Systematic review of symptom control and quality of life in studies on chemotherapy for advanced non-small cell lung cancer: how CONSORTed are the data?

Health-Related Quality of Life in Advanced Non-small Cell Lung Cancer: A Methodological Appraisal Based on a Systematic Literature Review

Background: The majority of lung cancer patients are diagnosed with advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC), the bulk of which receive palliative systemic treatment with the goal to provide effective symptom palliation and safeguard health-related quality of life (HRQoL). Advanced NSCLC trials with HRQoL endpoints face methodological constraints limiting interpretability.

Objectives: We provide a comprehensive overview of recent clinical trials evaluating the impact of systemic therapies on HRQoL in advanced NSCLC, focusing on the methodological quality, with the ultimate goal to improve interpretation, comparison and reporting of HRQoL data.

Methods: A systematic literature review was performed. Prospective studies published over the last decade evaluating the impact of systemic treatments on HRQoL in advanced NSCLC were included. Methodological quality of HRQoL reporting was assessed with the CONSORT-PRO extension.

Results: Hundred-twelve manuscripts describing 85 trials met all criteria. No formal conclusion can be drawn regarding the impact on HRQoL of different treatments. We report an important variety in methodological quality in terms of definitions of HRQoL, missing data points, lack of standardization of analyzing and presenting HRQoL and no standard follow-up time. The quality of HRQoL data reporting varies substantially between studies but improves over time.

Conclusion: This review shows that in the heterogeneous landscape of trials addressing HRQoL in advanced stage NSCLC. Methodology reporting remains generally poor. Adequate reporting of HRQoL outcome data is equally important to support clinical decision-making as to correctly inform health policy regarding direct approval and reimbursement of the new drugs and combinations that will come online.

Scoping review on interventions to improve adherence to reporting guidelines in health research

OBJECTIVES

The goal of this study is to identify, analyse and classify interventions to improve adherence to reporting guidelines in order to obtain a wide picture of how the problem of enhancing the completeness of reporting of biomedical literature has been tackled so far.

DESIGN

Scoping review.

SEARCH STRATEGY

We searched the MEDLINE, EMBASE and Cochrane Library databases and conducted a grey literature search for (1) studies evaluating interventions to improve adherence to reporting guidelines in health research and (2) other types of references describing interventions that have been performed or suggested but never evaluated. The characteristics and effect of the evaluated interventions were analysed. Moreover, we explored the rationale of the interventions identified and determined the existing gaps in research on the evaluation of interventions to improve adherence to reporting guidelines.

RESULTS

109 references containing 31 interventions (11 evaluated) were included. These were grouped into five categories: (1) training on the use of reporting guidelines, (2) improving understanding, (3) encouraging adherence, (4) checking adherence and providing feedback, and (5) involvement of experts. Additionally, we identified lack of evaluated interventions (1) on training on the use of reporting guidelines and improving their understanding, (2) at early stages of research and (3) after the final acceptance of the manuscript.

CONCLUSIONS

This scoping review identified a wide range of strategies to improve adherence to reporting guidelines that can be taken by different stakeholders. Additional research is needed to assess the effectiveness of many of these interventions.

Comparison study of quality of life in advanced lung cancer patients on tyrosine kinase inhibitor and platinum doublet chemotherapy

INTRODUCTION

Lung cancer is most common cause of cancer death in the world. Most of the patient are diagnosed in the late stages and receive only palliative treatment. The main objective of the palliative chemotherapy is to improve survival as well as the quality of life (QOL). QOL is the most neglected dimension of cancer care in developing countries like India. Palliative chemotherapeutic agent which has minimum toxicity and prolongs the survival of metastatic cancer patients is the need of the day.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

In this study, 43 metastatic adenocarcinoma of lung patients of South Indian origin were enrolled. Twenty patients out of this 43 were epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) mutation positive and were started on tyrosine kinase inhibitor (TKI). Rest 23 patients were EGFR mutation negative and were started on various platinum-based doublet chemotherapy. QOL was measured using Cancer Institute QOL Questionnaire version 2 at the beginning of therapy and at the end of 3 months.

RESULTS

Our study showed that metastatic lung cancer patients had average QOL at presentation. The QOL in patients on TKI improved compared to those on platinum doublet chemotherapy during the second assessment, but this improvement was statistically not significant.

CONCLUSION

In this study, the metastatic lung cancer patients had an average QOL during initial presentation. Patients on TKI had a trend toward better QOL after 3 months of treatment compared to platinum doublet chemotherapy.

Evaluation of a 'Watch and Wait' Approach for Chemotherapy in Patients with Newly Diagnosed Advanced Non-small Cell Lung Cancer from a Diverse Community Population

AIMS

Systemic therapy in advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) is the standard of care. The time of treatment administration has not been examined in the metastatic setting. A 'watch and wait' approach for the initiation of chemotherapy is sometimes used in clinical practice, either because of patient preference, presumed indolent disease behaviour, upfront radiotherapy or other interventions. We propose to evaluate the effect of a watch and wait approach on systemic treatment deliverability and patients' outcomes in a population-based study.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A retrospective analysis of stage IIIB/IV NSCLC patients referred to medical oncology at the British Columbia Cancer Agency in 2009 was conducted. We defined the following: immediate chemotherapy (ICT) - chemotherapy ≤ 8 weeks from medical oncology consult; watch and wait chemotherapy (WWC) - initial observation with chemotherapy > 8 weeks from medical oncology consultation; watch and wait missed (WWM) - watch and wait patients who did not receive chemotherapy; best supportive care (BSC) - patients deemed chemotherapy ineligible. Statistical methods included Kaplan-Meier analysis, Log-rank tests and Cox proportional hazards modelling.

RESULTS

In total, 744 patients were seen by medical oncology; 355 (48%) received ICT, 173 (23%) watch and wait and 216 (29%) BSC. Of the 173 patients on a watch and wait approach, 42% missed an opportunity for chemotherapy due to poor performance status (50%), death (49%) and comorbidity (1%). The median overall survival was as follows: watch and wait 11.5 months, ICT 12.8 months and BSC 4.3 months (P < 0.0001). Controlling for confounding factors (age, gender, performance status), overall survival was longer in WWC (hazard ratio 0.73, confidence interval 0.81-1.07, P = 0.023) and lower in WWM (hazard ratio 1.68, 95% confidence interval 1.27-2.22, P < 0.0001), compared with ICT.

CONCLUSIONS

A significant proportion of watch and wait patients never receive systemic therapy, predominantly due to a decline in performance status. Patients in the ICT group were younger, had a better performance status and had non-squamous histology compared with the watch and wait group. The overall survival was longer in the patients who received ICT versus watch and wait. The watch and wait strategy is associated with a high risk of missing the opportunity for any chemotherapy and should be judiciously implemented only in carefully selected patients.

Health-related quality of life in older adult survivors of selected cancers: data from the SEER-MHOS linkage

BACKGROUND

Research on health-related quality of life (HRQOL) among older adult cancer survivors is mostly confined to breast cancer, prostate cancer, colorectal cancer, and lung cancer, which account for 63% of all prevalent cancers. Much less is known about HRQOL in the context of less common cancer sites.

METHODS

HRQOL was examined with the 36-Item Short Form Health Survey, version 1, and the Veterans RAND 12-Item Health Survey in patients with selected cancers (kidney cancer, bladder cancer, pancreatic cancer, upper gastrointestinal cancer, cancer of the oral cavity and pharynx, uterine cancer, cervical cancer, thyroid cancer, melanoma, chronic leukemia, non-Hodgkin lymphoma, and multiple myeloma) and in individuals without cancer on the basis of data linked from the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results cancer registry system and the Medicare Health Outcomes Survey. Scale scores, Physical Component Summary (PCS) and Mental Component Summary (MCS) scores, and a utility metric (Short Form 6D/Veterans RAND 6D), adjusted for sociodemographic characteristics and other chronic conditions, were calculated. A 3-point difference in the scale scores and a 2-point difference in the PCS and MCS scores were considered to be minimally important differences.

RESULTS

Data from 16,095 cancer survivors and 1,224,549 individuals without a history of cancer were included. The results indicated noteworthy deficits in physical health status. Mental health was comparable, although scores for the Role-Emotional and Social Functioning scales were worse for patients with most types of cancer versus those without cancer. Survivors of multiple myeloma and pancreatic malignancies reported the lowest scores, with their PCS/MCS scores less than those of individuals without cancer by 3 or more points.

CONCLUSIONS

HRQOL surveillance efforts revealed poor health outcomes among many older adults and specifically among survivors of multiple myeloma and pancreatic cancer.

Quality of life during chemotherapy in lung cancer patients: results across different treatment lines

Background:

Most lung cancer patients are diagnosed at an advanced disease stage and predominantly receive palliative treatment, which increasingly consists of several chemotherapy lines. We report on patients' quality of life (QOL) to gain knowledge on QOL during and across multiple lines of chemotherapy. This includes patients with (neo)adjuvant therapy up to 3rd or above line palliative chemotherapy.

Methods:

Lung cancer patients receiving outpatient chemotherapy at the Kufstein County Hospital completed an electronic version of the EORTC QLQ-C30. Linear mixed models were used for statistical analysis.

Results:

One hundred and eighty seven patients were included in the study. Surprisingly, irrespective of the chemotherapy line patients reported stable QOL scores during treatment. None of the calculated monthly change rates attained clinical significance, referring to established guidelines that classify a small clinical meaningful change as 5 to 10 points. According to treatment line, 3rd or above line palliative chemotherapy was associated with the worst QOL scores, whereas patients undergoing (neo)adjuvant or 1st line palliative chemotherapy reported fairly comparable QOL.

Conclusion:

The essential finding of our study is that all QOL aspects of the EORTC QLQ-C30 questionnaire remained unchanged during each chemotherapy line in an unselected population of lung cancer patients. Between treatment lines pronounced differences were found, indicating that later palliative chemotherapy lines are associated with higher QOL impairments. These changes in QOL may not primarily be related to the treatment, but rather refer to impairments due to disease progression and may be partly due to a consequence of the prior therapies.

Assessment of the reporting quality of randomized controlled trials on the treatment of diabetes mellitus with traditional chinese medicine: a systematic review

BACKGROUND

After the publication of the CONSORT 2010 statement, few studies have been conducted to assess the reporting quality of randomized clinical trials (RCTs) on treatment of diabetes mellitus with Traditional Chinese Medicine (TCM) published in Chinese journals.

OBJECTIVE

To investigate the current situation of the reporting quality of RCTs in leading medical journals in China with the CONSORT 2010 statement as criteria.

METHODS

The China National Knowledge Infrastructure (CNKI) electronic database was searched for RCTs on the treatment of diabetes mellitus with TCM published in the Journal of Traditional Chinese Medicine, Chinese Journal of Integrated Traditional & Western Medicine, and the China Journal of Chinese Materia Medica from January to December 2011. We excluded trials reported as "animal studies", "in vitro studies", "case studies", or "systematic reviews". The CONSORT checklist was applied by two independent raters to evaluate the reporting quality of all eligible trials after discussing and comprehending the items thoroughly. Each item in the checklist was graded as either "yes" or "no" depending on whether it had been reported by the authors.

RESULTS

We identified 27 RCTs. According to the 37 items in the CONSORT checklist, the average reporting percentage was 45.0%, in which the average reporting percentage for the "title and abstract", the "introduction", the "methods", the "results", the "discussion" and the "other information" was 33.3%, 88.9%, 36.4%, 54.4%, 71.6% and 14.8%, respectively. In the Journal of Traditional Chinese Medicine, Chinese Journal of Integrated Traditional & Western Medicine, and the China Journal of Chinese Materia Medica the average reporting percentage was 42.2%, 56.8%, and 46.0%, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

The reporting quality of RCTs in these three journals was insufficient to allow readers to assess the validity of the trials. We recommend that editors require authors to use the CONSORT statement when reporting their trial results as a condition of publication.

Consolidated standards of reporting trials (CONSORT) and the completeness of reporting of randomised controlled trials (RCTs) published in medical journals

BACKGROUND

An overwhelming body of evidence stating that the completeness of reporting of randomised controlled trials (RCTs) is not optimal has accrued over time. In the mid-1990s, in response to these concerns, an international group of clinical trialists, statisticians, epidemiologists, and biomedical journal editors developed the CONsolidated Standards Of Reporting Trials (CONSORT) Statement. The CONSORT Statement, most recently updated in March 2010, is an evidence-based minimum set of recommendations including a checklist and flow diagram for reporting RCTs and is intended to facilitate the complete and transparent reporting of trials and aid their critical appraisal and interpretation. In 2006, a systematic review of eight studies evaluating the "effectiveness of CONSORT in improving reporting quality in journals" was published.

OBJECTIVES

To update the earlier systematic review assessing whether journal endorsement of the 1996 and 2001 CONSORT checklists influences the completeness of reporting of RCTs published in medical journals.

SEARCH METHODS

We conducted electronic searches, known item searching, and reference list scans to identify reports of evaluations assessing the completeness of reporting of RCTs. The electronic search strategy was developed in MEDLINE and tailored to EMBASE. We searched the Cochrane Methodology Register and the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews using the Wiley interface. We searched the Science Citation Index, Social Science Citation Index, and Arts and Humanities Citation Index through the ISI Web of Knowledge interface. We conducted all searches to identify reports published between January 2005 and March 2010, inclusive.

SELECTION CRITERIA

In addition to studies identified in the original systematic review on this topic, comparative studies evaluating the completeness of reporting of RCTs in any of the following comparison groups were eligible for inclusion in this review: 1) Completeness of reporting of RCTs published in journals that have and have not endorsed the CONSORT Statement; 2) Completeness of reporting of RCTs published in CONSORT-endorsing journals before and after endorsement; or 3) Completeness of reporting of RCTs before and after the publication of the CONSORT Statement (1996 or 2001). We used a broad definition of CONSORT endorsement that includes any of the following: (a) requirement or recommendation in journal's 'Instructions to Authors' to follow CONSORT guidelines; (b) journal editorial statement endorsing the CONSORT Statement; or (c) editorial requirement for authors to submit a CONSORT checklist and/or flow diagram with their manuscript. We contacted authors of evaluations reporting data that could be included in any comparison group(s), but not presented as such in the published report and asked them to provide additional data in order to determine eligibility of their evaluation. Evaluations were not excluded due to language of publication or validity assessment.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We completed screening and data extraction using standardised electronic forms, where conflicts, reasons for exclusion, and level of agreement were all automatically and centrally managed in web-based management software, DistillerSR(®). One of two authors extracted general characteristics of included evaluations and all data were verified by a second author. Data describing completeness of reporting were extracted by one author using a pre-specified form; a 10% random sample of evaluations was verified by a second author. Any discrepancies were discussed by both authors; we made no modifications to the extracted data. Validity assessments of included evaluations were conducted by one author and independently verified by one of three authors. We resolved all conflicts by consensus.For each comparison we collected data on 27 outcomes: 22 items of the CONSORT 2001 checklist, plus four items relating to the reporting of blinding, and one item of aggregate CONSORT scores. Where reported, we extracted and qualitatively synthesised data on the methodological quality of RCTs, by scale or score.

MAIN RESULTS

Fifty-three publications reporting 50 evaluations were included. The total number of RCTs assessed within evaluations was 16,604 (median per evaluation 123 (interquartile range (IQR) 77 to 226) published in a median of six (IQR 3 to 26) journals. Characteristics of the included RCT populations were variable, resulting in heterogeneity between included evaluations. Validity assessments of included studies resulted in largely unclear judgements. The included evaluations are not RCTs and less than 8% (4/53) of the evaluations reported adjusting for potential confounding factors.   Twenty-five of 27 outcomes assessing completeness of reporting in RCTs appeared to favour CONSORT-endorsing journals over non-endorsers, of which five were statistically significant. 'Allocation concealment' resulted in the largest effect, with risk ratio (RR) 1.81 (99% confidence interval (CI) 1.25 to 2.61), suggesting that 81% more RCTs published in CONSORT-endorsing journals adequately describe allocation concealment compared to those published in non-endorsing journals. Allocation concealment was reported adequately in 45% (393/876) of RCTs in CONSORT-endorsing journals and in 22% (329/1520) of RCTs in non-endorsing journals. Other outcomes with results that were significant include: scientific rationale and background in the 'Introduction' (RR 1.07, 99% CI 1.01 to 1.14); 'sample size' (RR 1.61, 99% CI 1.13 to 2.29); method used for 'sequence generation' (RR 1.59, 99% CI 1.38 to 1.84); and an aggregate score over reported CONSORT items, 'total sum score' (standardised mean difference (SMD) 0.68 (99% CI 0.38 to 0.98)).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Evidence has accumulated to suggest that the reporting of RCTs remains sub-optimal. This review updates a previous systematic review of eight evaluations. The findings of this review are similar to those from the original review and demonstrate that, despite the general inadequacies of reporting of RCTs, journal endorsement of the CONSORT Statement may beneficially influence the completeness of reporting of trials published in medical journals. Future prospective studies are needed to explore the influence of the CONSORT Statement dependent on the extent of editorial policies to ensure adherence to CONSORT guidance.

[Palliative care: an example of Comparative Effectiveness Research?]

Comparative Effectiveness Research (CER) seeks to establish treatment objectives and concepts striving to achieve patient relevant progress in therapy on the basis of published evidence. Using the example of palliative medicine and palliative care, respectively, it will be demonstrated that these two are under-researched areas of care. In addition, it will become clear that the success of this interdisciplinary treatment concept for the seriously ill must be weighed in the light of traditional clinical research - far beyond the cancer diagnosis. The current distinction between curative and palliative research and care urgently needs to be reconsidered.

Self-care strategies used by patients with lung cancer to promote quality of life

PURPOSE/OBJECTIVES

To describe self-care strategies used by patients with lung cancer to promote quality of life (QOL).

RESEARCH APPROACH

Qualitative study using a phenomenologic approach.

SETTING

Cancer clinics in central Texas.

PARTICIPANTS

Purposive sampling was used to enroll 10 adults with lung cancer who had completed primary treatment within the prior two years.

METHODOLOGIC APPROACH

One-on-one, semistructured, audiotaped interviews were conducted.

MAIN RESEARCH VARIABLES

QOL and self-care strategies.

FINDINGS

Participants identified family and social support, functional independence, physical well-being, and spirituality as important aspects of QOL. Participants identified fatigue as the factor most negatively affecting QOL. Self-care strategies identified to improve QOL were primarily related to fatigue management. Rest was the primary self-care strategy reportedly recommended by healthcare providers, but this strategy was ineffective. Helpful self-care strategies included budgeting time and energy, maintaining contact with family and friends for support, and prayer.

CONCLUSIONS

This study documents the negative effect of fatigue on QOL in patients with lung cancer. Use of rest to manage fatigue's pervasive negative effect on QOL is a common self-care strategy, reportedly recommended by healthcare providers, but is ineffective by itself to manage fatigue and improve QOL.

INTERPRETATION

Healthcare providers should assess self-care strategies used by patients with lung cancer to promote improved QOL. Because fatigue has a documented negative effect on QOL in patients with lung cancer, providers should encourage the use of multidimensional strategies that have been supported by research evidence to manage fatigue and improve QOL.