Patient-reported outcomes as end points and outcome indicators in solid tumours

Factors affecting peripheral neuropathy induced by nanoparticle albumin-bound paclitaxel in patients with pancreatic cancer

AIM

Chemotherapy-induced peripheral neuropathy (CIPN) is a major toxicity limiting the use of nab-paclitaxel (Nab-P) in treating patients with pancreatic cancer. The aim of this study was to identify the factors affecting CIPN using patient-reported outcome measures and the minimally invasive volumetric absorptive microsampling (VAMS) technique.

METHODS

The maximum concentrations of paclitaxel (Cmax) were measured from 81 VAMS samples collected from 44 participants with pancreatic cancer. The association between CIPN development and demographic, clinical and pharmacokinetic factors was determined using univariable and multivariable logistic regression. The association between CIPN severity and the factors was evaluated using Spearman's rank correlation. The impact of Cmax and the number of treatment cycles on the severity was assessed using multivariable linear regression.

RESULTS

The development of CIPN was significantly associated with cumulative dose (odds ratio 1.005, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.003-1.007), treatment cycles (3.47, 2.25-5.85), alkaline phosphate (0.992, 0.985-0.998) and age (1.092, 1.020-1.179), with an area under the receiver operating characteristic curve of 0.89 (95% CI 0.83-0.95). The severity of CIPN significantly worsened with increasing cumulative dose (coefficient 0.58, 95% CI 0.44-0.69), treatment cycles (0.57, 0.44-0.68) and age (0.18, 0.00-0.35). The severity of CIPN was predictable from treatment cycles (P = .0002) and Cmax (P = .01).

CONCLUSION

The higher the cumulative dose of Nab-P, treatment cycles and age, the more frequently and severely do the patients experience CIPN. In predicting the severity of CIPN using Cmax, minimally invasive VAMS is a feasible alternative to venous blood sampling.

Improving the clinical meaning of surrogate endpoints: An empirical assessment of clinical progression in phase III oncology trials

Disease progression in clinical trials is commonly defined by radiologic measures. However, clinical progression may be more meaningful to patients, may occur even when radiologic criteria for progression are not met, and often requires a change in therapy in clinical practice. The objective of this study was to determine the utilization of clinical progression criteria within progression-based trial endpoints among phase III trials testing systemic therapies for metastatic solid tumors. The primary manuscripts and protocols of phase III trials were reviewed for whether clinical events, such as refractory pain, tumor bleeding, or neurologic compromise, could constitute a progression event. Univariable logistic regression computed odds ratios (OR) and 95% CI for associations between trial-level covariates and clinical progression. A total of 216 trials enrolling 148,190 patients were included, with publication dates from 2006 through 2020. A major change in clinical status was included in the progression criteria of 13% of trials (n = 27), most commonly as a secondary endpoint (n = 22). Only 59% of trials (n = 16) reported distinct clinical progression outcomes that constituted the composite surrogate endpoint. Compared with other disease sites, genitourinary trials were more likely to include clinical progression definitions (16/33 [48%] vs. 11/183 [6%]; OR, 14.72; 95% CI, 5.99 to 37.84; p < .0001). While major tumor-related clinical events were seldom considered as disease progression events, increased attention to clinical progression may improve the meaningfulness and clinical applicability of surrogate endpoints for patients with metastatic solid tumors.

Toward a more patient-centered drug development process in clinical trials for patients with myelodysplastic syndromes/neoplasms (MDS): Practical considerations from the International Consortium for MDS (icMDS)

Notable treatment advances have been made in recent years for patients with myelodysplastic syndromes/neoplasms (MDS), and several new drugs are under development. For example, the emerging availability of oral MDS therapies holds the promise of improving patients' health-related quality of life (HRQoL). Within this rapidly evolving landscape, the inclusion of HRQoL and other patient-reported outcomes (PROs) is critical to inform the benefit/risk assessment of new therapies or to assess whether patients live longer and better, for what will likely remain a largely incurable disease. We provide practical considerations to support investigators in generating high-quality PRO data in future MDS trials. We first describe several challenges that are to be thoughtfully considered when designing an MDS-focused clinical trial with a PRO endpoint. We then discuss aspects related to the design of the study, including PRO assessment strategies. We also discuss statistical approaches illustrating the potential value of time-to-event analyses and their implications within the estimand framework. Finally, based on a literature review of MDS randomized controlled trials with a PRO endpoint, we note the PRO items that deserve special attention when reporting future MDS trial results. We hope these practical considerations will facilitate the generation of rigorous PRO data that can robustly inform MDS patient care and support treatment decision-making for this patient population.

Impact of systemic cancer treatment on quality of life and mental well-being: a comparative analysis of patients with localized and advanced cancer

INTRODUCTION

This study investigated the impact of systemic cancer therapy on the quality of life, mental well-being, and life satisfaction of cancer patients.

METHODS

This prospective study was promoted by the Spanish Society of Medical Oncology (SEOM) and enrolled patients with localized, resected, or unresectable advanced cancer from 15 Spanish medical oncology departments. Patients completed surveys on quality of life (EORTC-QoL-QLQ-C30), psychological distress (BSI-18) and life satisfaction (SWLS) before and after systemic cancer treatment.

RESULTS

The study involved 1807 patients, 944 (52%) having resected, localized cancer, and 863 with unresectable advanced cancer. The mean age was 60 years, and 53% were female. The most common types of localized cancer were colorectal (43%) and breast (38%), while bronchopulmonary (32%), non-colorectal digestive (23%), and colorectal (15%) were the most frequent among those with advanced cancer. Before systemic treatment, patients with advanced cancer had poorer scores than those with localized cancer on physical, role, emotional, cognitive, social limitations, symptoms, psychological distress, and life satisfaction (all p < 0.001), but there were no differences in financial hardship. Patients with localized cancer had greater life satisfaction and better mental well-being than those with advanced cancer before systemic treatment (p < 0.001). After treatment, patients with localized cancer experienced worsening of all scales, symptoms, and mental well-being (p < 0.001), while patients with advanced disease had a minor decline in quality of life. The impact on quality of life was greater on all dimensions except economic hardship and was independent of age, cancer location, and performance status in participants with resected disease after adjuvant chemotherapy.

CONCLUSION

In conclusion, our study highlights that systemic cancer treatment can improve quality of life in patients with advanced cancer, while adjuvant treatments for localized disease may have a negative impact on quality of life and psychological well-being. Therefore, treatment decisions should be carefully evaluated on an individual basis.

Pretreatment endocrine symptoms and recurrence-free survival among young premenopausal patients with breast cancer: a prospective cohort study

Background

Pretreatment endocrine symptoms in premenopausal patients might be considered as a potential marker of poor prognosis. We conducted a cohort study to evaluate the association between endocrine symptoms prior to treatment and recurrence-free survival (RFS) among premenopausal patients with breast cancer aged ⩽40 years.

Methods

Data were obtained from a prospective cohort study (NCT03131089) conducted at the Samsung Medical Center from 2013 to 2021. We included patients aged ⩽40 years who had been diagnosed with breast cancer. The primary outcome measure was RFS. Endocrine symptoms were measured using the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy - Endocrine Symptoms (FACT-ES). We also calculated the hazard ratio (HR) for recurrence or all-cause mortality by comparing the tertiles of the FACT-ES score at diagnosis.

Results

Among the 977 participants, the mean (standard deviation) age was 35.3 (3.9) years. At diagnosis, 17.2% of the patients had at least one severe endocrine symptom. During 3512 person-years of follow-up, the high symptom group had a worse RFS than the low-symptom group [HR = 2.05; 95% confidence interval (CI) = 1.19-3.54]. In particular, hot flashes (HR = 5.59; 95% CI = 1.96-15.93) and breast sensitivity (HR = 1.82; 95% CI = 1.00-3.32) were associated with reduced RFS.

Conclusion

Close monitoring of pretreatment endocrine symptoms may be important in patients diagnosed with breast cancer at a young age.

Patient-Reported Symptom Burden After Cancer Surgery in Older Adults: A Population-Level Analysis

BACKGROUND

Older adults have unique needs for supportive care after surgery. We examined symptom trajectories and factors associated with high symptom burden after cancer surgery in older adults.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

We conducted a population-level study of patients ≥ 70 years old undergoing cancer surgery (2007-2018) using prospectively collected Edmonton Symptom Assessment System (ESAS) scores. The monthly prevalence of moderate to severe symptoms (ESAS ≥ 4) for anxiety, depression, drowsiness, lack of appetite, nausea, pain, shortness of breath, tiredness, and poor wellbeing was computed over 12 months after surgery.

RESULTS

Among 48,748 patients, 234,420 ESAS scores were recorded over 12 months after surgery. Moderate to severe tiredness (57.8%), poor wellbeing (51.9%), and lack of appetite (39.3%) were most common. The proportion of patients with moderate to severe symptoms was stable over the 1 month prior to and 12 months after surgery (< 5% variation for each symptom). There was no clinically significant change (< 5%) in symptom trajectory with the initiation of adjuvant therapy.

CONCLUSIONS

Patient-reported symptom burden was stable for up to 1 year after cancer surgery among older adults. Neither surgery nor adjuvant therapy coincided with a worsening in symptom burden. However, the persistence of symptoms at 1 year may suggest gaps in supportive care for older adults. This information on symptom trajectory and predictors of high symptom burden is important to set appropriate expectations and improve patient counseling, recovery care pathways, and proactive symptom management for older adults after cancer surgery.

Effect of Sarcopenia on Survival and Health-Related Quality of Life in Patients with Hepatocellular Carcinoma after Hepatectomy

BACKGROUND

Although sarcopenia has been reported as a negative prognostic factor in patients with hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC), the lack of studies with a prospective design utilizing comprehensive sarcopenia assessment with composite endpoints is an important gap in understanding the impact of sarcopenia in patients with HCC. The aim of this study was to investigate the relationship between sarcopenia and postoperative 1-year mortality and health-related quality of life (HRQOL) based on sarcopenia assessment.

METHODS

The study cohort, who received resection surgery for HCC between May 2020 and August 2021, was assessed for sarcopenia based on grip strength, the chair stand test, skeletal muscle mass, and gait speed. The primary outcome measures were 1-year mortality and HRQOL determined using the QLQ-C30 questionnaire. In addition, we collected hospital costs, postoperative hospital stays, complications, 30-day and 90-day mortality, and 90- and 180-day readmission rates. Univariate and multivariate linear regression analyses were conducted to examine factors associated with global health status.

RESULTS

A total of 153 eligible patients were included in the cohort. One-year mortality was higher in patients with sarcopenia than in those without sarcopenia (p = 0.043). There was a correlation between sarcopenia and the surgical approach to global health status (p = 0.025) and diarrhea (p = 0.003).

CONCLUSIONS

Preoperative sarcopenia reduces postoperative survival and health-related quality of life in patients with HCC.

Clinician and Patient Reporting of Symptomatic Adverse Events in Cancer Clinical Trials: Using CTCAE and PRO-CTCAE® to Provide Two Distinct and Complementary Perspectives

Inclusion of the patient perspective in the reporting of symptomatic adverse events provides different and complementary information to clinician reporting using the Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (CTCAE). The National Cancer Institute's Patient-Reported Outcomes version of the Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (PRO-CTCAE^®) is designed for patients to self-report their symptomatic adverse events in a manner that complements CTCAE reporting. Using CTCAE and PRO-CTCAE together offers the potential to refine our understanding of the prevalence and trajectory of lower grade AEs that can lead to elective discontinuation of therapy and diminished quality of life. This review addresses the development of PRO-CTCAE with an emphasis on the differences between PRO-CTCAE scores and CTCAE severity grades. This distinction is important when evaluating, grading and reporting toxicity and tolerability in cancer clinical trials.

Conceptual assessment of HRQOL among Japanese non-metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (nmCRPC) patients

OBJECTIVE

The study objectives were to understand how patients view the quality of life in non-metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (nmCRPC), including unmet needs and what patients consider most important in treatment outcomes. A gap analysis was conducted on existing patient-reported outcomes (PROs) measures versus what is missing from the patient perspective, to guide future development of PRO-based real-world evidence for nmCRPC in Japan. A conceptual model for nmCRPC Japanese patients' HRQOL was also created.

METHODS

This non-interventional, qualitative study consisted of a targeted literature review, PRO instrument review, and interviews with 20 nmCRPC patients and five treating physicians. Triangulation of the gap analysis, evidence from the targeted review of the literature, and qualitative interview findings were employed to assess the comprehensiveness of current nmCRPC and HRQOL measures.

RESULTS

Symptoms most reported by patients were frequent urination (70%), nocturia (65%), and general pain (65%). Others reported included lack of strength (30%). HRQOL impacts most reported were anxiety (45%) and worry (50%) about their diagnosis. Additional impacts mentioned were weight changes, loss of sleep, difficulty walking, loss of appetite, and difficulty traveling and seeking toilets in public. The gap analysis revealed 31 symptoms and 33 impacts not covered in existing prostate cancer-specific PRO instruments. Patients mentioned musculoskeletal symptoms such as fractures, leg pain, cramps, numbness, and loss of leg bone strength. Impacts not previously discussed in the literature or in outcome measures were feelings of self-consciousness around diagnosis, stigma around illness, and the impact on mobility including traveling.

CONCLUSION

Key results reveal pain and urinary symptoms are the most experienced by Japanese nmCRPC patients. The diagnosis and treatment of disease leads to significant impacts in patient lives. Analysis revealed that symptoms and life impacts are missing in the current literature and outcome measures. Testing and debriefing of specific items could further substantiate these dimensions.

Temporal trends in self-reported general and mental health status among colorectal cancer patients: racial/ethnic disparities in a population-based analysis

PURPOSE

Patient-reported outcomes are essential to patient-centered cancer care. We sought to determine the relationships between colorectal cancer (CRC) diagnosis and trends in self-reported general health status (GHS) and mental health status (MHS) among racial/ethnic groups.

METHODS

We used population-based Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER)-Consumer Assessment of Healthcare Providers and Systems (CAHPS) data to identify CRC patients diagnosed from 1996 to 2011 who reported GHS and/or MHS on a CAHPS survey within 6 years before or after diagnosis and were 65 or older at survey completion. Multivariable logistic regression assessed relationships of patient race/ethnicity and CRC diagnosis with the odds of reporting fair or poor GHS or MHS.

RESULTS

Five thousand five hundred forty-five patients reported GHS and/or MHS within 6 years before CRC diagnosis and 4,604 reported GHS and/or MHS within 6 years after diagnosis. 80.9% were non-Hispanic white (NHW), 7.1% were non-Hispanic black (NHB), 6.7% were Hispanic, and 5.3% were non-Hispanic Asian. Being diagnosed with CRC was associated with increased odds of reporting fair or poor GHS (OR = 1.55, 95% CI = 1.40-1.72) and MHS (OR = 1.33, 95% CI = 1.13-1.58). For GHS, this trend held for all race/ethnicities except NHBs, and for MHS, this trend held for NHWs and Hispanics only.

CONCLUSION

CRC diagnosis is an important driver of increased likelihood of fair and poor GHS and MHS, but the relationship is complicated by effect modification by race/ethnicity. Efforts to further understand the race/ethnicity-specific relationships between CRC diagnosis and declines in GHS and MHS are necessary to promote equitable care for all patients.

%TTD and %TUDD: New SAS macro programs to calculate the survival data of the time to deterioration for patient-reported outcomes data in oncology

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE

Longitudinal analysis of patient-reported outcome (PRO) data remains challenging, as no standardization of statistical methods has been proposed, making comparison of PRO results between clinical trials difficult. In this context, the time to deterioration approach has recently been proposed and is regularly used as a modality of longitudinal PRO analysis in oncology.

METHODS

Two new SAS macro programs were developed, %TTD and %TUDD, which implement longitudinal analysis of PRO data according to the time to deterioration approach. These programs implement the recommended deterioration definitions. We described the programs with their different functionalities.

RESULTS

The %TTD macro calculates the time to first or transient deterioration, and the %TUDD macro calculates the time until definitive deterioration. These macros allow to obtain the survival variables from the time to deterioration approach. We illustrate our programs by presenting different applications on the randomized phase II AFUGEM GERCOR clinical trial.

CONCLUSION

The implementation of the deterioration definitions in SAS software allows the dissemination of this approach, in order to move toward the goal of standardization of longitudinal PRO analysis in oncology clinical trials.

Impact of open-label versus blinded study design on patient-reported outcomes data in randomized clinical trials of immunotherapy in advanced or metastatic cancer patients: a systematic review

AIM

A systematic literature review of immuno-oncology trials was conducted to assess the potential impact of open-label vs double-blind trial design on patient-reported outcome (PRO) data.

METHODS

A systematic search of indexed literature published from January 2009 to May 2019 was conducted using PubMed/MEDLINE, Cochrane Library, and EMBASE database. All randomized clinical trials (RCTs) of immuno-oncology therapies on advanced cancer patients reporting PRO data were identified. Descriptive analyses were performed to quantify differences at baseline and over time, by the type of study, regarding questionnaire completion rate and PRO scores.

RESULTS

In total, 23 studies were retained (15 open-label, 8 blinded). At baseline, no difference in completion rate was observed between arms irrespective of trial design (absolute mean difference of 2.8% and 2.2% for open label and blinded studies, respectively). No clinically significant difference in baseline PRO scores was observed between arms. Over time, impact on PRO scores could not be identified due to the limited number of studies, heterogeneity of questionnaires and tumor types.

CONCLUSIONS

Trial design had no impact on PRO completion rate or baseline scores. Future research should involve analyses by specific cancer types and ideally compare individual data from two similar RCTs (blinded vs. open-label).

Measuring prognosis in chronic myeloid leukemia: what's new?

Introduction: The outcome of chronic myeloid leukemia (CML) patients in chronic phase has changed after the introduction of tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs). The life expectancy is actually similar to that of the general population. Prognostic stratification at baseline is part of a patient-centered approach to decide the best therapeutic approach.Areas covered: In this review, the current prognostic factors examined at baseline are detailed and the meaning is explained. A broad research on Medline, Embase and archives from EHA and ASH congresses, was performed. Prognostic factors have been divided into patient-related (age, gender, comorbidities, etc.) and disease-related (additional cytogenetic abnormalities, type of transcript, etc). New information about genomic data and the potential role of patient-reported outcomes is also discussed.Expert Opinion: Prognostic factors at baseline should be considered to evaluate the long-term probability of disease-related death, the possible toxicity, and the projected long-term overall survival. The genomic assessment would provide the basis for a genomic-based risk and help in oriented decision-making process.

Association of frailty with long-term homecare utilization in older adults following cancer surgery: Retrospective population-based cohort study

INTRODUCTION

Frailty is an important prognostic factor, and the association with postoperative dependence is important outcome to older adults. We examined the association of frailty with long-term homecare utilization for older adults following cancer surgery.

METHODS

In this population-based cohort study, we determined frailty status in all older adults (≥70 years old) undergoing cancer resection (2007-2017). Outcomes were receipt of homecare and intensity of homecare (days per month) over 5 years. We estimated the adjusted association of frailty with outcomes, and assessed interaction with age.

RESULTS

Of 82,037 patients, 6443 (7.8%) had frailty. Receipt and intensity of homecare was greater with frailty, but followed similar trajectories over 5 years between groups. Homecare receipt peaked in the first postoperative month (51.4% frailty, 43.1% no frailty), and plateaued by 1 year until 5 years (28.5% frailty, 12.8% no frailty). After 1 year, those with frailty required 4 more homecare days per month than without frailty (14 vs 10 days/month). After adjustment, frailty was associated with increased homecare receipt (hazard ratio 1.40; 95%CI 1.35-1.45), and increasing intensity each year (year 1 incidence rate ratio [IRR] 1.22, 95%CI 1.18-1.27 to year 5 IRR 1.47, 95%CI 1.35-1.59). The magnitude of the association of frailty with homecare receipt decreased with age (p_interaction <0.001).

CONCLUSION

While the trajectory of homecare receipt and intensity is similar between those with and without frailty, frailty is associated with increased receipt of homecare and increased intensity of homecare after cancer surgery across all age groups.

Impact of gastric cancer treatment on quality of life of patients

Treatment of gastric cancer is stage specific and ranges from endoscopic resections in early gastric cancer to gastrectomy and multimodal treatment in locally advanced tumour situations. Palliative systemic treatment has the potential to prolong survival in advanced tumour stages. However, tumour-directed therapies and their side-effects potentially worsen the general condition of a patient. Treatment discussions and decisions, especially when trading-off the options with the patient, have widened their focus from 'technical' terms like overall survival, disease-free survival and progression-free survival to patient reported outcomes (PROs) including quality of life (QoL). The assessment of PROs has evolved as important endpoint in clinical studies. A precise definition of QoL seems impossible. Its multiple dimensions can be evaluated by various validated questionnaires like the QLQ-C30 and FACT-G focusing on different priorities. Special additional tools have been developed and validated to assess QoL in gastric cancer patients (QLQ-STO22, FACT-Ga). We herein give an overview on the options to evaluate QoL in patients with gastric cancer and on published data on the impact of tumour-targeted therapy on QoL in these patients.

Patient-Reported Outcomes as Independent Prognostic Factors for Survival in Oncology: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

OBJECTIVES

Assessment of patient-reported outcomes (PROs) in oncology is of critical importance because it provides unique information that may also predict clinical outcomes.

METHODS

We conducted a systematic review of prognostic factor studies to examine the prognostic value of PROs for survival in cancer. A systematic literature search was performed in PubMed for studies published between 2013 and 2018. We considered any study, regardless of the research design, that included at least 1 PRO domain in the final multivariable prognostic model. The protocol (EPIPHANY) was published and registered in the International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (CRD42018099160).

RESULTS

Eligibility criteria selected 138 studies including 158 127 patients, of which 43 studies were randomized, controlled trials. Overall, 120 (87%) studies reported at least 1 PRO to be statistically significantly prognostic for overall survival. Lung (n = 41, 29.7%) and genitourinary (n = 27, 19.6%) cancers were most commonly investigated. The prognostic value of PROs was investigated in secondary data analyses in 101 (73.2%) studies. The EORTC QLQ-C30 questionnaire was the most frequently used measure, and its physical functioning scale (range 0-100) the most frequent independent prognostic PRO, with a pooled hazard ratio estimate of 0.88 per 10-point increase (95% CI 0.84-0.92).

CONCLUSIONS

There is convincing evidence that PROs provide independent prognostic information for overall survival across cancer populations and disease stages. Further research is needed to translate current evidence-based data into prognostic tools to aid in clinical decision making.

Optimizing the measurement of health-related quality of life in adolescents and young adults with cancer

To date, the health‐related quality of life experiences of adolescents and young adults (AYA) with cancer have been inconsistently and incompletely captured by existing patient‐reported outcome (PRO) measures. The National Institutes of Health Patient‐Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS) represents the state of the art for measurement science of PROs and provides an optimal approach for addressing these measurement challenges and catalyzing future patient‐centered research in AYA oncology.

Clinical benefit of immune checkpoint inhibitors approved by US Food and Drug Administration

Background

We describe the clinical benefit of immune checkpoint inhibitors using the European Society for Medical Oncology Magnitude of Clinical Benefit Scale (ESMO-MCBS) and ASCO VF.

Methods

We identify all approved indications of immune checkpoint inhibitors based on RCTs between January 1, 2011 and September 30, 2018 by FDA. Information including medians and HR of OS (PFS or DFS) and 95% CI, grade 3 or 4 toxicities in each arm, QOL data, survival probability at fixed time were extracted.

Results

Immune checkpoint inhibitors were approved for 18 indications based on RCTs. All the indications meet the ESMO-MCBS 1.1 threshold for meaningful benefit. By the updated ASCO-VF, the median Net Health Benefit (NHB) of these agents was 55.3 (range 17.4–77.1). Two third of the indication gained the bonus points for durable survival benefits by updated ASCO VF. When updated results were incorporated in the assessment, clinical benefit of most approved immune checkpoint inhibitors increased with a median improvement of NHB of 10 (range 2–20).

Conclusions

Approved immune checkpoint inhibitors provided clinical meaningful benefit by ESMO-MCBS 1.1, and most of these agents reach the threshold for bonus points for durable survival in the updated ASCO VF.

Validation of the Mexican-Spanish Version of the EORTC QLQ-OV28 Instrument for the Assessment of Quality of Life in Women with Ovarian Cancer

BACKGROUND

Health-related quality of life (HRQL) is an important outcome measure in Oncology.

AIM OF THE STUDY

To validate the Mexican-Spanish version of the QLQ-OV28 questionnaire to assess HRQL in women with ovarian cancer (OC).

METHODS

The QLQ-C30 and QLQ-OV28 instruments were applied to women with OC attending a cancer center in Mexico. The usual psychometric analyses were performed; the Spearman's method was used for correlation analysis, reliability analysis with the Cronbach's alpha, known-group comparisons with the Kruskal-Wallis test, responsiveness was tested employing repeated measures ANOVA, and the association of scale scores and overall survival (OS) were analyzed with the Kaplan-Meier method and Cox's model.

RESULTS

Two hundred fifty-two women with OC were included in this cohort. The instruments were well accepted and compliance rates were high; patients responded both instruments in <30 min. The QLQ-OV28 internal consistency tests demonstrated good convergent (Correlation coefficients [CC] 0.154‒0.694) and divergent validity (CC 0.003‒0.69). Cronbach's α coefficients of six of eight scales of the QLQ-OV28 instruments were >0.7 (range, 0.567‒0.857). Scales QLQ-OV28 instruments distinguished among clinically distinct groups of patients, particularly after basal serum albumin and basal Ca‒125 levels. The evaluation of responsiveness demonstrated that two scales of the QLQ-OV28 were sensitive to change over time during induction chemotherapy. Six scales of the QLQ-OV28 were associated with OS.

CONCLUSIONS

The Mexican-Spanish version of the QLQ-OV28 questionnaire is reliable and valid for the assessment of HRQL in patients with OC and can be broadly used in clinical trials.

Reporting of health-related quality of life endpoints in National Cancer Institute-supported cancer treatment trials

BACKGROUND

The importance of capturing and reporting health-related quality of life (HRQOL) in clinical trials has been increasingly recognized in the oncology field. As a result, the National Cancer Institute (NCI) began to provide support for correlative HRQOL studies in cancer treatment trials. The current study was conducted to assess the publication rate of HRQOL correlative studies in NCI-supported treatment trials and to identify potential factors positively or negatively associated with publication rates.

METHODS

The NCI conducted a retrospective review of existing NCI databases to identify cancer treatment trials that had obtained additional NCI funding for the assessment of HRQOL and to determine the extent to which funded HRQOL studies have been completed and published in a peer-reviewed journal.

RESULTS

Of the 108 included trials, 58 (54%) had a parent trial (PT) publication; of these, 36 trials (62%) had a published HRQOL result: 20 as an independent publication and 16 that were included and/or reported in the PT publication. The length of time between trial activation and closure, as well as the specific cancer, appeared to be associated with the publication rates.

CONCLUSIONS

The results of the current study demonstrated that approximately 45% of the PT publications were followed by a HRQOL publication within 1 year, to allow the knowledge to be used in patient treatment decision making. The authors believe the current analysis is an important first step toward a better understand of the challenges that researchers face when reporting HRQOL endpoints.

Patient-reported symptom burden as a prognostic factor in treatment with first-line cetuximab plus chemotherapy for unresectable metastatic colorectal cancer: Results of Phase II QUACK trial

Background

It remains unclear whether patients’ self‐perceptions of symptoms at baseline clinically impact the prognostic relevance, treatment efficacy, or toxicity profiles in metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) patients treated with the first‐line cetuximab and standard chemotherapy.

Methods

The data were collected from a prospective trial that assessed the relationships between quality of life (QOL), treatment efficacy, and adverse events (AEs).

Results

The analysis of 137 mCRC patients revealed a significant association between the presence of baseline tumor‐related symptoms and a lower overall survival (OS) compared to the absence of symptoms (HR, 2.49; 95% CI, 1.37‐4.62; P = .003). The asymptomatic responders had favorable outcomes compared to the symptomatic nonresponders (2‐year OS rates: 83.6% and 35.9%, respectively), while the symptomatic responders had similar outcomes to the asymptomatic nonresponders. The median postprogression survival differed significantly: 10.2 months for the symptomatic patients and 15.9 months for the asymptomatic patients (HR, 2.29; 95% CI, 1.25‐4.29, P = .008). The objective response rates and patient toxicity profiles were similar irrespective of the severity of baseline symptoms.

Conclusion

Baseline symptoms were associated with worse OS but not with impaired treatment efficacy or more frequent AEs in mCRC patients treated with cetuximab in addition to chemotherapy.

Patient-Reported Outcomes Predict Mortality in Lupus

OBJECTIVE

Physician-assessed disease activity and damage predict mortality in systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE). Patient-reported outcomes (PROs) are known predictors of mortality in other chronic diseases, but this relationship has not been well examined in SLE. The aim of the present study was to assess whether PROs predict mortality in SLE.

METHODS

Data were derived from the University of California at San Francisco Lupus Outcomes Study (n = 728). PROs (Medical Outcomes Study Short Form 36 [SF-36] subscales), self-rated health, and depression (Center for Epidemiologic Studies Depression scale [CES-D]) from 2007 (baseline data [T0]) were used to predict mortality (censored 2015). Univariate Cox regression analyses were completed for each PRO as a predictor of mortality, and multivariate Cox regression with covariates for each PRO separately. Covariates were age, sex, race/ethnicity, poverty, disease duration, disease activity (Systemic Lupus Activity Questionnaire), and damage (Brief Index of Lupus Damage).

RESULTS

The mean ± SD age of patients was 50.6 ± 12.6 years. Ninety-two percent of patients were women and 68.5% were white. There were 71 deaths (9.1%). In univariate analyses, both the SF-36 physical component subscale score and self-rated health were associated with mortality, and the SF-36 mental health subscale and CES-D scores were not associated with mortality. In multivariate analyses, lower scores of SF-36 physical function at T0 independently predicted mortality after controlling for all other covariates (hazard ratio 0.97 [95% confidence interval 0.94-0.99]; P < 0.01).

CONCLUSION

Patient-reported physical function independently predicted mortality in SLE, even after accounting for demographics (including poverty) and disease (duration, activity, and damage). Because PROs are easy to assess, they may be used to triage, track, and guide early interventions for those at high risk of mortality in SLE.

A Quality-adjusted Time Without Symptoms or Toxicity (Q-TWiST) Analysis of Nivolumab Versus Everolimus in Advanced Renal Cell Carcinoma (aRCC)

This study assessed the net health benefits of treatment with nivolumab versus everolimus among patients with advanced renal cell carcinoma by assessing the quality (ie, patient preferences) and quantity of survival (ie, time spent with significant toxicities, in progression, or before progression and without significant toxicities). Nivolumab resulted in a 3.3-month quality-adjusted survival gain versus everolimus that was statistically significant and clearly clinically meaningful.

Modeling strategies to improve parameter estimates in prognostic factors analyses with patient-reported outcomes in oncology

PURPOSE

The inclusion of patient-reported outcome (PRO) questionnaires in prognostic factor analyses in oncology has substantially increased in recent years. We performed a simulation study to compare the performances of four different modeling strategies in estimating the prognostic impact of multiple collinear scales from PRO questionnaires.

METHODS

We generated multiple scenarios describing survival data with different sample sizes, event rates and degrees of multicollinearity among five PRO scales. We used the Cox proportional hazards (PH) model to estimate the hazard ratios (HR) using automatic selection procedures, which were based on either the likelihood ratio-test (Cox-PV) or the Akaike Information Criterion (Cox-AIC). We also used Cox PH models which included all variables and were either penalized using the Ridge regression (Cox-R) or were estimated as usual (Cox-Full). For each scenario, we simulated 1000 independent datasets and compared the average outcomes of all methods.

RESULTS

The Cox-R showed similar or better performances with respect to the other methods, particularly in scenarios with medium-high multicollinearity (ρ = 0.4 to ρ = 0.8) and small sample sizes (n = 100). Overall, the Cox-PV and Cox-AIC performed worse, for example they did not select one or more prognostic collinear PRO scales in some scenarios. Compared with the Cox-Full, the Cox-R provided HR estimates with similar bias patterns but smaller root-mean-squared errors, particularly in higher multicollinearity scenarios.

CONCLUSIONS

Our findings suggest that the Cox-R is the best approach when performing prognostic factor analyses with multiple and collinear PRO scales, particularly in situations of high multicollinearity, small sample sizes and low event rates.

Patient-reported outcomes and health-related quality of life for cetuximab versus bevacizumab in metastatic colorectal cancer: a prospective cohort study

PURPOSE

Uncertainty exists regarding Patient-Reported Outcomes (PROs) and Health-Related Quality of Life (HRQoL) of patients with metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) treated with cetuximab or bevacizumab. We conducted a prospective cohort study comparing PROs and HRQoL from both therapies.

METHODS

We assessed PROs and HRQoL from patients treated with cetuximab or bevacizumab using QLQ-C30 and QLQ-CR29 questionnaires at three sequential time points, including baseline. Global Health Status (GHS), functional and symptom scales, and Overall Treatment Utility (derived from clinical and patient-reported outcomes) were compared for the two treatment strategies.

RESULTS

Between January 2017 and April 2018, 44 patients were allocated to cetuximab (n = 19) or bevacizumab (n = 25). Except for RAS mutation status, patient baseline characteristics were generally well balanced across treatment groups. A higher proportion of patients experienced a deterioration in GHS (≥ 10%) in cetuximab arm - 53.8% (95% CI 25.1-80.8%) at 6 weeks and 66.7% (95% CI 29.9-92.5%) at 12 weeks-comparing to bevacizumab cohort: 18.2% (95% CI 5.2-40.3%) at 6 weeks and 12.5% (95% CI:1.6-38.3%) at 12 weeks. Treatment utility rates at 6 and 12 weeks were, respectively, 88.6% and 69.8% for bevacizumab, compared to 49% and 19.1% for cetuximab (p = 0.004), a difference confirmed in subset analyses.

CONCLUSIONS

In patients with mCRC, cetuximab-containing regimens led to a progressive negative impact on PROs and global HRQoL, when compared to baseline and bevacizumab. Future research is needed to confirm these results. Our findings demonstrate the value of PROs when assessing comparative effectiveness of different treatment regimens.

Beyond maximum grade: modernising the assessment and reporting of adverse events in haematological malignancies

Tremendous progress in treatment and outcomes has been achieved across the whole range of haematological malignancies in the past two decades. Although cure rates for aggressive malignancies have increased, nowhere has progress been more impactful than in the management of typically incurable forms of haematological cancer. Population-based data have shown that 5-year survival for patients with chronic myelogenous and chronic lymphocytic leukaemia, indolent B-cell lymphomas, and multiple myeloma has improved markedly. This improvement is a result of substantial changes in disease management strategies in these malignancies. Several haematological malignancies are now chronic diseases that are treated with continuously administered therapies that have unique side-effects over time. In this Commission, an international panel of clinicians, clinical investigators, methodologists, regulators, and patient advocates representing a broad range of academic and clinical cancer expertise examine adverse events in haematological malignancies. The issues pertaining to assessment of adverse events examined here are relevant to a range of malignancies and have been, to date, underexplored in the context of haematology. The aim of this Commission is to improve toxicity assessment in clinical trials in haematological malignancies by critically examining the current process of adverse event assessment, highlighting the need to incorporate patient-reported outcomes, addressing issues unique to stem-cell transplantation and survivorship, appraising challenges in regulatory approval, and evaluating toxicity in real-world patients. We have identified a range of priority issues in these areas and defined potential solutions to challenges associated with adverse event assessment in the current treatment landscape of haematological malignancies.

Evaluating methodological quality of Prognostic models Including Patient-reported HeAlth outcomes iN oncologY (EPIPHANY): a systematic review protocol

INTRODUCTION

While there is mounting evidence of the independent prognostic value of patient-reported outcomes (PROs) for overall survival (OS) in patients with cancer, it is known that the conduct of these studies may hold a number of methodological challenges. The aim of this systematic review is to evaluate the quality of published studies in this research area, in order to identify methodological and statistical issues deserving special attention and to also possibly provide evidence-based recommendations.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

An electronic search strategy will be performed in PubMed to identify studies developing or validating a prognostic model which includes PROs as predictors. Two reviewers will independently be involved in data collection using a predefined and standardised data extraction form including information related to study characteristics, PROs measures used and multivariable prognostic models. Studies selection will be reported following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines, with data extraction form using fields from the Critical Appraisal and Data Extraction for Systematic Reviews of Prediction Modelling Studies (CHARMS) checklist for multivariable models. Methodological quality assessment will also be performed and will be based on prespecified domains of the CHARMS checklist. As a substantial heterogeneity of included studies is expected, a narrative evidence synthesis will also be provided.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

Given that this systematic review will use only published data, ethical permissions will not be required. Findings from this review will be published in peer-reviewed scientific journals and presented at major international conferences. We anticipate that this review will contribute to identify key areas of improvement for conducting and reporting prognostic factor analyses with PROs in oncology and will lay the groundwork for developing future evidence-based recommendations in this area of research.

PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER

CRD42018099160.

Patient reported outcomes in evaluation of chemotherapy toxicity in women with gynecologic malignancies: A pilot study

OBJECTIVE

Patient reported outcomes (PRO) relating to treatment toxicities have been demonstrated to reliably evaluate adverse events in clinical trials. We assessed the user satisfaction of implementing a focused PRO questionnaire for patients with gynecologic cancers undergoing chemotherapy.

METHODS

Patients with gynecologic cancers undergoing chemotherapy were prospectively identified after IRB approval from April 2017 to August 2017. We administered a 24-symptom questionnaire, adapted from the validated PRO version of the Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Event, to enrolled participants at the beginning of two outpatient visits. Patient and provider satisfaction with use of PRO was assessed afterwards. Descriptive statistics were performed.

RESULTS

A total of 44 patients were enrolled. Patients were racially diverse: 52% Caucasian, 18% African-American, 9% Asian, and 20% other; 27% were of Hispanic origin. The majority of patients had ovarian cancer (54%), followed by uterine (29%) and cervical cancer (15%). Ninety-five percent of patient and 97% of provider satisfaction survey responses indicated the PRO questionnaire addressed important symptoms. Nearly all patient and provider responses indicated the PRO questionnaire was easy to use. Sixty-nine percent of patient and 97% of provider responses indicated the questionnaire positively impacted clinical care; 85% of patients wished to use a similar questionnaire throughout treatment.

CONCLUSIONS

We have shown that incorporating a focused patient-reported symptom questionnaire into routine outpatient care of gynecological oncology patients undergoing chemotherapy was met with a high degree of patient and provider satisfaction regarding questionnaire content, feasibility, and perception of care improvement.

A prospective observational study to assess clinical decision-making, prognosis, quality of life and satisfaction with care in patients with relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma: the CLARITY study protocol

BACKGROUND

Treatment decision-making in patients with relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma (RRMM) is challenging for a number of reasons including, the heterogeneity of disease at relapse and the number of possible therapeutic approaches. This study broadly aims to generate new evidence-based data to facilitate clinical decision-making in RRMM patients. The primary objective is to investigate the prognostic value of patient self-reported fatigue severity for overall survival.

METHODS

This multicenter prospective observational study will consecutively enroll 312 patients with multiple myeloma who have received at least 1 prior line of therapy and are considered as RRMM according to the International Myeloma Working Group (IMWG) criteria. Eligible RRMM participants will be adults (≥ 18 years old) patients and will be enrolled irrespective of comorbidities and performance status. At the time of study inclusion, data to calculate the frailty score are to be available. Patients will be followed up for 30 months and patient-reported outcome (PRO) assessment is planned at baseline and thereafter at 3, 6, 12, and 24 months. The following PRO validated questionnaires will be used: the European Organisation for the Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Questionnaire-Core 30 (EORTC QLQ-C30), the EORTC QLQ-MY20 and the EORTC QLQ-INFO25. Satisfaction with care and preference for involvement in treatment decisions will also be evaluated. Clinical, laboratory and treatment related information will be prospectively collected in conjunction with pre scheduled PRO assessments. Cox regression analyses will be used to assess the prognostic value of baseline fatigue severity (EORTC QLQ-C30) and other patient-reported health-related quality of life parameters.

DISCUSSION

Clinical decision-making in RRMM is a challenge and outcome prediction is also an important aspect to enhance personalized treatment planning. Given the paucity of PRO data in this population, this prospective observational study aims to provide novel information that may facilitate patients' management in routine practice.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

This trial is registered as identifier NCT03190525 .

Real-world evidence research based on big data: Motivation-challenges-success factors

Background

In recent years there has been an increasing, partially also critical interest in understanding the potential benefits of generating real-world evidence (RWE) in medicine.

Objectives

The benefits and limitations of RWE in the context of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) are described along with a view on how they may complement each other as partners in the generation of evidence for clinical oncology. Moreover, challenges and success factors in building an effective RWE network of cooperating cancer centers are analyzed and discussed.

Material and methods

This article is based on a selective literature search (predominantly 2015–2017) combined with our practical experience to date in establishing European oncology RWE networks.

Results

RWE studies can be highly valuable and complementary to RCTs due to their high external validity. If cancer centers successfully address the various challenges in the establishment of an effective RWE study network and in the consequent execution of studies, they may efficiently generate high-quality research findings on treatment effectiveness and safety. Concerns pertaining to data privacy are of utmost importance and discussed accordingly. Securing data completeness, accuracy, and a common data structure on routinely collected disease and treatment-related data of patients with cancer is a challenging task that requires high engagement of all participants in the process.

Conclusion

Based on the discussed prerequisites, the analysis of comprehensive and complex real-world data in the context of a RWE study network represents an important and promising complementary partner to RCTs. This enables research into the general quality of cancer care and can permit comparative effectiveness studies across partner centers. Moreover, it will provide insights into a broader optimization of cancer care, refined therapeutic strategies for patient subgroups as well as avenues for further research in oncology.

Cancer symptom response as an oncology clinical trial end point

Introduction

A critical challenge in oncology is interpreting clinical trial results to inform clinical decision making. Clinical trials typically focus on overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS) as primary endpoints, which do not reflect early signs of meaningful patient benefit or harm. Cancer symptom response (CSR) can provide information about early treatment response, and studies show that CSR predicts long-term health outcomes.

Areas covered

CSR requires careful consideration of its measurement and interpretation to facilitate integration into clinical practice. We describe considerations for the evaluation, analysis, and interpretation of CSR in clinical trials. To illustrate the potential clinical value of CSR, we performed a retrospective analysis of a three-arm randomized cooperative-group clinical trial.

Expert commentary

Evaluation of CSR provides a meaningful assessment of early cancer treatment effects. It can act as an early signal of disease progression and death and thus can identify which patients with stable disease will have a more favorable prognosis. Future research will include development of methods for more accurate assessment of CSR, reduction of the number of symptoms used as signals for disease progression or survival by tumor type, and statistical methods that effectively correct for missing data and informative censoring.

Patient-reported outcomes enhance the survival prediction of traditional disease risk classifications: An international study in patients with myelodysplastic syndromes

BACKGROUND

Current prognostic systems for myelodysplastic syndromes (MDS) are based on clinical, pathologic, and laboratory indicators. The objective of the current study was to develop a new patient-centered prognostic index for patients with advanced MDS by including self-reported fatigue severity into a well-established clinical risk classification: the International Prognostic Scoring System (IPSS).

METHODS

A total of 469 patients with advanced (ie, IPSS intermediate-2 or high-risk) MDS were analyzed. Untreated patients (280 patients) were recruited into an international prospective cohort observational study to create the index. The index then was applied to an independent cohort including pretreated patients with MDS from the Dana-Farber Cancer Institute in Boston, Massachusetts (189 patients). At baseline, patients completed the European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Questionnaire-Core 30 (EORTC QLQ-C30).

RESULTS

A new prognostic index was developed: the FA-IPSS(h), in which FA stands for fatigue and h for higher-risk. This new risk classification enabled the authors to distinguish 3 subgroups of patients with distinct survival outcomes (ie, risk-1, risk-2, and risk-3). Patients classified as FA-IPSS(h) risk-1 had a median overall survival (OS) of 23 months (95% confidence interval [95% CI], 19-29 months), whereas those with risk-2 had a median OS of 16 months (95% CI, 12-17 months) and those with risk-3 had a median OS of 10 months (95% CI, 4-13 months). The predictive accuracy of this new index was higher than that of the IPSS alone in both the development cohort as well as in the independent cohort including pretreated patients.

CONCLUSIONS

The FA-IPSS(h) is a novel patient-centered prognostic index that includes patients' self-reported fatigue severity. The authors believe its use might enhance physicians' ability to predict survival more accurately in patients with advanced MDS. Cancer 2018;124:1251-9. © 2017 American Cancer Society.

Physical function metric over measure: An illustration with the Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS) and the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy (FACT)

BACKGROUND

Measuring patient-reported outcomes (PROs) is becoming an integral component of quality improvement initiatives, clinical care, and research studies in cancer, including comparative effectiveness research. However, the number of PROs limits comparability across studies. Herein, the authors attempted to link the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-General Physical Well-Being (FACT-G PWB) subscale with the Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS) Physical Function (PF) calibrated item bank. The also sought to augment a subset of the conceptually most similar FACT-G PWB items with PROMIS PF items to improve the linking.

METHODS

Baseline data from 5506 participants in the Measuring Your Health (MY-Health) study were used to identify the optimal items for linking FACT-G PWB with PROMIS PF. A mixed methods approach identified the optimal items for creating the 5-item FACT/PROMIS-PF5 scale. Both the linked and augmented relationships were cross-validated using the follow-up MY-Health data.

RESULTS

A 5-item FACT-G PWB item subset was found to be optimal for linking with PROMIS PF. In addition, a 2-item subset, including only items that were conceptually very similar to the PROMIS item bank content, were augmented with 3 PROMIS PF items. This new FACT/PROMIS-PF5 provided superior score recovery.

CONCLUSIONS

The PROMIS PF metric allows for the evaluation of the extent to which similar questionnaires can be linked and therefore expressed on the same metric. These results allow for the aggregation of existing data and provide an optimal measure for future studies wishing to use the FACT yet also report on the PROMIS PF metric. Cancer 2018;124:153-60. © 2017 American Cancer Society.

Patient-reported outcomes in hematology: is it time to focus more on them in clinical trials and hematology practice?

In less than 2 decades, major clinical advances have been made in various areas of hematologic malignancies. Clinicians and patients now frequently face challenging choices regarding various treatments that are often similar in regard to safety or clinical effectiveness; hence, medical decision making has grown in complexity. For example, several novel drugs have been developed as oral agents, introducing an additional challenge in patient management, such as ensuring an optimal adherence to therapy in order to maximize drug effectiveness. This rapidly changing scenario provides a rationale for a more systematic collection of patient-reported outcomes (PRO) in clinical research and routine care. In the former case, PRO may help to better understand overall treatment effectiveness of a new drug being tested. In the latter case, it may aid in making more informed, individualized treatment decisions in daily practice by obtaining more accurate information on the actual symptom burden experienced by the patient. In any case, evaluating PRO requires making several, and often challenging, decisions depending, for example, on the population being studied and the specific setting. Therefore, if PROs are to fulfill their potential of generating clinically meaningful data that robustly inform patient care, special attention should be given to methodological rigor. We outline the value of a more systematic and rigorous implementation of PRO assessment in the current hematology arena, by providing some real world examples of how PRO data have contributed in better understanding the value of new therapies. We also discuss practical considerations in PRO assessment in clinical research.

Patient-reported outcomes and survival in multiple sclerosis: A 10-year retrospective cohort study using the Multiple Sclerosis Impact Scale-29

BACKGROUND

There is increasing emphasis on using patient-reported outcomes (PROs) to complement traditional clinical outcomes in medical research, including in multiple sclerosis (MS). Research, particularly in oncology and heart failure, has shown that PROs can be prognostic of hard clinical endpoints such as survival time (time from study entry until death). However, unlike in oncology or cardiology, it is unknown whether PROs are associated with survival time in neurological diseases. The Multiple Sclerosis Impact Scale-29 (MSIS-29) is a PRO sensitive to short-term change in MS, with questions covering both physical and psychological quality of life. This study aimed to investigate whether MSIS-29 scores can be prognostic for survival time in MS, using a large observational cohort of people with MS.

METHODS AND FINDINGS

From 15 July 2004 onwards, MSIS-29 questionnaires were completed by people with MS registered with the MS Society Tissue Bank (n = 2,126, repeated 1 year later with n = 872 of the original respondents). By 2014, 264 participants (12.4%) had died. Higher baseline MSIS-29 physical (MSIS-29-PHYS) score was associated with reduced survival time (subgroup with highest scores versus subgroup with lowest scores: hazard ratio [HR] 5.7, 95% CI 3.1-10.5, p < 0.001). Higher baseline MSIS-29 psychological score was also associated with reduced survival time (subgroup with highest scores versus subgroup with lowest scores: HR 2.8, 95% CI 1.8-4.4, p < 0.001). In those with high baseline MSIS-29 scores, mortality risk was even greater if the MSIS-29 score worsened over 1 year (HR 2.3, 95% CI 1.2-4.4, p = 0.02). MSIS-29-PHYS scores were associated with survival time independent of age, sex, and patient-reported Expanded Disability Status Scale score in a Cox regression analysis (per 1-SD increase in MSIS-29-PHYS score: HR 1.8, 95% CI 1.1-2.9, p = 0.03). A limitation of the study is that this cohort had high baseline age and disability levels; the prognostic value of MSIS-29 for survival time at earlier disease stages requires further investigation.

CONCLUSIONS

This study reports that PROs can be prognostic for hard clinical outcomes in neurological disease, and supports PROs as a meaningful clinical outcome for use in research and clinical settings.

The prognostic performance of adding patient-reported outcomes to the MASCC risk index to identify low-risk febrile neutropenia patients with solid tumors and lymphomas

PURPOSE

This study aims to develop and validate a prognostic model (PROMASCC) by incorporating the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-Neutropenia (FACT-N) elements, with the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer (MASCC) risk index, for identifying low-risk patients with febrile neutropenia (FN) for developing serious complications.

METHODS

This was a single-center, cross-sectional observational study. Either English or Chinese versions of the FACT-N were administered to the eligible patients according to their language preference within 7 days of FN onset. Univariate analyses and multivariate analyses were performed to construct the PROMASCC model. The prognostic performance was compared between the PROMASCC model and MASCC risk index. The internal validation of the PROMASCC model was examined by bootstrapping technique.

RESULTS

From August 2014 to April 2016, a total of 120 eligible patients were included in this study. In the univariate analyses, only the malaise subscale score has been significantly associated with the favorable outcome (without complications) (P = 0.024). Compared to the MASCC risk index, the PROMASCC model has shown advantages on the improved specificity (64.3 vs. 38.1%) and positive predictive value (81.0 vs. 73.7%), lower misclassification rate (24.2 vs. 25.8%), and increased area under receiver-operating characteristic curve (0.732 vs. 0.658). The bootstrapping procedure estimates the optimism-corrected area for the PROMASCC model to be 0.731 (95% CI 0.648 to 0.814).

CONCLUSIONS

This study has developed and validated a PROMASCC model and demonstrated that additional measurement on patient's fatigue level could improve the risk stratification of patients with FN.

The value of quality of life assessment in chronic myeloid leukemia patients receiving tyrosine kinase inhibitors

The development of the oral tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs) to treat chronic myeloid leukemia (CML) is one of the great triumphs of cancer research. Although the efficacy of TKIs has dramatically improved the disease-specific overall survival rate, the prevalence of CML is increasing worldwide. Currently, CML patients receive prolonged (even lifelong) treatment, and over the last decade, clinical decision making has become challenging. Therefore, consideration of the effects of TKI therapies on patients' quality of life (QoL) and symptom burden (ie, patient-reported outcomes [PROs]) is now critical to more robustly inform patient care and improve health care quality. Over the last 5 years, a number of studies have generated valuable PRO data, for example, on long-term QoL effects of imatinib therapy or symptom burden of patients switching from imatinib to second-generation TKIs. PRO findings are important, as they provide a unique patient perspective on the burden of the disease and treatments effects. We will review main evidence-based data on the use of PROs in clinical research and highlight the importance of methodological rigor of PRO assessment. Also, we will describe the potential value of using PRO assessment in routine clinical practice, for example, to facilitate timely management of side effects. Areas for future research will also be discussed.