Literature DB >> 1515244

Can Karnofsky performance status be transformed to the Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group scoring scale and vice versa?

E Verger1, M Salamero, C Conill.   

Abstract

There is no consensus regarding the equivalence of performance status between the Karnofsky (KPS) and the Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) scales. In the present study KPS and ECOG scores were compared in 150 consecutive cancer patients. An empirical relation was established through regression analysis in a subsample of 75 patients and the results tested in the second subsample. Transformation tables including 95 and 66% confidence intervals were calculated. Both performance scales are highly correlated, but inferences about individual patients were subject to a high level of error. These results stress the difficulty of translating one score to another, especially in the range of lower performance status where a wide spread is observed.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  1992        PMID: 1515244     DOI: 10.1016/0959-8049(92)90510-9

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Eur J Cancer        ISSN: 0959-8049            Impact factor:   9.162


  43 in total

1.  Creating a Synthetic Clinical Trial: Comparative Effectiveness Analyses Using an Electronic Medical Record.

Authors:  Marjorie G Zauderer; Aleksandr Grigorenko; Paul May; Nicholas Kastango; Isaac Wagner; Aryeh Caroline; Mark G Kris
Journal:  JCO Clin Cancer Inform       Date:  2019-06

2.  Psychometric testing of the Impact of Event Scale-Chinese Version (IES-C) in oral cancer patients in Taiwan.

Authors:  Shu-Ching Chen; Yeur-Hur Lai; Chun-Ta Liao; Chia-Chin Lin
Journal:  Support Care Cancer       Date:  2005-02-17       Impact factor: 3.603

3.  Patients are the best judges: Evaluating quality of life in CNS tumor care.

Authors:  John P Ney; Lynne P Taylor
Journal:  Neurol Clin Pract       Date:  2019-02

Review 4.  IDH wild-type WHO grade II diffuse low-grade gliomas. A heterogeneous family with different outcomes. Systematic review and meta-analysis.

Authors:  Davide Tiziano Di Carlo; Hugues Duffau; Federico Cagnazzo; Nicola Benedetto; Riccardo Morganti; Paolo Perrini
Journal:  Neurosurg Rev       Date:  2018-06-26       Impact factor: 3.042

5.  Chemotherapy for a ventilator-supported patient with small cell lung cancer: A case report.

Authors:  Run Xiang; Tianpeng Xie; Qiang Li
Journal:  Oncol Lett       Date:  2016-07-14       Impact factor: 2.967

6.  Apatinib for Advanced Osteosarcoma after Failure of Standard Multimodal Therapy: An Open Label Phase II Clinical Trial.

Authors:  Lu Xie; Jie Xu; Xin Sun; Xiaodong Tang; Taiqiang Yan; Rongli Yang; Wei Guo
Journal:  Oncologist       Date:  2018-12-17

7.  Latent Class Analysis Reveals Distinct Subgroups of Patients Based on Symptom Occurrence and Demographic and Clinical Characteristics.

Authors:  Christine Miaskowski; Laura Dunn; Christine Ritchie; Steven M Paul; Bruce Cooper; Bradley E Aouizerat; Kimberly Alexander; Helen Skerman; Patsy Yates
Journal:  J Pain Symptom Manage       Date:  2015-01-31       Impact factor: 3.612

8.  Patient-physician disagreement regarding performance status is associated with worse survivorship in patients with advanced cancer.

Authors:  Ian D Schnadig; Erik K Fromme; Charles L Loprinzi; Jeff A Sloan; Motomi Mori; Hong Li; Tomasz M Beer
Journal:  Cancer       Date:  2008-10-15       Impact factor: 6.860

9.  Weekly irinotecan (CPT-11) in 5-FU heavily pretreated and poor-performance-status patients with advanced colorectal cancer.

Authors:  M Benavides; P García-Alfonso; M Cobo; A Muñoz-Martín; S Gil-Calle; F Carabantes; E Villar; J Graupera; M Balcells; G Pérez-Manga
Journal:  Med Oncol       Date:  2004       Impact factor: 3.064

10.  Baseline FACT-G score is a predictor of survival for advanced lung cancer.

Authors:  M Dharma-Wardene; H J Au; J Hanson; D Dupere; J Hewitt; D Feeny
Journal:  Qual Life Res       Date:  2004-09       Impact factor: 4.147

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.