Quality Of Life
Recently Published Documents


TOTAL DOCUMENTS

161678
(FIVE YEARS 83815)

H-INDEX

330
(FIVE YEARS 83)

2021 ◽  
Vol 124 ◽  
pp. 108325
Author(s):  
Christopher L. Anderson ◽  
Victoria Evans ◽  
Laura Gorham ◽  
Zhao Liu ◽  
Cynthia R. Johnson ◽  
...  

2021 ◽  
Vol 39 (28_suppl) ◽  
pp. 37-37
Author(s):  
Yu Ke ◽  
Patricia Soek Hui Neo ◽  
Grace Meijuan Yang ◽  
Shirlynn Ho ◽  
Yee Pin Tan ◽  
...  

37 Background: Accessible Cancer Care to Enable Support for Cancer Survivors (ACCESS) is a multidisciplinary survivorship care model launched at the National Cancer Centre Singapore (NCCS) in 2019. ACCESS employs routine distress and problem screening to triage cancer patients with varying care needs and complexities for tailored care. Here, we described the study design to evaluate ACCESS, and reported the baseline characteristics of our study cohort to characterize the profile of prospective target recipients of the new care model. Methods: A cluster randomized controlled trial was initiated to assess the effectiveness of ACCESS on quality of life and symptom burden, with each cluster unit defined at the oncologist level. Clusters were randomized in a 1:1 ratio to receive ACCESS or usual care. Eligible patients were ≥21 years, newly diagnosed with breast or gynecological cancer, and receiving follow-up care in NCCS. Patients were followed up for one year and patient-reported outcomes were collected every three months using the European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Questionnaire Core 30 and Rotterdam Symptom Checklist. Results: By May 2021, 91 patients and 89 patients in the usual care and ACCESS arm were recruited, respectively. Both groups (usual care vs. ACCESS) had comparable mean age (56.2±10.9 vs. 56.2±10.7, P = 0.998) and racial composition (P = 0.760). Employment status was similar in both arms (48.4% vs. 56.2% employed, P = 0.293) and most patients were covered by health insurance (89.8% vs. 88.1%, P = 0.920). At baseline, patients in both arms had comparable mean quality of life scores (65.1±19.8 vs. 66.9±17.6, P = 0.51) and reported high physical, role, emotional, cognitive, and social functioning levels (all mean scores > 70). No statistically significant differences in physical symptom and psychological distress levels were observed. Prevalent symptoms reported included fatigue (82.4% vs. 71.9%), pain (68.1% vs. 55.1%), and insomnia (57.1% vs. 55.1%). Almost half of the cohort reported financial difficulties (45.1% vs. 46.1%). Conclusions: Comparable baseline characteristics suggested the absence of systematic differences in care needs and demand among patients cared by different oncologists. Despite high functioning statuses at baseline, participants reported impaired quality of life with active physical and financial problems. These results support our hypothesis that routine screening would be valuable to identify such problems promptly for management via standardized care pathways. Results from this ongoing trial will determine the effectiveness of ACCESS on quality of life and functional recovery through treatment and survivorship. Clinical trial information: NCT04014309.


2021 ◽  
Vol 39 (28_suppl) ◽  
pp. 114-114
Author(s):  
Saad Omar Atiq ◽  
James Helzberg ◽  
Nathan Hirshman ◽  
Zainab Atiq ◽  
Daniel J. George ◽  
...  

114 Background: The role of palliative care in genitourinary (GU) malignancies has been understudied. Despite representing nearly 25% of new cancer diagnoses, with over 350,000 new cases diagnosed each year, few GU patients have been included in palliative care trials under the theory that symptoms are less severe for GU patients than other solid tumors. Early involvement of palliative care services improves the patient care experience, decreases healthcare utilization, is associated with survival benefit, and results in improved quality of life and mood. To further elucidate the role of palliative care in oncology, we must study its utility in subsets of malignancy like GU cancers, as needs for patients may differ by malignancy type. Methods: A retrospective cross-sectional analysis of initial outpatient palliative care visits was performed using data from the Quality Data Collection Tool for Palliative Care (QDACT-PC) database from 2014-2020. QDACT-PC is a web-based, point-of-care registry used by physicians across the United States to track quality metrics associated with patient consultations. Data was collected and analyzed from patients' initial visits including pain scale, dyspnea scale, feeling of well-being (Quality of Life scale), fatigue scale, constipation scale, palliative performance status (PPS), and preference for resuscitation status. Scales for these variables were 0-10, with the exception of a scale of 0-100% for PPS. Patients less than 18 and greater than 90 years old were excluded. Chi-squared and Student’s t-tests were used to compare categorical and continuous variables, respectively. Results: 824 GU oncology patients (358 prostate cancer patients, 251 bladder cancer patients, 215 renal cancer patients) were compared against all patients with non-GU cancers (7807 patients). Notably, non-GU patients reported higher rates of fatigue (4.50 vs. 4.13, p = 0.0013) and dyspnea (1.63 vs. 1.11, p < 0.0001) than GU patients. GU malignancies had non-significant higher reported pain (3.73 vs. 3.60, p = 0.3109) and constipation (1.96 vs. 1.83, p = 0.2319) and lower PPS (4.95 vs. 4.96, p = 0.8555) and QOL (4.55 vs. 4.73, p = 0.0962). Preference for resuscitation at the time of referral was similar between the two groups (p = 0.6339). Only 16.5% of prostate cancer patients referred to palliative care in this database were black, while black patients are often estimated to represent 30% of new prostate cancer diagnoses each year. Conclusions: GU patients represent 9.54% of cancer patients seen by palliative care while the incidence is nearly 25%. Traditionally, GU patients were underrepresented in palliative care trials under the notion of less severe symptoms; however, this study demonstrates that GU patients have as severe symptoms as non-GU patients, highlighting a disparity in referral to palliative care. Furthermore, the lack of representation of black patients suggests potential inequity and warrants further investigation.


2021 ◽  
Vol 39 (28_suppl) ◽  
pp. 3-3
Author(s):  
Janneke van Roij ◽  
Natasja Raijmakers ◽  
Laurien Ham ◽  
Marieke van den Beuken-van Everdingen ◽  
Ben van den Borne ◽  
...  

3 Background: Previous studies on experienced quality of care and quality of life have not addressed the reciprocal relation between patients and their relatives. For the first time we were able to include almost 700 couples (patient – relative) in a palliative oncological care context. This study aims to assess the experienced quality of care and emotional functioning (EF) of patients with advanced cancer and their relatives, including their reciprocal relation by using a dyadic approach. Methods: A prospective multicentre observational study among patients with advanced cancer and their relatives, recruited from 40 hospitals in the Netherlands or self-enrolled between November 2017 and January 2020 (eQuiPe study). Patients with metastatic cancer and their relatives were eligible to participate. Respondents completed a questionnaire and clinical data of the patient were obtained by linking the information to the Netherlands Cancer Registry (NCR). Logistic regression analyses were performed on baseline data of 1,103 patients and 831 relatives to assess the association between experienced quality of care and EF of patients and relatives separately and across dyads. Results: In total, 1,103 (65%) patients and 831 (71%) relatives completed the baseline questionnaire, including 699 unique patient-relative couples. Patients experienced lower levels of quality of life, including EF, and more symptoms compared to the normative population ( p<.001). Relatives reported even clinically relevantly lower EF compared to patients (69 vs. 78, p<.001) and were less satisfied with care (59 vs. 74; p<.001). Being more satisfied with care in general ( p<.05) and clarity about who their central health care professional ( p<.05) were positively associated with high EF in patients. For relatives, perceived continuity of care ( p<.01) and continuity of information for the patient ( p<.05) were positively associated with high EF. Dyadic analyses showed that EF of patients ( p<.001) and relatives ( p<.001) was positively associated with EF of the other person and perceived continuity of care by relatives was positively associated with high EF in patients ( p<.01). Conclusions: Experienced integral organisation and satisfaction with care in patients and relatives are related to their EF. The additional reciprocal relation between patients’ and their relatives’ EF and the experienced continuity of care suggests the opportunity for a family‐centered approach to optimize advanced cancer care.


2021 ◽  
Vol 39 (28_suppl) ◽  
pp. 193-193
Author(s):  
J. Vozmediano

193 Background: Integrative oncology has proven to be a useful approach to control cancer symptoms and improve the quality of life (QoL) and overall health of patients, delivering integrated patient care at both physical and emotional levels. The objective of this randomized trial was to evaluate the effects of a triple intervention program on the QoL and lifestyle of women with breast cancer. Methods: Seventy-five survivors of stage IIA-IIB breast cancer were randomized into 2 groups. The intervention group (IG) received a 6-month dietary, exercise, and mindfulness program that was not offered to the control group (CG). Data were gathered at baseline and at 6 months postintervention on QoL and adherence to Mediterranean diet using clinical markers and validated questionnaires. Between-group differences at baseline and 3 months postintervention were analyzed using Student’s t test for related samples and the Wilcoxon and Mann-Whitney U tests. Results: At 6 months postintervention, the IG showed significant improvements versus CG in physical functioning ( p =.027), role functioning ( p =.028), and Mediterranean diet adherence ( p =.02) and a significant reduction in body mass index ( p =.04) and weight ( p =.05), with a mean weight loss of 0.7 kg versus a gain of 0.55 kg by the CG ( p =.05). Dyspnea symptoms were also increased in the CG versus IG ( p =.066). Conclusions: These results demonstrate that an integrative dietary, physical activity, and mindfulness program enhances the QoL and healthy lifestyle of stage IIA-IIB breast cancer survivors. Cancer symptoms may be better managed by the implementation of multimodal rather than isolated interventions. Keywords: integrative oncology, breast cancer, quality of life, diet, exercise, mindfulness. Clinical trial information: NCT04150484.


2021 ◽  
Vol 39 (28_suppl) ◽  
pp. 1-1
Author(s):  
Manali I. Patel ◽  
Sana Indravadan Khateeb ◽  
Ivana Krajcinovic ◽  
Deb Salava ◽  
Tumaini Coker

1 Background: Low-income and minority populations have disproportionately less activation in their cancer care, worse health-related quality of life (HrQOL), and greater acute care use than affluent and white populations. Community-based interventions are needed to improve patient experiences and quality of cancer care among these populations. We used community-based participatory methods to refine a previously tested intervention for use in Atlantic City NJ. The intervention, LEAPS, uses community health workers trained to activate patients to discuss advance care planning and their symptom burden with cancer clinicians and to connect patients with culturally-relevant community resources to overcome complications from social determinants of health. We conducted a randomized controlled trial of LEAPS in collaboration with a employer-union health fund. Members of the employer-union health fund with newly diagnosed with hematologic and solid tumor cancers were randomized to the 6-month intervention or to usual care. The objective was to determine if the intervention improved HrQOL at 4 months post-enrollment as compared to baseline more than usual care and secondarily the effect on change in patient activation at 4 months post-enrollment as compared to baseline and acute care use within 12 months post-enrollment. Methods: We conducted patient interviews to assess HrQOL and patient activation and obtained claims data for health care use. We used regression models to evaluate differences in health-related quality of life (validated Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-General) scores and patient activation (validated Patient Activation Measure) scores between groups over time and exact poisson regression adjusted for length of follow-up to compare emergency department and hospitalization utilization. Results: A total of 160 patients were consented and randomized into the study (80 intervention; 80 control). There were no differences in demographic or clinical factors across groups. The majority were non-white (74%), female (53%), mean age 57 years. The most common diagnoses were breast (31%) and lung (21%) cancer and the majority were diagnosed with stage 3 or 4 (63%). At 4 months, the intervention group had greater improvements in quality of life as compared to the control group (difference in difference: 9.56 p < 0.001), greater change in patient activation (difference in difference: 12.43 (p < 0.001)), and lower acute care use (hospital visits (1.10 (1.53) +/- 1.83 (1.31), p = 0.02) and emergency department use (1.2 (2.82) versus 3.47 (3.62) p = 0.03). Conclusions: Integration of community-based interventions into cancer care for low-income and minority populations may be a more effective and sustainable way to ensure equitable cancer care. Clinical trial information: NCT03699748.


2021 ◽  
Vol 39 (28_suppl) ◽  
pp. 319-319
Author(s):  
Paul K. Paik ◽  
Mo Yang ◽  
Emma Knowles ◽  
Anthony Hatswell ◽  
Helene Vioix ◽  
...  

319 Background: To complement the clinical findings, utilities were analyzed based on patient-reported outcomes (PROs) from VISION trial (Cohort A; data cut: July 1, 2020), a Phase II trial showed durable clinical activity of tepotinib in advanced NSCLC METex14+. Methods: The European Organization for the Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Questionnaire (EORTC QLQ-C30) and the EuroQol 5 Dimension 5 Level (EQ-5D-5L) questionnaires were completed at Day 1, every 6 weeks for 9 months, then every 12 weeks, for up to 30 days after the last tepotinib dose. The Quality of Life Utility Measure-Core 10 dimensions (QLE-C10D) and EQ-5D-5L utilities were derived using the utility algorithm from published literature and the US crosswalk, respectively. Utilities are preference-based, health-related quality of life (HRQoL) metrics expressed on a scale including 0 (dead) and 1 (full health). Linear mixed regression models were used to analyze utilities at baseline, pre-progression, and post-progression, and to understand the relationship between EQ-5D and QLE-C10D. Utilities were assessed by both independent review committee (IRC) and investigators. Results: Utilities were estimated for 150 of 152 pts, with 983 observations for EORTC and 907 for EQ-5D. Mean EORTC utilities increased after tepotinib initiation, from 0.691 at baseline to 0.722 in the IRC-assessed progression-free period, and decreased after progression (0.671). Consistent trends were identified when progression was based on investigator's assessment. Analyses of EQ-5D utilities yielded similar findings and utilities. The two questionnaires were generally highly correlated (Table). Prior treatment (yes/no; p=0.554), adenocarcinoma (p=0.881), or squamous histology (p=0.841) were not statistically significant predictors of EQ-5D utility, while progression status significantly predicted utility in all progression-based models (p≤0.002). Conclusions: VISION is the first trial of a MET inhibitor to provide data on PROs and utilities in NSCLC harboring METex14 skipping mutation. EORTC and EQ-5D (minimally important difference: 0.08) utilities show an increase in HRQoL from baseline during tepotinib treatment until progression. Utility with tepotinib did not vary by prior treatment status or histology. Clinical trial information: NCT02864992. [Table: see text]


2021 ◽  
Vol 39 (28_suppl) ◽  
pp. 53-53
Author(s):  
Akhil Mehta ◽  
Jukes P. Namm ◽  
Ellen D'Errico ◽  
Eric Lau ◽  
Linda Hong ◽  
...  

53 Background: Financial toxicity (FT) is a critical concern for cancer survivors. There is limited data about the relationship between FT throughout the continuum of cancer care, demographics, disease factors, and quality of life (QoL) indicators in gynecologic cancer survivors. Methods: Gynecologic cancer survivors who received treatment from 2015 to 2019 at Loma Linda University Cancer Center were invited to complete an anonymous online survey. A modified version of the comprehensive score for financial toxicity (COST) survey was used to assess FT at baseline and after treatment. The patient-reported outcomes measurement information system (PROMIS) survey was used to assess QoL. Demographic data were summarized using descriptive statistics. Associations between disease factors and FT measured at baseline and after treatment were analyzed using univariable linear regression. Lower COST score coefficients indicate greater FT. Correlations between FT and QoL were evaluated using the Pearson correlation. Results: A total of 252 surveys were sent to gynecologic cancer survivors who met study criteria, of whom 28% responded. Amongst 70 patients included in this analysis, the median age was 64 (IQR 56, 70), 47% were white (n = 33), 20% were unemployed, 22% had a high school or lower level of education, and 50% had an annual income < $60,000. With respect to cancer subtype, 63% had uterine cancer (n = 44), 20% had cervical cancer (n = 14), and 17% had ovarian cancer (n = 12). The mean COST score at baseline and after treatment was 21.2 ± 9.2 and 12.9 ± 7.8, respectively. The following characteristics were associated with significantly greater FT at baseline: Hispanic ethnicity (-5.5; 95% CI: -1 to -10), Black race (-14.4; 95% CI: -3.4 to -25.4), household number > 4 (-6.9; 95% CI: -2.6 to -16.4), Medicare insurance (-6.5; 95% CI: -1.7 to -11.2), and Medicaid insurance (-11.2; 95% CI: -4.3 to -17.9) (p < 0.05). Patients who received combined modality surgery, chemotherapy, and radiation had significantly higher FT (-5.6; 95% CI: -1.3 to -9.8, p < 0.05) compared to those who received single-modality treatment. Likewise, patients with 5 or more treatment-related side effects had significantly higher FT (-6.3; 95% CI -1.13 to -11.4, p < 0.05) compared to those who reported no side effects. During treatment, 24% of patients turned down or skipped treatment, 38% quit their job, and 28% reported family members quit their job. Finally, COST scores measured after treatment correlated positively with physical and mental health (Pearson coefficient 0.57 and 0.56 respectively, p < 0.001). Conclusions: These findings support the need for assessing FT at baseline and throughout the continuum of cancer care to provide individualized assistance to patients facing financial strain. FT affects compliance to treatment which can adversely affect cancer-related outcomes and QoL. Additional policies are needed to address the increasing cost of cancer care.


2021 ◽  
Vol 39 (28_suppl) ◽  
pp. 131-131
Author(s):  
Sharon Lam ◽  
Nicolas Schlecht ◽  
Gregory Rosenblatt ◽  
Vikas Mehta

131 Background: Financial toxicity (FT) describes objective and subjective burden of costs associated with medical care. Patients with head and neck cancer (HNC) and lung carcinoma are acutely impacted by FT, as these cancers disproportionately occur in populations that are poor, unemployed, and/or of minority backgrounds compared to patients with other cancers. Our group recently published results showing delay in time to treatment initiation (TTI) was associated with poorer survival in HNC patients. Another study reported that FT was associated with worse progression-free survival in non-small cell lung cancer patients. In this study, we sought to investigate the association between FT, TTI and clinical outcomes among HNC and lung carcinoma patients, as well as predictors of FT. Methods: A retrospective analysis of 140 patients diagnosed with either HNC or lung carcinoma between January 2007 and March 2018 with quality-of-life data collected prospectively at the time of radiation oncology treatment was conducted. Participants responded to a question about their experience on ‘financial difficulties’ with a 4-point Likert Scale within the European Organization for the Research and Treatment of Cancer Core Quality of Life Questionnaire (EORTC QLQ-C30) quality of life assessment. FT was low when patients indicated ‘1’ (not at all) or ‘2’ (a little), and high if patients indicated ‘3’ (quite a bit), and ‘4’ (very much). Chi-square test and Student’s t-test were used to compare characteristics of patients with and without FT. The association between FT and TTI and survival outcomes were analyzed using the Kaplan-Meier methods and Cox proportional-hazards regression models. Results: The study sample included 70 patients with HNC (mean [SD] age, 64.3 [12.0]; 62.7% male) and 70 patients with lung carcinoma (mean [SD] age, 69.1 [10.2]; 38.0% male). Over half (N = 80, 55.2%) reported experiencing financial toxicity (64% HNC vs. 45.7% lung carcinoma). Younger age (< 60 years), having Medicaid, and having small-cell lung carcinoma were associated with greater FT (p = 0.049, p = 0.042, p = 0.034, respectively). Patients who reported having poorer health and quality of life also experienced greater FT (p = 0.030, p = 0.016, respectively). HNC patients who experienced greater FT were less likely to experience treatment delay (p = 0.035). After adjusting for age, sex, ethnicity, tumor site, and tumor stage, FT was associated with worse survival outcomes in all patients (HR = 1.52, 95% CI 1.06-2.19). Conclusions: Greater FT was associated with younger age, having Medicaid, and having small-cell lung carcinoma. HNC patients who experienced greater FT were less likely to experience treatment delay, which suggests that delay may not be a causative factor for the worsened survival seen with patients who report FT.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document