overall survival and was better tolerated than the standard 75 mg/m² 3-weekly regimen in men with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC) in the original randomised PROSTY trial. The aim of this study was to investigate, whether quality of life (QoL) effects would differ between the 2-weekly docetaxel 50 mg/m² regimen from the standard 3-weekly 75 mg/m² treatment.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

QoL data were collected with the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy - Prostate (FACT-P) and Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy Advanced Prostate Symptom Index - 8 Item version (FAPSI-8). Pain was measured using the Visual Analogue Scale (VAS). A total of 743 forms from 163 patients were analysed in Arm A (2-weekly docetaxel), and 704 forms from 173 patients were analysed in Arm B (3-weekly docetaxel). The data were analysed using both the Wilcoxon signed rank test (with Holm-Bonferroni adjustment) and Mann-Whitney U models.

RESULTS

No major differences were found in total QoL. Total QoL was higher at month 8 in Arm B (p = .020), but this was reversed in the following month (p = .043), and no statistically significant differences were found during other months. Compared to Arm A, participants in Arm B had longer-lasting deterioration in FAPSI-8 scores and emotional well-being subdomain at the beginning of treatment (p < .05). Various one-month differences were found in FACT-P subdomains (except for functional well-being), and these favoured participants in Arm A, except for the prostate-cancer subdomain. There were no differences in pain.

CONCLUSION

Based on our results, 2-weekly docetaxel was not inferior to 3-weekly docetaxel in terms of total health-related QoL and seemed to be superior at least in terms of the FAPSI-8 and emotional well-being subdomain in the first three to four months of treatment. More research on the topic is suggested to confirm the results.

Differential adherence to peer and nurse components of a supportive care package-The appeal of peer support may be related to women's health and psychological status

OBJECTIVE

Knowledge of factors associated with intervention non-adherence may provide insights into the clinical utility of non-pharmacologic interventions.

METHODS

This study compared complete and incomplete adherers to two separate components of a novel intervention package for women undergoing curative intent radiotherapy for gynaecological cancer on socio-demographic, clinical and pre-radiotherapy patient-reported outcomes data.

RESULTS

Adherence to the tailored specialist nurse consultations was satisfactory (71% participated in all available sessions, 19% participated in all but one). Adherence to the telephone peer support sessions was less satisfactory (47% participated in all available sessions, 24% participated in all but one session). Complete adherers to the peer sessions reported significantly lower levels of psychological distress and significantly higher levels of physical, emotional and functional wellbeing before radiotherapy. No other statistically significant differences were observed between complete and incomplete adherers to the nurse- or peer-led sessions.

CONCLUSION

Women's ability or motivation to engage with peer support may be influenced by their health and psychological status. Further, the extent of intervention non-adherence to the peer-led component may have compromised the assessment of its efficacy.

PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS

Peer support may be less acceptable or appropriate for women with more complex care needs. Such women may prefer specialised care from trained professionals.

Implementation of a cloud-based electronic patient-reported outcome (ePRO) platform in patients with advanced cancer

Background

Patient reported outcomes (PROs) have been associated with improved symptom management and quality of life in patients with cancer. However, the implementation of PROs in an academic clinical practice has not been thoroughly described. Here we report on the execution, feasibility and healthcare utilization outcomes of an electronic PRO (ePRO) application for cancer patients at an academic medical center.

Methods

We conducted a randomized trial comparing an experimental ePRO arm to standard of care in patients with advanced cancer in the thoracic, gastrointestinal, and genitourinary oncology groups at Stanford Cancer Center from March 2018 to November 2019. We describe the pre-implementation, implementation, and post-implementation phases of the ePRO arm, technological barriers, electronic health record (EHR) integration, clinician burden, and patient data privacy and security. Feasibility was pre-specified to be at least 70% completion of all questionnaires. Acceptability was based on patient and clinician feedback. Ambulatory healthcare utilization was assessed by reviewing numbers of phone messages, electronic portal messages, and referrals for supportive care.

Results

Of 617 ePRO questionnaires sent to 72 patients, 445 (72%) were completed. Most clinicians (87.5%) and patients (93%) felt neutral or positive about the ePRO tool’s ease of use. Exposure to ePRO did not cause a measurable change in ambulatory healthcare utilization, with a median of less than two phone messages and supportive care referrals, and 5–6 portal messages.

Conclusions

Web-based ePRO tools for patients with advanced cancer are feasible and acceptable without increasing clinical burden. Key lessons include the importance of pilot testing, engagement of stakeholders at all levels, and the need for customization by disease group. Future directions for this work include completion of EHR integration, expansion to other centers, and development of integrated workflows for routine clinical practice.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s41687-021-00358-2.

A preliminary prospective study of health-related quality of life among Chinese-American breast cancer survivors

PURPOSE

This study examined the predictors of health-related quality of life (HRQOL) and changes in HRQOL over a 1-year period among Chinese-American breast cancer survivors (BCS).

METHODS

A two-wave longitudinal research design included participants from hospital-based cancer registries and community organizations in Los Angeles. Participants completed mailed questionnaires at baseline and 12-month follow-up. HRQOL was measured using the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-General (FACT-G v.4). Change in HRQOL was assessed using a 7-point meaningful change score.

RESULTS

Participants were 73 Chinese-American BCS, a majority of whom were middle-aged (M = 54.6, SD = 9.2), lower income (63% < 45K), and diagnosed with stage I-II (83%) breast cancer. Regression analyses showed that multilevel contextual factors including general health perception, quality of care, life stress, and improvement in general health perception significantly predicted HRQOL at baseline and follow-up. The final model explained 72% of the variance of HRQOL. The examination of meaningful change indicated that improvement was reported by 32% (n = 22) and deterioration by 25% (n = 17); the majority indicated minimal change (43%, n = 30). Improvement was associated with increases in family communication, social support, and general health perception, while deterioration was associated with declines in social support, family communication, and general health perception.

CONCLUSION

Findings indicate that among Chinese-American BCS, HRQOL is influenced by socioecological factors such as family communication and life stress. Results suggest that cancer survivorship outcomes research may benefit from theoretical foundations that examine the broader contextual dimensions that seem to impact and predict HRQOL. Implications for research are discussed.

Phase III Randomized Controlled Trial of eRAPID: eHealth Intervention During Chemotherapy

PURPOSE

Electronic patient self-Reporting of Adverse-events: Patient Information and aDvice (eRAPID) is an online eHealth system for patients to self-report symptoms during cancer treatment. It provides automated severity-dependent patient advice guiding self-management or medical contact and displays the reports in electronic patient records. This trial evaluated the impact of eRAPID on symptom control, healthcare use, patient self-efficacy, and quality of life (QOL) in a patient population treated predominantly with curative intent.

METHODS

Patients with colorectal, breast, or gynecological cancers commencing chemotherapy were randomly assigned to usual care (UC) or the addition of eRAPID (weekly online symptom reporting for 18 weeks). Primary outcome was symptom control (Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-General, Physical Well-Being subscale [FACT-PWB]) assessed at 6, 12, and 18 weeks. Secondary outcomes were processes of care (admissions or chemotherapy delivery), patient self-efficacy, and global quality of life (Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy–General, EQ5D-VAS, and EORTC QLQ-C30 summary score). Multivariable mixed-effects repeated-measures models were used for analyses. Trial registration: ISRCTN88520246.

RESULTS

Participants were 508 consenting patients (73.6% of 690 eligible) and 55 health professionals. eRAPID compared to UC showed improved physical well-being at 6 ( P = .028) and 12 ( P = .039) weeks and no difference at 18 weeks (primary end point) ( P = .69). Fewer eRAPID patients (47%) had clinically meaningful physical well-being deterioration than UC (56%) at 12 weeks. Subgroup analysis found benefit in the nonmetastatic group at 6 weeks ( P = .0426), but not in metastatic disease. There were no differences for admissions or chemotherapy delivery. At 18 weeks, patients using eRAPID reported better self-efficacy ( P = .007) and better health on EQ5D-VAS ( P = .009). Average patient compliance with weekly symptom reporting was 64.7%. Patient adherence was associated with clinician's data use and improved FACT-PWB at 12 weeks.

CONCLUSION

Real-time monitoring with electronic patient-reported outcomes improved physical well-being (6 and 12 weeks) and self-efficacy (18 weeks) in a patient population predominantly treated with curative intent, without increasing hospital workload.

Fifteen year quality of life outcomes in men with localised prostate cancer: population based Australian prospective study

OBJECTIVE

To assess treatment related changes in quality of life up to 15 years after diagnosis of localised prostate cancer.

DESIGN

Population based, prospective cohort study with follow-up over 15 years.

SETTING

New South Wales, Australia.

PARTICIPANTS

1642 men with localised prostate cancer, aged less than 70, and 786 controls randomly recruited from the New South Wales electoral roll into the New South Wales Prostate Cancer Care and Outcomes Study (PCOS).

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

General health and disease specific quality of life were self-reported at seven time points over a 15 year period, using the 12-item Short Form Health Survey scale, University of California, Los Angeles prostate cancer index, and expanded prostate cancer index composite short form (EPIC-26). Adjusted mean differences were calculated with controls as the comparison group. Clinical significance of adjusted mean differences was assessed by the minimally important difference, defined as one third of the standard deviation (SD) from the baseline score.

RESULTS

At 15 years, all treatment groups reported high levels of erectile dysfunction, depending on treatment (62.3% (active surveillance/watchful waiting, n=33/53) to 83.0% (non-nerve sparing radical prostatectomy, n=117/141)) compared with controls (42.7% (n=44/103)). Men who had external beam radiation therapy or high dose rate brachytherapy or androgen deprivation therapy as primary treatment reported more bowel problems. Self-reported urinary incontinence was particularly prevalent and persistent for men who underwent surgery, and an increase in urinary bother was reported in the group receiving androgen deprivation therapy from 10 to 15 years (year 10: adjusted mean difference -5.3, 95% confidence interval -10.8 to 0.2; year 15: -15.9; -25.1 to -6.7).

CONCLUSIONS

Patients receiving initial active treatment for localised prostate cancer had generally worse long term self-reported quality of life than men without a diagnosis of prostate cancer. Men treated with radical prostatectomy faired especially badly, particularly in relation to long term sexual outcomes. Clinicians and patients should consider these long term quality of life outcomes when making treatment decisions.

What happens to cancer survivors attending a structured cancer survivorship clinic? Symptoms, quality of life and lifestyle changes over the first year at the Sydney Cancer Survivorship Centre clinic

BACKGROUND

Sydney Cancer Survivorship Centre (SCSC) clinic provides multidisciplinary care after primary adjuvant treatment, with ~ 40% of attendees continuing follow-up with SCSC.

METHODS

SCSC survivors completed measures of symptoms, quality-of-life and lifestyle factors at initial visit (T1), first follow-up (T2) and 1 year (T3). Analyses used mixed effect models, adjusted for age, sex and tumour type.

RESULTS

Data from 206 survivors (2013-2019) were included: 51% male; median age 63 years; tumour types colorectal 68%, breast 12%, upper gastrointestinal 12%, other 8%. Mean time from: T1 to T2, 3.6 months; T1 to T3, 11.8 months. Mean weight remained stable, but 45% (35/77) of overweight/obese survivors lost weight from T1 to T3. Moderately-intense aerobic exercise increased by 63 mins/week at T2, and 68 mins/week T3. Proportion meeting aerobic exercise guidelines increased from 20 to 41%. Resistance exercise increased by 26 mins/week at T2. Global quality-of-life was unchanged from T1 to T2, improving slightly by T3 (3.7-point increase), mainly in males. Mean distress scores were stable, but at T3 the proportion scoring 4+/10 had declined from 41 to 33%. At T3, improvements were seen in pain, fatigue and energy, but > 20% reported moderate-severe fatigue, pain or sleep disturbance. Proportion reporting 5+ moderate-severe symptoms declined from 35% at T1 to 26% at T3, remaining higher in women.

CONCLUSIONS

Survivors attending SCSC increased exercise by 3 months, and sustained it at 1 year. Most overweight/obese survivors avoided further weight gain. Survivors had relatively good quality-of-life, with improvement in many symptoms and lifestyle factors at 1 year.

Relationship between molecular response and quality of life with bosutinib or imatinib for chronic myeloid leukemia

Patients with newly diagnosed chronic phase chronic myeloid leukemia (CP CML) can be effectively treated with tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs) and achieve a lifespan similar to the general population. The success of TKIs, however, requires long-term and sometimes lifelong treatment; thus, patient-assessed health-related quality of life (HRQoL) has become an increasingly important parameter for treatment selection. Bosutinib is a TKI approved for CP CML in newly diagnosed adults and in those resistant or intolerant to prior therapy. In the Bosutinib Trial in First-Line Chronic Myelogenous Leukemia Treatment (BFORE), bosutinib demonstrated a significantly higher major molecular response rate compared with imatinib, with maintenance of HRQoL (measured by the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-Leukemia (FACT-Leu) questionnaire), after 12 months of first-line treatment. We examined relationships between molecular response (MR) and HRQoL. MR values were represented by a log-reduction scale (MRLR; a continuous variable). A repeated-measures longitudinal model was used to estimate the relationships between MRLR as a predictor and each FACT-Leu domain as an outcome. Effect sizes were calculated to determine strength of effects and allow comparisons across domains. The majority of FACT-Leu domains (with the exception of social well-being and physical well-being) demonstrated a significant relationship with MRLR (p < 0.05). Our results showed variable impact of clinical improvement on different dimensions of HRQoL. For patients who achieved MR⁵, emotional well-being and leukemia-specific domains showed the greatest improvement, with medium differences in effect sizes, whereas social well-being and physical well-being had the weakest relationship with MR.

Early characteristics of bone deficits in children with Fontan palliation

BACKGROUND

This is a cross-sectional study aiming to understand the early characteristics and background of bone health impairment in clinically well children with Fontan circulation.

METHODS

We enrolled 10 clinically well children with Fontan palliation (operated >5 years before study entrance, Tanner stage ≤3, age 12.1 ± 1.77 years, 7 males) and 11 healthy controls (age 12.0 ± 1.45 years, 9 males) at two children's hospitals. All patients underwent peripheral quantitative CT. For the Fontan group, we obtained clinical characteristics, NYHA class, cardiac index by MRI, dual x-ray absorptiometry, and biochemical studies. Linear regression was used to compare radius and tibia peripheral quantitative CT measures between Fontan patients and controls.

RESULTS

All Fontan patients were clinically well (NYHA class 1 or 2, cardiac index 4.85 ± 1.51 L/min/m2) and without significant comorbidities. Adjusted trabecular bone mineral density, cortical thickness, and bone strength index at the radius were significantly decreased in Fontan patients compared to controls with mean differences -30.13 mg/cm3 (p = 0.041), -0.31 mm (p = 0.043), and -6.65 mg2/mm4 (p = 0.036), respectively. No differences were found for tibial measures. In Fontan patients, the mean height-adjusted lumbar bone mineral density and total body less head z scores were -0.46 ± 1.1 and -0.63 ± 1.1, respectively, which are below the average, but within normal range for age and sex.

CONCLUSIONS

In a clinically well Fontan cohort, we found significant bone deficits by peripheral quantitative CT in the radius but not the tibia, suggesting non-weight-bearing bones may be more vulnerable to the unique haemodynamics of the Fontan circulation.

Can Methods Developed for Interpreting Group-level Patient-reported Outcome Data be Applied to Individual Patient Management?

BACKGROUND

Patient-reported outcome (PRO) data may be used at 2 levels: to evaluate impacts of disease and treatment aggregated across individuals (group-level) and to screen/monitor individual patients to inform their management (individual-level). For PRO data to be useful at either level, we need to understand their clinical relevance.

PURPOSE

To provide clarity on whether and how methods historically developed to interpret group-based PRO research results might be applied in clinical settings to enable PRO data from individual patients to inform their clinical management and decision-making.

METHODS

We first differentiate PRO-based decision-making required at group versus individual levels. We then summarize established group-based approaches to interpretation (anchor-based and distribution based), and more recent methods that draw on item calibrations and qualitative research methods. We then assess the applicability of these methods to individual patient data and individual-level decision-making.

FINDINGS

Group-based methods provide a range of thresholds that are useful in clinical care: some provide screening thresholds for patients who need additional clinical assessment and/or intervention, some provide thresholds for classifying an individual's level of severity of symptoms or problems with function, and others provide thresholds for meaningful change when monitoring symptoms and functioning over time during or after interventions. Availability of established cut-points for screening and symptom severity, and normative/reference values, may play into choice of PRO measures for use in clinical care. Translatability of thresholds for meaningful change is more problematic because of the greater reliability needed at the individual-level versus group-level, but group-based methods may provide lower bound estimates. Caution is needed to set thresholds above bounds of measurement error to avoid "false-positive changes" triggering unwarranted alerts and action in clinic.

CONCLUSIONS

While there are some challenges in applying available methods for interpreting group-based PRO results to individual patient data and clinical care-including myriad contextual factors that may influence an individual patient's management and decision-making-they provide a useful starting point, and should be used pragmatically.

A cluster-randomised, controlled proof-of-concept study to explore the feasibility and effect of a patient-directed intervention on quality of life in patients with advanced soft tissue sarcoma

INTRODUCTION

Even with evolving and expanding therapeutical options for the treatment of advanced sarcomas over recent years, the balance between efficacy and toxicity still remains a major concern. Moreover, the symptom burden in patients with sarcoma remains high compared with other malignant diseases. It is, therefore, crucial to assess treatment effectiveness not only in terms of disease-related outcomes (eg, overall survival) but also from an individual and patient-centred perspective using the assessment of patient-reported outcomes (PROs). By focusing on PROs as a primary study endpoint, we aim to address key issues for patients with advanced soft tissue sarcoma (STS) undergoing palliative treatment.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

The protocol of the YonLife study describes a multicentre, cluster-randomised, controlled, open-label proof-of-concept study conducted in patients with advanced or metastatic STS treated with trabectedin in seven German hospitals. The primary objective of the study is to exploratively compare overall quality of life between the patients receiving a multidimensional intervention based on individual PROs and those receiving usual supportive treatment. This complex intervention consists of the (1) electronic assessment of PRO, (2) creation of a case vignette based on PRO and clinical data and (3) treatment suggestions based on the discussion of these vignettes in a regularly meeting expert panel. Additionally, the YonLife trial assesses the applicability of a tablet-based assessment of PROs. Patients' and physicians' acceptance and challenges concerning the implementation process will be evaluated.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

The YonLife trial has been approved by the Ethics Committee of the University Hospital Dresden as well as by the relevant institutions of each participating centre before patient enrolment. The findings will be reported via relevant peer-reviewed journals as well as through presentation at international conferences.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

NCT02204111, pre-results.

Electronic patient self-Reporting of Adverse-events: Patient Information and aDvice (eRAPID): a randomised controlled trial in systemic cancer treatment

BACKGROUND

eRAPID (electronic patient self-Reporting of Adverse-events: Patient Information and aDvice) is an internet based system for patients to self-report symptoms and side effects (adverse events or AE) of cancer treatments. eRAPID allows AE reporting from home and patient reported data is accessible via Electronic Patient Records (EPR) for use in routine care. The system can generate alerts to clinical teams for severe AE and provides patient advice on managing mild AEs. The overall aims of eRAPID are to improve the safe delivery of cancer treatments, enhance patient care and standardise AE documentation.

METHODS

The trial is a prospective randomised two-arm parallel group design study with repeated measures and mixed methods. Participants (adult patients with breast cancer on neo-adjuvant or adjuvant chemotherapy, colorectal and gynaecological cancer receiving chemotherapy) are randomised to receive the eRAPID intervention or usual care over 18 weeks of treatment. Participants in the intervention arm receive training in using the eRAPID system to provide routine weekly adverse event reports from home. Hospital staff can access eRAPID reports via the EPR and use the information during consultations or phone calls with patients. Prior to commencing the full trial an internal pilot phase was conducted (N = 87 participants) to assess recruitment procedures, consent and attrition rates, the integrity of the intervention information technology and establish procedures for collecting outcome data. The overall target sample for the trial is N = 504. The primary outcome of the trial is quality of life (FACT-G) with secondary outcomes including health economics (costs to patients and the NHS), process of care (e.g. contacts with the hospital, number of admissions, clinic appointments and changes to treatment/medications) and patient self-efficacy. Outcome data is collected at baseline, 6, 12, 18 weeks and 12 months. The intervention is also being evaluated via end of study interviews with patient participants and clinical staff.

DISCUSSION

The pilot phase was completed in February 2016 and recruitment and attrition rates met criteria for continuing to the full trial. Recruitment recommenced in May 2016 and is planned to continue until December 2017. Overall findings will determine the value of the eRAPID intervention for supporting the care of patients receiving systemic cancer treatment.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN88520246 . Registered 11 September 2014.

Patient-reported outcomes and their predictors at 2- and 3-year follow-up after immediate latissimus dorsi breast reconstruction and adjuvant treatment

BACKGROUND

The aim of this study was to estimate the impact 2 and 3 years after surgery of implant-assisted latissimus dorsi (LDI) and autologous latissimus dorsi (ALD) flap breast reconstructions on patient-reported outcomes (PROs), and, secondarily, to determine whether baseline characteristics can predict PROs.

METHODS

This was a multicentre prospective cohort study. The European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) Quality of Life Core Questionnaire (QLQ-C30) and breast cancer module (QLQ-BR23), Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy - Breast (FACT-B), and Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS) PROs were completed before surgery and at 2 and 3 years after breast reconstruction. The effects of LDI and ALD, adjusted for baseline clinicodemographic characteristics, were estimated with multiple linear regressions. Effect sizes above 0·5 were considered clinically important.

RESULTS

Some 206 patients (LDI 93, ALD 113) were recruited in 2007-2013; 66·5 per cent were node-negative and 34·6 per cent received radiotherapy. Women with adverse clinicopathological factors were more likely to have received radiotherapy and to undergo ALD. Patients in both surgical groups showed clinically important effects at 2 and 3 years, including improvements in emotional scales, but worse physical functioning, social well-being, body image and anxiety. Radiotherapy adversely affected social functioning at 2 years (P = 0·002). Women undergoing ALD reconstruction had significantly improved sexual functioning at 3 years (P = 0·003) relative to those who had LDI procedures, even after adjusting for case mix (P = 0·007). At 3 years, younger women experienced worse physical well-being than older women (P = 0·006), and chemotherapy was associated with worse arm symptoms (P = 0·005).

CONCLUSION

Clinically important changes occurred in physical functioning, breast symptoms, body image and psychological distress. These results will guide selections of key PRO domains and sample-size calculation of future studies.

Psychometric characteristics of the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-General when applied to Brazilian cancer patients: a cross-cultural adaptation and validation

BACKGROUND

The psychometric properties of an instrument should be evaluated routinely when using different samples. This study evaluated the psychometric properties of the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-General (FACT-G) when applied to a sample of Brazilian cancer patients.

METHODS

The face, content, and construct (factorial, convergent, and discriminant) validities of the FACT-G were estimated. Confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) was conducted the ratio chi-square by degrees of freedom (χ (2)/df), the comparative fit index (CFI), the Tucker-Lewis index (TLI), and the root mean square error of approximation (RMSEA) as indices. The invariance of the best model was assessed with multi-group analysis using the difference of chi-squares method (Δχ(2)). Convergent validity was assessed using Average Variance Extracted (AVE) and discriminant validity was determined via correlational analysis. Internal consistency was assessed using the Cronbach's alpha (α) coefficient, and the Composite Reliability (CR) was estimated.

RESULTS

A total of 975 cancer patients participated in the study, with a mean age of 53.3 (SD = 13.0) years. Of these participants, 61.5 % were women. In CFA, five correlations between errors were included to fit the FACT-G to the sample (χ (2)/df = 8.611, CFI = .913, TLI = .902, RMSEA = .088). The model did not indicate invariant independent samples (Δχ(2): μ: p < .001, i: p < .958, Cov: p < .001, Res: p < .001). While there was adequate convergent validity for the physical well-being (AVE = .54) and social and family Well-being factors (AVE = .55), there was low convergent validity for the other factors. Reliability was adequate (CR = .76-.89 and α = .71-.82). Functional well-being, emotional well-being, and physical well-being were the factors that demonstrated a strong contribution to patients' health-related quality of life (β = -.99, .88, and .64, respectively).

CONCLUSION

The FACT-G was found to be a valid and reliable assessment of health-related quality of life in a Brazilian sample of patients with cancer.

The co-occurrence of chronic pain and psychological distress and its associations with salient socio-demographic characteristics among long-term social assistance recipients in Norway

BACKGROUND

While lower socioeconomic status increases individual's risk for chronic conditions, little is known about how long-term social assistance recipients (LTRs) with multiple chronic health problems experience chronic pain and/or psychological distress. Social assistance is the last safety net in the Norwegian welfare system and individuals have a legal right to economic assistance if they are unable to support themselves or are entitled to other types of benefits. The purposes of this study were to determine the co-occurrence of both chronic pain and psychological distress and to evaluate for differences in demographic and social characteristics, as well as health-related quality of life, among LTRs.

METHODS

This descriptive, cross-sectional study surveyed people receiving long-term social assistance in Norway about their health and social functioning from January-November 2005. The social welfare authority offices in each of 14 municipalities in Norway were responsible to locate the LTRs who met the study's inclusion criteria. The selected municipalities provided geographic variability including both rural and urban municipalities in different parts of the country. LTRs were included in this study if they: had received social assistance as their main source of income for at least 6 of the last 12 months; were between 18 and 60 years of age; and were able to complete the study questionnaire. In this study, 405 LTRs were divided into four groups based on the presence or absence of chronic pain and/or psychological distress. (1) Neither chronic pain nor psychological distress (32%, n=119), (2) only chronic pain (12%, n=44), (3) only psychological distress and (24%, n=87), (4) both chronic pain and psychological distress (32%, n=119).

RESULTS

Except for age and marital status, no differences were found between groups in demographic characteristics. Significant differences were found among the four groups on all of the items related to childhood difficulties before the age of 16, except the item on sexual abuse. LTRs with both chronic pain and psychological distress were more likely to have experienced economic problems in their childhood home; other types of abuse than sexual abuse; long-term bullying; and had more often dropped out of school than LTRs with neither chronic pain nor psychological distress. LTRs with both chronic pain and psychological distress, reported more alcohol and substance use/illicit drug use, more feelings of loneliness and a lower mental score on SF-12 than LTRs with only chronic pain.

CONCLUSIONS AND IMPLICATIONS

Co-occurrence of chronic pain and psychological distress is common in LTRs and problems in early life are associated with the co-occurrence of chronic pain and psychological distress in adult life. Although this study cannot assign a clear direction or causality to the association between social and demographic characteristics and chronic pain and psychological distress, the findings when examining LTRs' problems in childhood before the age of 16, indicated that incidents in early life create a probability of chronic pain and psychological distress in the adult life of the individuals. Further studies should use life course studies and longitudinal data in to investigate these important questions in LTRs.

Which quality of life instruments are preferred by cancer patients in Japan? Comparison of the European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Questionnaire-C30 and the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-General

PURPOSE

We compared two health-related quality of life (HRQOL) instruments used for cancer patients [the European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Questionnaire-C30 (EORTC QLQ-C30) and the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-General (FACT-G)] to identify which instrument cancer patients most preferred.

METHODS

Adult cancer patients who had received cancer treatments within the previous 2 years (n = 395) completed both surveys; participants assessed the importance, necessity, and appropriateness of each as an indicator of their quality of life.

RESULTS

The patients significantly preferred the FACT-G over the EORTC QLQ-C30 as a more important (effect size (ES) = 0.37, P < 0.001), necessary (ES = 0.18, P < 0.001), and appropriate questionnaire (ES = 0.14, P = 0.005). The subgroups of patients with good performance status, and those who reported low levels of work disruption, significantly preferred the FACT-G more than the other. The corresponding correlation coefficients were the following: physical functioning and well-being subscale, r = 0.65; emotional functioning and well-being subscale, r = 0.60; social functioning and social/family well-being subscale, r = 0.00; and role functioning and functional well-being subscale, r = 0.41.

CONCLUSIONS

We recommend using the FACT-G if the performance status of the subject is good, e.g., in outpatient or cancer survivor surveys, based on the observed patient preferences. When performance status is not good, an instrument should be chosen after considering the differences between their scale structures and social domains and based on the availability of disease-specific modules.

Self-efficacy, quality of life, and weight loss in overweight/obese endometrial cancer survivors (SUCCEED): a randomized controlled trial

OBJECTIVE

More patient-centered programming is essential for endometrial cancer (EC) survivors needing to lose weight to reduce cardiovascular disease risk (CVD). The purpose of this study was to improve self-efficacy (SE) and quality of life (QOL) using a lifestyle intervention program designed for weight loss.

METHODS

Overweight and obese early-stage EC survivors, n = 75, were randomized into two groups: 1) Survivors of Uterine Cancer Empowered by Exercise and Healthy Diet (SUCCEED), a six-month lifestyle intervention or 2) a usual care group (UC). Participants completed the Weight Efficacy Lifestyle Questionnaire (WEL) to assess SE and the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-General (FACT-G) to measure QOL, and their body mass index (BMI) was calculated at baseline, 3, 6, and 12 months. Mixed, repeated-measures ANCOVA models with baseline covariates were employed using SPSS 20.0.

RESULTS

Positive effects in every WEL domain, including the total score, were statistically significant in the SUCCEED group versus the UC group. A linear regression model demonstrated that, if BMI decreased by 1 unit, the total WEL score increased by 4.49 points. Significant negative correlations were found in the total WEL score and a change in BMI of R = -0.356 (p = 0.006). Between-group differences in the FACT-G were significant from baseline in the fatigue domain at three months (p = .008) and in the physical domain at six months (p = .048). No other significant differences were found.

CONCLUSION

Overall, this study shows promise for targeted interventions to help improve SE, thus improving BMI.

Chemotherapy induced peripheral neuropathy: the modified total neuropathy score in clinical practice

BACKGROUND

Chemotherapy-induced peripheral neuropathy (CIPN) is a common, potentially reversible side effect of some chemotherapeutic agents. CIPN is associated with decreased balance, function and quality of life (QoL). This association has to date been under-investigated.

AIMS

To profile patients presenting with CIPN using the modified Total Neuropathy Score (mTNS) in this cross-sectional study and to examine the relationship between CIPN (measured by mTNS) and indices of balance, quality of life (QoL) and function.

METHODS

Patients receiving neurotoxic chemotherapy regimens were identified using hospital databases. Those who did not have a pre-existing neuropathy were invited to complete mTNS, Berg Balance Scale (BBS), timed up and go (TUG), and FACT-G QoL questionnaire. mTNS scores were profiled and also correlated with BBS, TUG and FACT-G using Spearmans correlation coefficient.

RESULTS

A total of 29 patients undergoing neurotoxic chemotherapy regimens were tested. The patients mTNS scores ranged between 1 and 12 (median = 5), indicating that all patients had clinical evidence of neuropathy on mTNS. No significant correlations were found between mTNS and BERG (r = -0.29), TUG (r = 0.14), or FACT-G (r = 0.05).

CONCLUSIONS

This study found a high prevalence of CIPN in patients treated with neurotoxic chemotherapy regimens. The mTNS provided a clinically applicable, sensitive screening tool for CIPN which could prove useful in clinical practice. mTNS did not correlate with BBS, TUG or FACT-G in this sample, possibly due to relatively mild levels of CIPN and consequent subtle impairments which were not adequately captured by gross functional assessments.

Physical symptoms, coping styles and quality of life in recurrent ovarian cancer: a prospective population-based study over the last year of life

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this study was to describe the trajectory of physical symptoms, coping styles and quality of life (QoL) and the relationship between coping and QoL over the last year of life in women with recurrent ovarian cancer.

METHODS

The patient cohort were women recruited to the Australian Ovarian Cancer Study who subsequently experienced recurrent, invasive ovarian cancer and completed at least one psychosocial assessment (optimism, minimisation, hopelessness/helplessness, QoL) during the last year of life (n=217).

RESULTS

QoL declined sharply from six months before death. Lack of energy was the most prevalent symptom over three measurement periods (67-92%) and also the most severe. Anorexia (36-55%), abdominal swelling (33-58%), nausea (26-47%) and pain (26-43%) all increased in prevalence and severity towards the end of life. Higher optimism (p=0.009), higher minimisation (p=0.003) and lower helplessness/hopelessness (p=0.03) at baseline were significant predictors of subsequent higher QoL.

CONCLUSIONS

Progressive deterioration in quality of life may be an indicator of death within about six months and therefore should be an important consideration in decisions about subsequent treatment. Coping styles which independently predicted subsequent changes in QoL could potentially be targeted by interventions to minimise worsening QoL.

A nurse- and peer-led support program to assist women in gynaecological oncology receiving curative radiotherapy, the PeNTAGOn study (peer and nurse support trial to assist women in gynaecological oncology): study protocol for a randomised controlled trial

Background

Women who undergo radiotherapy for gynaecological cancer (GC) can experience distressing side effects which impact on psychosocial functioning and intimate relationships. Cancer-related distress may be ameliorated by comprehensive preparation for treatment and addressing women’s informational, physical, psychological and psychosexual needs. This paper describes the protocol for a multisite randomised controlled trial (RCT) testing a novel intervention package which combines tailored specialist nursing consultations and telephone peer support with the primary aim to reduce psychological distress. Secondary aims assess patient quality of life, symptom distress, unmet supportive care needs, preparation for treatment, psychosexual functioning and vaginal stenosis.

Methods/design

This multifaceted intervention comprises four nurse-led consultations coupled with four phone calls from a peer support volunteer (GC survivor). The evidence-based intervention will be delivered at critical points in the illness trajectory: pre-treatment, mid-treatment, treatment completion and post-treatment. Nurses and peers undergo 2-day intensive training workshops, are guided by comprehensive study intervention manuals and receive ongoing supervision and support. Eligible patients will have a diagnosis of GC, be scheduled to receive curative radiotherapy, be aged 18 years or over and speak English. Three-hundred and six participants will be randomized to receive usual care or usual care with the intervention package. Study outcome measures will be collected at baseline, day 1 of radiotherapy and 1, 6 and 12 months post radiotherapy. Clinical assessments of vaginal toxicity will occur at baseline, and 3, 6, and 12 months post radiotherapy.

Discussion

This timely research has the potential to substantially reduce the physical, psychosexual and supportive care needs of women with GC. Using a telephone peer support model, the intervention package ensures equitable access to support services for geographically isolated patients. The novel intervention engages peer volunteers who liaise with nurses to encourage adherence to professionally-delivered information and provide emotional support. It has been designed to be potentially transferable to a range of treatment settings and diseases. Based on pilot data, the proposed intervention was found to be useful and acceptable to patients and clinicians. If effective and feasible in the multisite RCT, the program could be widely disseminated.

Trial registration

Australian New Zealand Clinical Trial Registry ACTRN12611000744954

The impact of chemotherapy-related nausea on patients' nutritional status, psychological distress and quality of life

PURPOSE

Nausea is a troublesome and distressing symptom for patients receiving chemotherapy. While vomiting is well controlled with current antiemetics, nausea is a more difficult symptom to manage. The aim of this study was to assess the impact of nausea on nutritional status, quality of life and psychological distress.

METHODS

This was a prospective observational study over two cycles of chemotherapy. Patients completed the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer Antiemesis Tool, a measure of nutritional status (Patient-Generated Subjective Global Assessment), the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-General (FACT-G) quality of life scale and the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale at the end of each chemotherapy cycle (around day 10 post-chemotherapy).

RESULTS

The sample consisted of 104 patients, primarily female, receiving anthracycline-based chemotherapy. While vomiting was minimal (5.2-14.6 % of the patients), high levels of nausea were observed (55.2-72.9 %), and severe nausea (>6 on a 0-10 scale) was reported by 20.5-29.2 % of the participants. Severe nausea had a borderline significant impact in relation to physical functioning (p = 0.025) and a significant impact on nutritional status (severe acute nausea, p = 0.003; severe delayed nausea, p = 0.017). Clinically meaningful changes were observed in relation to the FACT-G total score.

CONCLUSION

Chemotherapy-induced nausea does have an impact on nutritional status and physical functioning and can impair anxiety and quality of life. As a key symptom associated with other symptoms, it is imperative that greater attention is given to managing treatment-related nausea through innovative non-pharmacological and nutritional interventions.

Evidence-based guidelines for interpreting change scores for the European Organisation for the Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Questionnaire Core 30

AIM

To use published literature and experts' opinion to investigate the clinical meaning and magnitude of changes in the Quality of Life (QOL) of groups of patients measured with the European Organisation for the Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Questionnaire Core 30 (EORTC QLQ-C30).

METHODS

An innovative method combining systematic review of published studies, expert opinions and meta-analysis was used to estimate large, medium, and small mean changes over time for QLQ-C30 scores.

RESULTS

Nine hundred and eleven papers were identified, leading to 118 relevant papers. One thousand two hundred and thirty two mean changes in QOL over time were combined in the meta-analysis, with timescales ranging from four days to five years. Guidelines were produced for trivial, small, and medium size classes, for each subscale and for improving and declining scores separately. Estimates for improvements were smaller than respective estimates for declines.

CONCLUSIONS

These guidelines can be used to aid sample size calculations and interpretation of mean changes over time from groups of patients. Observed mean changes in the QLQ-C30 scores are generally small in most clinical situations, possibly due to response shift. Careful consideration is needed when planning studies where QOL changes over time are of primary interest; the timing of follow up, sample attrition, direction of QOL changes, and subscales of primary interest are key considerations.

Scientific rigour in psycho-oncology trials: why and how to avoid common statistical errors

OBJECTIVE

It is well documented that statistical and methodological flaws are common in much of the health research literature, including psycho-oncology. These can have far-reaching effects, including the publishing of misleading results; the wasting of time, effort, and financial resources; exposure of patients to the potential harms of research and decreased confidence in science and researchers by the public.

METHODS

Several of the most common statistical errors and methodological pitfalls that occur in the field of psycho-oncology are discussed, including those that occur at the design, analysis, reporting and conclusion stages.

RESULTS

Fourteen topics are briefly discussed, explaining why there is a problem and how to avoid it. These include proper approaches to power, clustering, missing data, categorization of continuous variables, subgroup analyses, multiple comparisons, statistical interactions, confidence intervals and correct interpretation of p-values. Extensive referencing points the reader to more in-depth explanations.

CONCLUSIONS

To increase the scientific rigour in psycho-oncology, researchers should involve a biostatistician from the beginning of the study and should commit to continuing education on best practices in the fields of statistics and reporting.

A point of minimal important difference (MID): a critique of terminology and methods

The minimal important difference (MID) is a phrase with instant appeal in a field struggling to interpret health-related quality of life and other patient-reported outcomes. The terminology can be confusing, with several terms differing only slightly in definition (e.g., minimal clinically important difference, clinically important difference, minimally detectable difference, the subjectively significant difference), and others that seem similar despite having quite different meanings (minimally detectable difference versus minimum detectable change). Often, nuances of definition are of little consequence in the way that these quantities are estimated and used. Four methods are commonly employed to estimate MIDs: patient rating of change (global transition items); clinical anchors; standard error of measurement; and effect size. These are described and critiqued in this article. There is no universal MID, despite the appeal of the notion. Indeed, for a particular patient-reported outcome instrument or scale, the MID is not an immutable characteristic, but may vary by population and context. At both the group and individual level, the MID may depend on the clinical context and decision at hand, the baseline from which the patient starts, and whether they are improving or deteriorating. Specific estimates of MIDs should therefore not be overinterpreted. For a given health-related quality-of-life scale, all available MID estimates (and their confidence intervals) should be considered, amalgamated into general guidelines and applied judiciously to any particular clinical or research context.

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.

Evidence-Based Guidelines for Determination of Sample Size and Interpretation of the European Organisation for the Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Questionnaire Core 30

Purpose

To use published literature to estimate large, medium, and small differences in quality of life (QOL) data from the European Organisation for the Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Questionnaire Core 30 (EORTC QLQ-C30).

Methods

An innovative method combining systematic review of published studies, expert opinions, and meta-analysis was used to estimate large, medium, and small differences for QLQ-C30 scores. Published mean data were identified from the literature. Differences (contrasts) between groups (eg, between treatment groups, age groups, and performance status groups) were reviewed by 34 experts in QOL measurement and cancer treatment. The experts, blinded to actual QOL results, were asked to predict these differences. A large difference was defined as one representing unequivocal clinical relevance. A medium difference was defined as likely to be clinically relevant but to a lesser extent. A small difference was one believed to be subtle but nevertheless clinically relevant. A trivial difference was used to describe circumstances unlikely to have any clinical relevance. Actual QOL results were combined using meta-analytic techniques to estimate differences corresponding to small, medium, or large effects.

Results

Nine hundred eleven articles were identified, leading to 152 relevant articles (2,217 contrasts) being reviewed by at least two experts. Resulting estimates from the meta-analysis varied depending on the subscale. Thus, the recommended minimum to detect medium differences ranges from 9 (cognitive functioning) to 19 points (role functioning).

Conclusion

Guidelines for the size of effects are provided for the QLQ-C30 subscales. These guidelines can be used for sample size calculations for clinical trials and can also be used to aid interpretation of differences in QLQ-C30 scores.

Minimal important differences for interpreting health-related quality of life scores from the EORTC QLQ-C30 in lung cancer patients participating in randomized controlled trials

BACKGROUND

The aim of this study was to determine the smallest changes in health-related quality of life (HRQOL) scores in a subset of the European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Questionnaire core 30 (EORTC QLQ-C30) scales, which could be considered as clinically meaningful in patients with non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC).

METHODS

WHO performance status (PS) and weight change were used as clinical anchors to determine minimal important differences (MIDs) in HRQOL change scores (range, 0-100) in the EORTC QLQ-C30 scales. Selected distribution-based methods were used for comparison.

FINDINGS

In a pooled dataset of 812 NSCLC patients undergoing treatment, the values determined to represent the MID depended on whether patients were improving or deteriorating. MID estimates for improvement (based on a one-category change in PS, 5 - <20% weight gain) were physical functioning (9, 5); role functioning (14, 7); social functioning (5, 7); global health status (9, 4); fatigue (14, 5); and pain (16, 2). The respective MID estimates for deterioration (based on PS, weight loss) were physical (4, 6); role (5, 5); social (7, 9); global health status (4, 4); fatigue (6, 11); and pain (3, 7).

INTERPRETATION

Based on the selected QLQ-C30 scales, the MID may depend upon whether the patients' PS is improving or worsening, but our results are not definitive. The MID estimates for the specified scales can help clinicians and researchers evaluate the significance of changes in HRQOL and assess the value of a health care intervention or compare treatments. The estimates also can be useful in determining sample sizes in the design of future clinical trials.

Meta-analysis provides evidence-based interpretation guidelines for the clinical significance of mean differences for the FACT-G, a cancer-specific quality of life questionnaire

Our aim was to develop evidence-based interpretation guidelines for the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-General (FACT-G), a cancer-specific health-related quality of life (HRQOL) instrument, from a range of clinically relevant anchors, incorporating expert judgment about clinical significance. Three clinicians with many years' experience managing cancer patients and using HRQOL outcomes in clinical research reviewed 71 papers. Blinded to the FACT-G results, they considered the clinical anchors associated with each FACT-G mean difference, predicted which dimensions of HRQOL would be affected, and whether the effects would be trivial, small, moderate, or large. These size classes were defined in terms of clinical relevance. The experts' judgments were then linked with FACT-G mean differences, and inverse-variance weighted mean differences were calculated for each size class. Small, medium, and large differences (95% confidence interval) from 1,118 cross-sectional comparisons were as follows: physical well-being 1.9 (0.6-3.2), 4.1 (2.7-5.5), 8.7 (5.2-12); functional well-being 2.0 (0.5-3.5), 3.8 (2.0-5.5), 8.8 (4.3-13); emotional well-being 1.0 (0.1-2.6), 1.9 (0.3-3.5), no large differences; social well-being 0.7 (-0.7 to 2.1), 0.8 (-2.9 to 4.5), no large differences. Results from 436 longitudinal comparisons tended to be smaller than the corresponding cross-sectional results. These results augment other interpretation guidelines for FACT-G with information on sample size, power calculations, and interpretation of cancer clinical trials that use FACT-G.