How Accurate Is Clinician Reporting of Chemotherapy Adverse Effects? A Comparison With Patient-Reported Symptoms From the Quality-of-Life Questionnaire C30

2004 ◽  
Vol 22 (17) ◽  
pp. 3485-3490 ◽  
Author(s):  
Erik K. Fromme ◽  
Kristine M. Eilers ◽  
Motomi Mori ◽  
Yi-Ching Hsieh ◽  
Tomasz M. Beer

Purpose Adverse events in chemotherapy clinical trials are assessed and reported by clinicians, yet clinician accuracy in assessing symptoms has been questioned. We compared patient reporting of eight symptoms using a validated instrument, the European Organization for the Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality-of-Life Questionnaire C30 (QLQ-C30 or QLQ) with physicians' reporting of the same symptoms in the study's adverse events log. Patients and Methods Thirty-seven men with metastatic, androgen-independent prostate cancer enrolled onto a phase II trial of weekly calcitriol and docetaxel completed the QLQ every 4 weeks for up to 28 weeks. A patient-reported symptom was defined as an increase in a QLQ symptom score by at least 10 points (0 to 100 scale), sustained for at least 4 weeks. A physician-reported symptom was considered present if it was ever documented in the adverse event log. Results Forty-nine (new or worsened) symptoms were detected by both physician and QLQ, 48 symptoms were detected by the physician alone, and 55 symptoms were detected by the QLQ alone. They agreed on the absence of a symptom in 102 instances of 254 possible opportunities. Their uncorrected agreement was 59.4%, but Cohen's κ, a coefficient of agreement that corrects for chance, was 0.15, indicating only slight agreement. Using the QLQ as the standard, overall physician sensitivity and specificity was 47% and 68%, respectively, although it varied considerably among symptoms. Conclusion Even in a tightly controlled clinical trial, physician reporting was neither sensitive nor specific in detecting common chemotherapy adverse effects. Tools for collecting patient-reported adverse event data in chemotherapy clinical trials should be developed.

2008 ◽  
Vol 26 (8) ◽  
pp. 1355-1363 ◽  
Author(s):  
Carolyn C. Gotay ◽  
Crissy T. Kawamoto ◽  
Andrew Bottomley ◽  
Fabio Efficace

Purpose Patient-reported outcomes (PROs), routinely collected as a part of cancer clinical trials, have been linked with survival in numerous clinical studies, but a comprehensive critical review has not been reported. This study systematically assessed the impact of PROs on patient survival after a cancer diagnosis within the context of clinical trials. Design Cancer clinical trials that assessed baseline PROs and mortality were identified through MEDLINE (through December 2006) supplemented by the Cochrane database, American Society of Clinical Oncology/European Society for Medical Oncology abstracts and hand searches. Inclusion criteria were publication in English language and use of multivariate analyses of PROs that controlled for one or more clinical factors. Two raters reviewed each study, abstracted data, and assessed study quality; two additional raters verified abstractions. Results In 36 of 39 studies (N = 13,874), at least one PRO was significantly associated with survival (P < .05) in multivariate analysis, with varying effect sizes. Studies of lung (n = 12) and breast cancer (n = 8) were most prevalent. The most commonly assessed PRO was quality of life, measured by the European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Questionnaire C30 in 56% of studies. Clinical variables adjusted for included performance status (PS), treatment arm, stage, weight loss, and serum markers. Results indicated that PROs provide distinct prognostic information beyond standard clinical measures in cancer clinical trials. Conclusion PROs might be considered for stratification purposes in future trials, as they were often better predictors of survival than PS. Studies are needed to determine whether interventions that improve PROs also increase survival and to identify explanatory mechanisms through which PROs relate to survival.


2019 ◽  
Author(s):  
Juan Ignacio Arraras ◽  
Gemma Asin ◽  
José Juan Illarramendi ◽  
Ana Manterola ◽  
Esteban Salgado ◽  
...  

2017 ◽  
Vol 30 (1) ◽  
pp. 47 ◽  
Author(s):  
Miguel Relvas-Silva ◽  
Rui Almeida Silva ◽  
Mário Dinis-Ribeiro

Introduction: Health-related quality of life assessment is increasingly important as it can help both clinical research and care for patients, particularly among oncological patients. Quality of Life Questionnaire – OES18 (esophageal module) and Quality of Life Questionnaire – OG25 (esophagogastric module) are the European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer modules for the evaluation of quality of life in patients with esophageal and esophagogastric cancers, respectively. The aim of our study was to translate, to culturally adapt and to perform a pilot testing to create the Portuguese version of both questionnaires.Material and Methods: The European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer guidelines were followed for translation, cultural adaptation and pilot testing of Quality of Life Questionnaire – OES18 (esophageal module) and Quality of Life Questionnaire – OG25 (esophagogastric module). The Quality of Life Questionnaire – OG25 (esophagogastric module) went through a process of forward (English → Portuguese) and backward (Portuguese → English) translation, by independent native speaker translators. After review, a preliminary version was created to be pilot tested among Portuguese patients. As a Brazilian version was already available for Quality of Life Questionnaire – OES18 (esophageal module), the questionnaire was simply culturally adapted and pilot tested. Both cancer and non-cancer patients were included.Results: Overall, 30 patients completed the Portuguese version of each questionnaire. Afterwards, a structured interview was conducted to find and report any problematic items. Troublesome items and wording were changed according to the pilot testing results. The final versions were sent to the European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Group and approved.Conclusion: The Portuguese versions of the European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Questionnaire – OES18 (esophageal module) and OG25 (esophagogastric module) questionnaires are useful, reliable and valid tools for measuring health-related quality of life in patients with esophageal and esophagogastric cancers, respectively. They can now be used in clinical setting and for scientific purposes.


2020 ◽  
Vol 66 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Antonio Augusto Claudio Pereira ◽  
Nayara De Paula Passarin ◽  
Jordana Henriques Coimbra ◽  
Gabriela Grasso Pacheco ◽  
Marcel Pereira Rangel

Introdução: A qualidade de vida de pacientes oncológicos tem sido objeto de estudo em muitos trabalhos brasileiros. Contudo, apesar da alta prevalência de indivíduos submetidos a radioterapia, poucos estudos com ênfase nesse grupo de pacientes foram identificados. Objetivo: Avaliar a qualidade de vida e a prevalência de sintomas depressivos em pacientes com neoplasias malignas durante o tratamento radioterápico. Método: Estudo transversal quantitativo realizado com 153 pacientes oncológicos em vigência de tratamento radioterápico em um centro especializado em oncologia e radioterapia, localizado no Noroeste do Estado do Parana. Os dados foram coletados entre marco e setembro de 2018. O European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Questionnaire (EORTC QLQ-C30) e o Inventario de Depressão de Beck foram utilizados para avaliar a qualidade de vida e os sintomas depressivos, respectivamente. Resultados: Os domínios “qualidade de vida”, “função cognitiva” e “função social” foram os que menos se mostraram prejudicados na amostra estudada, enquanto “insônia”, “perda de apetite” e “dificuldades financeiras” destacaram-se entre os maiores preditores de baixa qualidade de vida. Ademais, contatou-se que 22% dos indivíduos avaliados apresentaram algum grau de transtorno de humor, sendo 11% diagnosticados com depressão. Conclusão: O declínio na qualidade de vida e a prevalência de sintomas depressivos em pacientes oncológicos, mesmo os em vigência de radioterapia, enaltecem a importância de intervenções precoces que visem a restabelecer a funcionalidade e o bem-estar.


2019 ◽  
Vol 76 (6) ◽  
pp. 598-606
Author(s):  
Jovica Milovanovic ◽  
Dragoslava Andrejic ◽  
Ana Jotic ◽  
Vojko Djukic ◽  
Oliver Toskovic ◽  
...  

Backround/Aim. Considering the distinct increase in the incidence of oropharyngeal cancer over oral cavity cancers and changing epidemiology with human papilloma virus (HPV) infection emerging as an important risk factor, there is a need to establish better treatment choices in specific groups of patients with oropharyngeal cancer. The aim of this study was to assess the quality of life (QOL) and functional performance and the impact of different demographical data, stage of disease, and treatment type on these parameters in patients with oropharyngeal cancer with successfully achieved locoregional control a year after the treatment. Methods. Study included 87 patients who underwent QOL and functional impairment assessment 12 to 14 months after finished oncological treatment with the following questionnaires: the European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality-of Life-Questionnaire-C30 (EORTC QLQ-C30), European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of- Life Questionnaire-Head and Neck 35 (EORTC QLQ-H&N35) and The Karnofsky Performance Scale (KPS). Results. Specific groups of patients had significantly different post-treatment QOL scores. The factors associated with the worse QOL scores were female gender, not being in a partnership, level of education and HPV status. Conclusion. Clinicians should consider socioeconomic factors and HPV status in planning the recovery after treatment of patients with oropharyngeal carcinoma. Gender, education level and employment are the variables that form a certain risk profiles associated with the lower QOL.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document