Patient-Reported Physical Function Measures in Cancer Clinical Trials

The impact of age on physical functioning after treatment for breast cancer, as measured by patient-reported outcome measures: A systematic review

PURPOSE

This systematic review aims to explore the impact of age on physical functioning post-treatment for early-stage, locally advanced, or locally recurrent breast cancer, as measured by patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs), identify PROMs used and variations in physical functioning terms/labels.

METHODS

MEDLINE, EmBase, PsycINFO, CINAHL and AMED were searched, along with relevant key journals and reference lists. Risk of bias (quality) assessment was conducted using a Critical Appraisal Skills Programme checklist. Data was synthesised through tables and narrative.

RESULTS

28,207 titles were extracted from electronic databases, resulting in 44 studies with age sub-groups, and 120 without age sub-groups. Of those with findings on the impact of age, there was variability in the way findings were reported and 21 % found that age did not have a significant impact. However, 66 % of the studies found that with older age, physical functioning declined post-treatment. Comorbidities were associated with physical functioning declines. However, findings from sub-groups (breast cancer stage, treatment type and time post-treatment) lacked concordance. Twenty-eight types of PROM were used: the EORTC QLQ-C30 was most common (50.6 %), followed by the SF-36 (32.3 %). There were 145 terms/labels for physical functioning: 'physical functioning/function' was used most often (82.3 %).

CONCLUSIONS

Findings point towards an older age and comorbidities being associated with more physical functioning declines. However, it was not possible to determine if stage, treatment type and time since treatment had any influence. More consistent use of the terminology 'physical functioning/function' would aid future comparisons of study results.

Physical health-related quality of life trajectories over two years following breast cancer diagnosis in older women: a secondary analysis

PURPOSE

To identify distinct trajectories of physical health-related quality of life (HRQoL) in older women over the first two years following breast cancer diagnosis, and to examine characteristics associated with trajectory group membership.

METHODS

A secondary analysis of a longitudinal study of women diagnosed with stage I-III breast cancer who completed surveys within eight months of diagnosis and six, twelve, and eighteen months later that focuses on a subset of women aged ≥ 65 years (N = 145).Physical HRQoL was assessed using the Physical Component Score (PCS) of the SF-36 Health Survey. Finite mixture modeling identified distinct PCS trajectories. Multivariable logistic regression identified variables predictive of low PCS group membership.

RESULTS

Two distinct patterns of PCS trajectories were identified. The majority (58%) of women had PCS above the age-based SF-36 population norms and improved slightly over time. However, 42% of women had low PCS that remained low over time. In multivariable analyses, older age, difficulty paying for basics, greater number of medical comorbidities, and higher body mass index were associated with low PCS group membership. Cancer treatment and psychosocial variables were not significantly associated.

CONCLUSION

A large subgroup of older women reported very low PCS that did not improve over time. Older age, obesity, multiple comorbidities, and lower socioeconomic status may be risk factors for poorer PCS in women with breast cancer. Incorporating routine comprehensive geriatric assessments that screen for these factors may help providers identify older women at risk for poorer physical HRQoL post breast cancer treatment.

Establishing a common metric for physical function: Linking SARC-F and PROMIS® physical function

INTRODUCTION

Aligned with the increasing need for standardized assessment of physical function in older individuals with cancer and other conditions, several patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) have been developed and published. The aim of this study is to link the Strength, Assistance with walking, Rising from a chair, Climbing stairs, and Falls questionnaire (SARC-F), and the Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System® (PROMIS®) Physical Function Short Form 8c (PROMIS PF 8c), and make their scores convertible, in order to expand the use of both instruments in research and inform clinicians and researchers about the interchangeability of critical cut-off scores.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

The sample included 300 participants recruited from an online panel. Participants were included if they had received a cancer diagnosis from a clinician and reported receiving anti-cancer treatment. We conducted five linking procedures and selected an optimal one to generate the crosswalk table between the two measures.

RESULTS

The linked T scores of all five methods showed acceptably small mean differences from the observed T scores, and the standard deviation (SD), and root-mean-squared deviation (RMSD) of the differences were generally similar across all methods. After comparing across all statistics, the Stocking-Lord approach was considered as the optimal approach to compute the crosswalk table for converting SARC-F raw scores to PROMIS PF 8c scores. The crosswalk table shows that the SARC-F cut-off value of 4 between healthy versus symptomatic with a corresponding score of 37 fell in the range of moderate physical function limitation from 30 to 39 on the PROMI PF 8c T score metric.

DISCUSSION

The linkage in this study has potential for improving clinical and research activities for people with cancer and perhaps others with a similar range of physical function. It facilitates the interpretability in scores of both measures on a common metric anchored on general population for further group-level analysis. Researchers can use this crosswalk to harmonize data collected from either instrument without requiring all cohorts to administer the same instrument for a prospective data collection or retrospective data analysis purpose or for a cross-study effectiveness study.

Measuring What Is Meaningful in Cancer Cachexia Clinical Trials: A Path Forward With Digital Measures of Real-World Physical Behavior

PURPOSE

The burden of cancer cachexia on patients' health-related quality of life, specifically their physical functioning, is well documented, but clinical trials thus far have failed to show meaningful improvement in physical functioning. The purpose of this review is to summarize existing methods of assessing physical function in cancer cachexia, outline a path forward for measuring what is meaningful to patients using digital measures derived from digital health technologies (DHTs), and discuss the current landscape of digital measures from the clinical and regulatory standpoint.

DESIGN

For this narrative review, peer-reviewed articles were searched on PubMed, clinical trials records were searched on clinicaltrials.gov, and records of digital measures submitted for regulatory qualification were searched on the US Food and Drug Administration's Drug Development Tool Qualification Program database.

RESULTS

There are gaps in assessing aspects of physical function that matter to patients. Existing assessment methods such as patient-reported outcomes and objective performance outcomes have limitations, including their episodic nature and burden to patients. DHTs such as wearable sensors can capture real-world physical behavior continuously, passively, and remotely, and may provide a more comprehensive picture of patients' everyday functioning. Recent regulatory submissions showcase potential clinical implementation of digital measures in various therapeutic areas.

CONCLUSION

Digital measures of real-world physical behavior present an opportunity to detect and demonstrate improvements in physical functioning in cancer cachexia, but evidence-based development is critical. For their use in clinical and regulatory decision making, studies demonstrating meaningfulness to patients as well as feasibility and validation are necessary.

Outcome Measures and Patient-Reported Metrics in Cancer Rehabilitation

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

The current panorama of measurement tools for use in cancer rehabilitation is reviewed. For rehabilitation purposes, evaluating function is of the highest priority.

RECENT FINDINGS

From a patient-reported outcome (PRO) standpoint, SF-36 and EORTC-QLQ-C30 are in most common use in cancer rehabilitation research; these are quality of life measures that contain functional subdomains. Newer tools which are based on item response theory and have options for both computer assisted or short form (SF) administration, including the Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS) and Activity Measure for Post-acute Care (AMPAC) instruments, show increasing use, especially PROMIS Physical Function SF, and, recently, PROMIS Cancer Function Brief 3D, which has been validated in the cancer population, with domains of physical function, fatigue, and social participation, to track clinical rehabilitation outcomes. Evaluating objective measures of function in cancer patients is also crucial. Utilization of clinically feasible tools for cancer rehabilitation, to employ for both screening purposes and for monitoring of rehabilitation treatment efficacy, is an evolving area, much needed to promote further research and improved, consistent clinical care for cancer patients and survivors.

EffEx-HN trial: study protocol for a randomized controlled trial on the EFFectiveness and feasibility of a comprehensive supervised EXercise program during radiotherapy in Head and Neck cancer patients on health-related quality of life

BACKGROUND

With over 500,000 annually reported cases worldwide, head and neck cancer (HNC) is the seventh most common type of cancer worldwide. Treatment of HNC with chemoradiotherapy frequently results in serious impairments in physical and psychosocial functioning. Besides, HNC patients typically start their cancer treatment already with poor physical and psychosocial health. It has been shown that a sufficient level of physical activity (PA) before, during, and after cancer treatment is associated with fewer negative treatment-related side effects and a better quality of life (QOL). In order to prevent worsening of functioning and limit the physical impact of the HNC treatment, a comprehensive supervised exercise program (CSEP) may be beneficial during early cancer treatment. However, up to now, the feasibility and effectiveness of such a program are not yet investigated thoroughly in HNC. Therefore, the primary objective of this study is to examine the effectiveness of a CSEP during HNC treatment, in addition to usual supportive care, compared to usual supportive care alone, on health-related QOL up to 1 year post-diagnosis. Secondary objectives entail gathering information on (1) the effectiveness of a CSEP on secondary outcomes such as physical and mental function, activities of daily life, and participation in society and (2) the feasibility, possible barriers, and facilitators for participation in a CSEP during HNC treatment.

METHODS

To investigate the effectiveness of the CSEP, a parallel, open-label randomized controlled trial will be performed. To study the feasibility of the CSEP, a mixed-method study will be performed in a subgroup of participants. HNC patients are eligible if they receive radiotherapy at the Radiation-Oncology department of the University Hospital of Leuven. A 4-size permuted block randomization will be used. The control group receives the current standard of supportive care. The intervention group receives a CSEP, additional to the same usual supportive care. The CSEP consists of a 12-week intensive phase with 3 exercise sessions of 1 h per week, where supervision is gradually reduced after 6 weeks. During the maintenance phase (from week 13), patients exercise at home with monthly tele-consultations with a physiotherapist. The CSEP contains supervised aerobic and resistance training. In both groups, outcomes of interest are evaluated through self-reported questionnaires and clinical assessments, at baseline, 6 weeks, 12 weeks, 6 months, and 12 months post-diagnosis. The primary endpoint is health-related QOL, measured with the EORTC QLQ-C30 at 6 months post-diagnosis.

DISCUSSION

The study will be conducted in accordance with the Declaration of Helsinki. This protocol has been approved by the ethical committee of the University Hospitals Leuven (s65549). Recruitment started in January 2022. Results will be disseminated via peer-reviewed scientific journals and presentations at congresses.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT05256238 Date of registration: February 25, 2022.

The added value of supervised hydrotherapy sessions to a 12-week exercise program after breast cancer treatment: a three-arm pseudo-randomized pilot study

Sufficient physical activity after breast cancer treatment is crucial for improvement of a wide range of health-related outcomes and survival. The first aim of this pilot study was to explore whether adding supervised hydrotherapy sessions to a standard 12-week exercise program consisting of already two supervised sessions of land-based exercises has beneficial effects on physical and mental functioning and quality of life in breast cancer survivors. As a secondary aim, the added value of a third supervised training session with land-based exercises to the same standard exercise program was investigated. Breast cancer patients who finished primary cancer treatment were allocated to one of the three 12-week exercise programs, i.e. a standard exercise program with two supervised land-based exercise sessions per week (control group) or the same standard program with an additional weekly supervised hydrotherapy session (hydrotherapy-group) or land-based exercise session (land-based exercise group). The efficacy of the three programs was tested by comparing changes in physical and mental functioning and quality of life from pre- until post-intervention. Twenty-six (41%) patients were allocated to the control group, 21 (33%) to the hydrotherapy-group and 16 (26%) to the land-based exercise group. The results show no differences in any outcome between the three groups. Comparing the two exercise programs with three supervised sessions, results show a significantly larger improvement in the self-reported moderate (median (IQR) +1240 (412;3330) vs. +50(-1088;1125);p=0.020) and total physical activity level (+2982 (878;5457) vs. +370(-576;1718);p=0.008) in the hydrotherapy-group compared to the land-based exercise group. The opposite was found for the outcome ‘physical symptoms’, a subscale from the health-related quality of life questionnaire with a larger improvement in the land-based exercise group compared to the hydrotherapy-group (+3(0.6;4.8) vs. +0.6(-0.8;2.1); p=0.008). In conclusion, the results of this pilot study indicate that adding a third weekly supervised session to a 12-week exercise program consisting of already two weekly supervised sessions had no added value for the improvement of physical and mental functioning and quality of life after breast cancer treatment. If a third supervised session is organized, hydrotherapy may be a valuable exercise modality since moderate and total physical activity levels seem to improve more compared to an exercise program with three supervised land-based exercise sessions. For self-reported physical symptoms although, a land-based exercise program seems more beneficial. Because of the limited sample size and pilot study design all obtained findings need to be interpreted with caution.

Patient-reported outcome measures for physical function in cancer patients: content comparison of the EORTC CAT Core, EORTC QLQ-C30, SF-36, FACT-G, and PROMIS measures using the International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health

BACKGROUND

Patient-reported physical function (PF) is a key endpoint in cancer clinical trials. Using complex statistical methods, common metrics have been developed to compare scores from different patient-reported outcome (PRO) measures, but such methods do not account for possible differences in questionnaire content. Therefore, the aim of our study was a content comparison of frequently used PRO measures for PF in cancer patients.

METHODS

Relying on the framework of the International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health (ICF) we categorized the item content of the physical domains of the following measures: EORTC CAT Core, EORTC QLQ-C30, SF-36, PROMIS Cancer Item Bank for Physical Function, PROMIS Short Form for Physical Function 20a, and the FACT-G. Item content was linked to ICF categories by two independent reviewers.

RESULTS

The 118 items investigated were assigned to 3 components ('d - Activities and Participation', 'b - Body Functions', and 'e - Environmental Factors') and 11 first-level ICF categories. All PF items of the EORTC measures but one were assigned to the first-level ICF categories 'd4 - Mobility' and 'd5 - Self-care', all within the component 'd - Activities and Participation'. The SF-36 additionally included item content related to 'd9 - Community, social and civic life' and the PROMIS Short Form for Physical Function 20a also included content related to 'd6 - domestic life'. The PROMIS Cancer Item Bank (v1.1) covered, in addition, two first-level categories within the component 'b - Body Functions'. The FACT-G Physical Well-being scale was found to be the most diverse scale with item content partly not covered by the ICF framework.

DISCUSSION

Our results provide information about conceptual differences between common PRO measures for the assessment of PF in cancer patients. Our results complement quantitative information on psychometric characteristics of these measures and provide a better understanding of the possibilities of establishing common metrics.

A review of patient-reported outcomes used for regulatory approval of oncology medicinal products in the European Union between 2017 and 2020

Introduction

Cancer and corresponding available treatments are associated with substantial symptoms and functional limitations. In this context, collection of patient-reported outcomes (PRO) in clinical trials gained special interest and is recommended by regulatory authorities. Within clinical trials framework, PRO may provide evidence to support medicines approval, labeling and marketing claims. This study aims to analyze the existing evidence based on PRO as part of new oncology indications receiving positive opinions issued by the European Medicines Agency (EMA) between 2017 and 2020 and to identify PRO related label claims granted.

Methodology

Oncology medicinal products and indications approved by the European Commission following a positive opinion from the EMA between 2017 and 2020 were identified. European Public Assessment Report (EPAR) and Summary of Product Characteristics (SmPC) were reviewed for each medicinal product to identify use of PRO and PRO label claims.

Results

A total of 128 oncology indications, corresponding to 76 medicines, were approved; of those, 100 (78.1%) included PRO in the confirmatory clinical trials. Thirty-seven indications were supported by double-blind randomized trials and the remainder 63 by open-label trials. Out of the 104 confirmatory trials analyzed, PRO were defined as a secondary endpoint in 60 studies (57.7%), exploratory in 31 (29.8%) and as both in 13 (12.5%). In total, 54 different PRO measures (PROM) were used, of those 41 (75.9%) were disease-specific measures. Nevertheless, PROM selected relied on the EORTC (41.3%), FACIT (17.1%) and EQ-5D (29.2%) measures. A total of 76 indications (59.4%) had PRO reviewers comments included in the EPAR, however only 22 indications (17.8%) included label claims in the SmPC. The reasons identified in the EMA assessment supporting the exclusion of PRO claims were described for 34 indications (44.7%).

Conclusions

Despite growing recognition of the value of PRO data for the development of improved cancer therapies, PRO implementation remains challenging. The main reasons identified in our study are related with study design, missing data, study conduct and PROM selection.

The patient-reported outcomes measurement information systems (PROMIS®) physical function and its derivative measures in adults: a systematic review of content validity

PURPOSE

This study aims to systematically review and critically appraise the content validity of the adult versions of the Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System Physical Function (PROMIS-PF) item bank and its derivative measures in any adult population.

METHODS

MEDLINE and EMBASE were searched in October 2021 for studies on measurement properties of PROMIS-PF measures in an adult population. Studies were included if the study described the development of a PROMIS-PF measure or investigated its relevance, comprehensiveness, or comprehensibility. Assessment of the methodological quality of eligible studies, rating of results, and summarizing evidence was performed following the COnsensus-based Standards for the selection of health Measurement INstruments (COSMIN) methodology for assessing content validity. A modified GRADE approach was used to determine the level of evidence.

RESULTS

Three development studies and eight studies on the content validity of one or more of the PROMIS-PF measures were identified. The methodological quality of most studies was rated doubtful. There was low to high level evidence for sufficient relevance, comprehensiveness, and comprehensibility of most PROMIS-PF measures for healthy seniors and various disease populations. We found low to moderate level evidence for insufficient relevance of PROMIS-PF measures for patients with conditions that affected only one body part, and insufficient comprehensibility of the PROMIS-PF measures for minority elderly.

CONCLUSION

Most PROMIS-PF measures demonstrate sufficient content validity in healthy seniors and various disease populations. However, the quality of this evidence is generally low to moderate, due to limitations in the methodological quality of the studies.

Evaluating health related quality of life in outpatients receiving anti-cancer treatment: results from an observational, cross-sectional study

Background

The aim of the study was to assess health-related quality of life (HRQOL) in outpatients receiving anti-cancer treatment.

Methods

Observational, cross-sectional, single-center study that assessed HRQOL in cancer patients receiving antineoplastic treatment.

Results

A total of 184 patients were included in the study; the median total FACT-G score was 66 ± 12.9; the scores for the physical well-being, social/family well-being, emotional well-being and functional well-being domains were 17.8 + 4.8, 19.1 ± 4.4, 14.8 ± 3.8 and 14.3 ± 4.7 respectively. Patients with adverse events had poorer HRQOL compared to those without them (FACT-G score 62.2 vs. 67.3; p < 0.05). In the multivariate analysis the variables associated with poorer HRQOL in the form of a gradient were tumor stage and performance status (ECOG); female sex was also associated with poorer HRQOL.

Conclusion

In our study, the neoplastic disease and anti-cancer treatment toxicities had an impact on HRQOL. Patients had poorer scores in the functional well-being domain and higher ones in the social/family well-being domain. Variables associated with worse HRQOL were tumor stage, performance status (ECOG) and female sex.

Distinctions Between Self-Report and Performance-Based Measures of Physical Function in Older Patients Prior to Chemotherapy

BACKGROUND

The maintenance of physical function (PF) is an extremely important outcome for elderly people.

OBJECTIVE

The aims of this study were to identify differences in the subjective and objective measures of PF between younger older adults (YOAs, 60-69 years of age) and older adults (OA, ≥70 years of age), to compare the PF scores with age-matched samples from the general population, and to evaluate for associations between the subjective and objective measures of PF.

METHODS

Patients (n = 139) were assessed using subjective (ie, European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer Core Quality-of-Life Questionnaire) and objective (ie, Short Physical Performance Battery [SPPB]) measures prior to chemotherapy (CTX). Data were analyzed using parametric and nonparametric tests.

RESULTS

No differences were found between the 2 age groups in any of the subjective or objective measures of PF. Compared with the age-matched general population, both YOAs and OAs had significantly lower scores in both measures of PF. Large effect sizes were found for differences in European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer Core Quality-of-Life Questionnaire role function, SPPB balance, and SPPB total scores between the YOA group and the age-matched general population samples. Correlations between the subjective and objective measures were low.

CONCLUSIONS

Older patients with cancer have lower PF than their age-matched general population prior to CTX. Longitudinal studies are warranted to evaluate for changes in PF during and following CTX.

IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE

Nurses need to perform routine assessments of PF in older oncology patients prior to CTX. Our findings suggest that SPPB gait speed may be a useful screening measure for PF in older patients.

Evaluation by electronic patient-reported outcomes of cancer survivors' needs and the efficacy of inpatient cancer rehabilitation in different tumor entities

OBJECTIVE

We investigated cancer survivors' health-related quality of life (HRQOL), specific deficiencies related to underlying disease or treatment, and benefits of rehabilitation in a large variety of cancer entities.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Electronic patient-reported outcomes were performed as clinical routine procedures. Cancer survivors underwent a 3-week multidisciplinary inpatient rehabilitation. Twenty-one different cancer entities were analyzed separately before (T0) and by the end (T1) of rehabilitation. HRQOL, symptoms, and functions were assessed with EORTC-QLQ-C30 questionnaire, psychological distress with Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS).

RESULTS

Four thousand four hundred one of 5912 rehabilitants were evaluable, having completed both questionnaires at T0 and T1. All function mean scores and HRQOL were lower than in Austrian normal population, while levels of anxiety, depression, and all symptom scores were higher. HRQOL was particularly low in lung, liver, and bladder cancer patients. Maximum anxiety levels were observed in patients with breast and thyroid cancer patients, the highest levels of depression in liver and brain cancer patients. Fatigue was severe in patients with lung, liver, esophageal, bladder cancer, and myeloma patients. Mean scores were also high for pain and insomnia. In the group of all rehabilitants, a highly significant improvement of global HRQOL, anxiety, depression, and all function and symptom scores was observed at T1 (p < 0.001). We noted significant improvement of HRQOL, anxiety, depression, fatigue, emotional, social, role, and physical functions in each cancer entity with medium to large effect sizes. Other recorded symptoms were reduced in the majority of cancers.

CONCLUSION

Rehabilitation effectively improves psychological distress and HRQOL as a part of treatment for various cancers.

Health-related quality-of-life impact of pembrolizumab versus best supportive care in previously systemically treated patients with advanced hepatocellular carcinoma: KEYNOTE-240

BACKGROUND

Health-related quality of life (HRQoL) is an important outcome measure and prognostic indicator in hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). KEYNOTE-240 (NCT02702401) assessed the efficacy and safety of pembrolizumab plus best supportive care (BSC) versus placebo plus BSC in patients with HCC who previously received sorafenib. This study presents the results of a prespecified exploratory analysis of patient-reported outcomes.

METHODS

Patients completed the European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer Core Quality of Life Questionnaire (EORTC QLQ-C30) and its HCC supplement (EORTC QLQ-HCC18) electronically at baseline; at weeks 2, 3, 4, 6, 9, 12, and 18; and then every 9 weeks until 1 year or end of treatment, and at the 30-day safety follow-up visit.

RESULTS

The HRQoL population included 271 and 127 patients randomly assigned to pembrolizumab and placebo, respectively. From baseline to week 12, changes in both scores were similar between pembrolizumab and placebo; global health status/QoL scores were stable. The proportions of patients who improved, remained stable, or deteriorated across all functional domain and symptom scores were generally similar between pembrolizumab and placebo. Time to deterioration was similar between the 2 arms based on the prespecified analysis of EORTC QLQ-HCC18 domains of abdominal swelling, fatigue, and pain.

CONCLUSION

Pembrolizumab preserved HRQoL during treatment for advanced HCC. Combined with efficacy and safety results from KEYNOTE-240, these findings support a positive benefit/risk profile for pembrolizumab in a second-line treatment setting for patients with HCC who previously received sorafenib.

Priority Rankings of Patient-Reported Outcomes for Pancreatic Ductal Adenocarcinoma: A Comparison of Patient and Physician Perspectives

Background: Pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) is associated with high symptom burden. However, treatment decisions currently depend heavily on physician interpretation of clinical parameters and may not consider patients’ health preferences. The NIH Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS) initiative standardized a set of patient-reported outcomes for use in chronic diseases. This study identifies preference rankings among patients with PDAC and physicians for PROMIS domains and compares the priorities of patients and their providers. Methods: We condensed the 96 NIH PROMIS adult domains into 31 domains and created a Maximum Difference Scaling questionnaire. Domain preference scores were generated from the responses of patients with PDAC and physicians, which were compared using Maximum Difference Scaling software across demographic and clinical variables. Results: Participants included 135 patients with PDAC (53% male; median age, 68 years) and 54 physicians (76% male; median years of experience, 10). Patients selected physical functioning (PF) as their top priority, whereas physicians identified pain as most important. PF, ability to perform activities of daily living, and symptom management were within the top 5 domains for both patients and physicians, and varied only slightly across age, sex, and ethnicity. However, several domains were ranked significantly higher by patients than by physicians, including but not limited to PF; ability to do things for yourself, family, and friends; ability to interact with others to obtain help; and sleep quality. Physicians ranked pain, anxiety, and depression higher than patients did. Conclusions: Our findings suggest that patients with PDAC value PF and engaging in daily and social activities the most, whereas physicians prioritize symptoms such as pain. Patient-reported outcomes need to become more integrated into PDAC care and research to better identify unmet patient needs, inform treatment decisions, and develop therapies that address outcomes valued by patients.

Preliminary Normative Standards of the Mayo Clinic Esophagectomy CONDUIT Tool

Objective

To collect patient-reported outcomes after esophagectomy to establish a set of preliminary normative standards to aid in symptom-score interpretation.

Patients and Methods

Patients undergoing esophagectomy often have little understanding about postoperative symptom management. The Mayo Clinic esophageal CONDUIT tool is a validated questionnaire comprising 5 multi-item symptom-assessment domains and 2 health-assessment domains. A prospective nonrandomized cohort study was conducted on adult patients who have had esophagectomies using the CONDUIT tool from August 17, 2015, to July 30, 2018 (NCT02530983). The Statistical Analysis System v9.4 (SAS Institute Inc., Cary, NC) was used to calculate and analyze the scores.

Results

Over the study period, 569 patients were assessed for eligibility, and 241 patients consented and were offered the tool. Of these, 188 patients (median age: 65 years; range: 24 to 87 years; 80% male patients) had calculable scores. Of the 188 patients, 50 (26.6%) patients were identified as potential beneficiaries for educational intervention to improve symptoms (received moderate scores for a domain), and 131 (69.7%) patients were identified as needing further testing or provider intervention (received poor scores for a domain) based on the tool.

Conclusion

The CONDUIT tool scores, when compared with standardized scales with established preliminary normative scores, could be used to identify and triage patients who need targeted education, further testing, or provider interventions. These score ranges will serve as the first set of normative standards to aid in the interpretation of conduit performance among providers and patients.

Health-related quality of life and medical comorbidities in older patients with pancreatic adenocarcinoma: An analysis using the 1998-2011 surveillance, epidemiology, and end results-medicare health outcomes survey data

OBJECTIVES

This study compares health-related quality of life (HRQoL) of older patients with pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) to controls without cancer, and examines the impact of medical comorbidities on HRQoL.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We conducted a case-control study using the 1998-2011 Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results-Medicare Health Outcomes Survey (SEER-MHOS) linked dataset. Cases were Medicare beneficiaries aged 65 and older diagnosed with PDAC (N = 128) and matched controls were without a history of cancer (N = 512). We used the Short Form 36 (SF-36) and Veterans-RAND-12 (VR-12) to examine HRQoL and calculated mental (MCS) and physical (PCS) component scores. Linear regression and mixed effects models were used to examine the impact of medical comorbidities on MCS and PCS for cases and controls, respectively.

RESULTS

Cases reported significantly poorer PCS (29.3 vs. 36.3) and MCS (44.8 vs. 49.9) compared to controls. Comorbidities were significantly associated with lower PCS and MCS in controls. However, neither total number of comorbidities or comorbidities grouped by organ systems (cardiopulmonary disease, musculoskeletal disease, diabetes) were significantly related to PCS or MCS for cases. Comparison of regression coefficients estimates did not indicate that lack of significance was due to differences in sample size.

CONCLUSIONS

The results of this study highlight the poor HRQoL reported by older patients with PDAC. HRQoL scores were very low in this population, particularly in physical health status, which were not explained by comorbidities.

Exercise Intervention Improves Clinical Outcomes, but the "Time of Session" is Crucial for Better Quality of Life in Breast Cancer Survivors: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

This study examined the effects of exercise intervention on the quality of life (QoL), social functioning (SF), and physical functioning (PF) of breast cancer survivors, and identified the responsible and optimal exercise characteristics for amelioration of outcomes. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that adopted exercise intervention and measured the QoL, SF, and PF of breast cancer patients were included. We used meta-analysis to calculate the pooled effect, and meta-regression to identify the responsible exercise characteristics (type, frequency, duration, and time). Subgroup analysis assessed the optimal "time of session" for an improved QoL. The Cochrane risk-of-bias tool was used to determine the quality of studies. In the systematic review, we included 26 RCTs with a total of 1892 breast cancer patients, whilst 18 trials were considered for meta-analysis (exercise = 602; control = 603). The pooled effect showed that exercise intervention substantially improved the QoL (standardized mean difference (SMD) = 0.35; I2 = 61%; 95% confidence internal (CI): 0.15-0.54; p = 0.0004), SF (SMD = 0.20; I2 = 16%; 95% CI:0.08-0.32; p = 0.001), and PF (SMD = 0.32; I2 = 32%; 95% CI:0.20-0.44; p < 0.00001). Meta-regression analysis showed that improved QoL was associated (p = 0.041) with the "time of session". More specifically, sessions conducted for medium-time (>45 to ≤60 min; p = 0.03) and longer-time (>60 to 90 min; p = 0.005) considerably improved the QoL, whilst shorter-time (≤45 min; p = 0.15) did not. To summarize, exercise interventions improved the QoL, SF, and PF of breast cancer survivors, where the "time of session" appeared to be crucial for an effective improvement in the QoL.

A Review of Patient-Reported Outcomes Labeling for Oncology Drugs Approved by the FDA and the EMA (2012-2016)

OBJECTIVES

To compare US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and European Medicines Agency (EMA) labeling for evidence based on patient-reported outcomes (PROs) of new oncology treatments approved by both agencies.

METHODS

Oncology drugs and indications approved between 2012 and 2016 by both the FDA and the EMA were identified. PRO-related language and analysis reported in US product labels and drug approval packages and EMA summaries of product characteristics were compared for each indication.

RESULTS

In total, 49 oncology drugs were approved for a total of 64 indications. Of the 64 indications, 45 (70.3%) included PRO data in either regulatory submission. No FDA PRO labeling was identified. PRO language was included in the summary of product characteristics for 21 (46.7%) of 45 indications. European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer and Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy measures were used frequently in submissions. FDA's comments suggest that aspects of study design (eg, open labels) or the validity of PRO measures was the primary reason for the lack of labeling based on PRO endpoints. Both agencies identified missing PRO data as problematic for interpretation.

CONCLUSIONS

During this time period, the FDA and the EMA used different evidentiary standards to assess PRO data from oncology studies, with the EMA more likely to accept data from open-label studies and broad concepts such as health-related quality of life. An understanding of the key differences between the agencies may guide sponsor PRO strategy when pursuing labeling. Patient-focused proximal concepts are more likely than distal concepts to receive positive reviews.

Patient-Reported Toxicities During Chemotherapy Regimens in Current Clinical Practice for Early Breast Cancer

BACKGROUND

This study explores the incidence of patient-reported major toxicity-symptoms rated "moderate," "severe," or "very severe"-for chemotherapy regimens commonly used in early breast cancer.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Female patients aged 21 years or older completed a validated Patient-Reported Symptom Monitoring instrument and rated 17 symptoms throughout adjuvant or neoadjuvant chemotherapy. Fisher's exact tests compared differences in percentages in symptom ratings, and general linear regression was used to model the incidence of patient-reported major toxicity.

RESULTS

In 152 patients, the mean age was 54 years (range, 24-77), and 112 (74%) were white; 51% received an anthracycline-based regimen. The proportion of patients rating fatigue, constipation, myalgia, diarrhea, nausea, peripheral neuropathy, and swelling of arms or legs as a major toxicity at any time during chemotherapy varied significantly among four chemotherapy regimens (p < .05). The mean (SD) number of symptoms rated major toxicities was 6.3 (3.6) for anthracycline-based and 4.4 (3.5) for non-anthracycline-based regimens (p = .001; possible range, 0-17 symptoms). Baseline higher body mass index (p = .03), patient-reported Karnofsky performance status ≤80 (p = .0003), and anthracycline-based regimens (p = .0003) were associated with greater total number of symptoms rated major toxicities (alternative model: chemotherapy duration, p < .0001). Twenty-six percent of dose reductions (26 of 40), 75% of hospitalizations (15 of 20), and 94% of treatment discontinuations (15 of 16) were in anthracycline-based regimens.

CONCLUSION

Capturing multiple toxicity outcomes throughout chemotherapy enables oncologists and patients to understand the range of side effects as they discuss treatment efficacies. Continuous symptom monitoring may aid in the timely development of interventions that minimize toxicity and improve outcomes. IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE: This study investigated patient-reported toxicities for 17 symptoms recorded prospectively during adjuvant and neoadjuvant chemotherapy regimens for early breast cancer. An analysis of four commonly used chemotherapy regimens identified significant differences among regimens in both individual symptoms and total number of symptoms rated moderate, severe, or very severe. Longer chemotherapy regimens, such as anthracycline-based regimens followed by paclitaxel, had higher proportions of symptoms rated major toxicities. The inclusion of patient perspectives on multiple toxicity outcomes at the same time at multiple time points during chemotherapy has the potential for improving patient-provider communication regarding symptom management, patient satisfaction, and long-term clinical outcomes.

Exploring the efficacy of an electronic symptom assessment and self-care intervention to preserve physical function in individuals receiving neurotoxic chemotherapy

Background

Impaired physical function due to chemotherapy-induced peripheral neuropathy (CIPN) symptoms may lead to diminished quality of life. However, even with the knowledge of the effects of CIPN on physical function, clinicians infrequently assess and manage CIPN. Interventions that prioritize the early identification of CIPN to provide prompt treatment may reduce the impact of CIPN on physical function. The purpose of this paper is to compare self-reported physical function in individuals receiving neurotoxic chemotherapy between Electronic Symptom Assessment-Cancer (ESRA-C) intervention group (e.g., opportunity for symptom screening, self-care recommendations, communication coaching, and symptom tracking) and control group participants (i.e., electronic assessment alone). Secondary outcomes include pain intensity, sensory/motor CIPN, depression, fatigue, and insomnia.

Methods

The data used in this paper are a subset of a randomized controlled trial that examined the impact of the ESRA-C intervention on symptom distress in individuals receiving cancer treatment. Since the interest in this analysis is on the effects of neurotoxic chemotherapy on physical function, subjects were included if they received platinum and/or taxane-based chemotherapy and completed the baseline and end-of-treatment measures. Participants completed standardized questionnaires of physical function, CIPN, fatigue, depression, pain intensity, and insomnia prior to treatment, 3–6 weeks after treatment initiation, and after the completion of treatment. Changes in mean scores are compared between groups using linear mixed models adjusting for age.

Results

Intervention group participants reported significantly less reduction in physical functioning (baseline: 87.4/100; end-of-treatment: 84.5/100) relative to the control (baseline: 90.2/100; end-of-treatment: 81.8/100) (p = 0.011). For secondary measures, significantly less depression (p = 0.005) was observed in the intervention group as compared to the control, but otherwise, there were no between-group differences. Among participants who received high cumulative doses of neurotoxic chemotherapy, the intervention group reported significantly less severe sensory (p = 0.007) and motor CIPN (p = 0.039) relative to the control.

Conclusion

Use of the ESRA-C intervention led to less reduction in physical function in comparison to the control in individuals receiving neurotoxic chemotherapy. Further research is needed to confirm our findings and to identify how electronic symptom assessment technology may mediate physical function preservation.

Trial registration

ClinicalTrials.Gov NCT00852852. Registered 27 February 2009.

Reducing Cancer Burden in the Population: An Overview of Epidemiologic Evidence to Support Policies, Systems, and Environmental Changes

"Reducing Cancer Burden in the Population: Epidemiologic Evidence to Support Policies, Systems, and Environmental Changes" is a compilation of 11 reviews addressing aspects of primary prevention of cancer (early life factors, vitamin D, and periodontal disease and the oral microbiome); primary and secondary prevention (in the transgender population); surveillance following secondary prevention (personalizing follow-up of patients diagnosed with an adenoma based on colorectal cancer risk); tertiary prevention (physical activity as an adjuvant to cancer treatment, measurement of patient-reported physical functioning in cancer treatment trials, and implementation of palliative care recommendations); and all 3 (changing epidemiology of oral cancers). Authors discuss policies, systems, and environment (PSE) changes that may be supported by epidemiologic evidence, for example, how existing public health and clinical policies and guidelines targeting noncancer outcomes may indirectly reduce cancer burden and how some cancer control policies could be refined to enhance effectiveness. Authors also discuss where systems and environment changes are necessary to ensure routine implementation of up-to-date, evidence-based policies and guidelines. Two other articles discuss infrastructure to support identification of existing and emerging cancer problems that could be reduced or avoided, including by PSE changes. These frameworks may guide impactful cancer research relevant to cancer centers' catchment areas, as well as cancer control efforts in countries where noncommunicable diseases including cancer are on the rise. The weight of the evidence of these reviews supports opportunities for PSE changes and infrastructure that could reduce the cancer burden in populations.