I Kopp1, A Bauhofer, M Koller. 1. Association of the Scientific Medical Societies in Germany (AWMF), c/o Institute of Theoretical Surgery, Philipps-University Marburg, Marburg, Germany. kopp@mailer.uni-marburg.de
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Quality of life (QoL) is an important outcome measure in clinical studies. However, there is little experience with the interpretation of QoL results. METHODS: To guide interpretation of QoL results from a randomised controlled trial (RCT) targeting the effectiveness of the immune modulator G-CSF on postoperative recovery in high risk (ASA III/IV) colorectal cancer patients, we compared RCT data with data from a population based cohort study and norm reference data. QoL was assessed using the European Organisation for the Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) QLQ-C30 and CR38 questionnaires. QoL results were analysed on discharge from hospital and six months postoperatively. RESULTS: Colorectal cancer patients (both from the RCT and the cohort study) showed the greatest differences in QoL scores compared to norm reference data at discharge from hospital. Six months postoperatively, global quality of life and pain approximated norm reference values indicating optimal recovery. However, deficits still appeared in scores for role functioning, physical functioning, social functioning and fatigue. The best improvements (discharge from hospital to six months postoperatively) were seen with respect to physical functioning, fatigue and pain. CONCLUSIONS: For further analysis of RCT data, physical functioning and fatigue scores may be more sensitive than global quality of life to detect differences in treatment effects. Copyright 2004 Birkhäuser Verlag, Basel
BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Quality of life (QoL) is an important outcome measure in clinical studies. However, there is little experience with the interpretation of QoL results. METHODS: To guide interpretation of QoL results from a randomised controlled trial (RCT) targeting the effectiveness of the immune modulator G-CSF on postoperative recovery in high risk (ASA III/IV) colorectal cancerpatients, we compared RCT data with data from a population based cohort study and norm reference data. QoL was assessed using the European Organisation for the Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) QLQ-C30 and CR38 questionnaires. QoL results were analysed on discharge from hospital and six months postoperatively. RESULTS:Colorectal cancerpatients (both from the RCT and the cohort study) showed the greatest differences in QoL scores compared to norm reference data at discharge from hospital. Six months postoperatively, global quality of life and pain approximated norm reference values indicating optimal recovery. However, deficits still appeared in scores for role functioning, physical functioning, social functioning and fatigue. The best improvements (discharge from hospital to six months postoperatively) were seen with respect to physical functioning, fatigue and pain. CONCLUSIONS: For further analysis of RCT data, physical functioning and fatigue scores may be more sensitive than global quality of life to detect differences in treatment effects. Copyright 2004 Birkhäuser Verlag, Basel
Authors: Therese Juul; Morten Aagaard Petersen; Bernhard Holzner; Søren Laurberg; Peter Christensen; Mogens Grønvold Journal: Qual Life Res Date: 2014-03-28 Impact factor: 4.147
Authors: Michael Jefford; Karla Gough; Allison Drosdowsky; Lahiru Russell; Sanchia Aranda; Phyllis Butow; Jo Phipps-Nelson; Jane Young; Mei Krishnasamy; Anna Ugalde; Dorothy King; Andrew Strickland; Michael Franco; Robert Blum; Catherine Johnson; Vinod Ganju; Jeremy Shapiro; Geoffrey Chong; Julie Charlton; Andrew Haydon; Penelope Schofield Journal: Oncologist Date: 2016-06-15
Authors: Thomas M Atkinson; Angela M Stover; Daniel F Storfer; Rebecca M Saracino; Thomas A D'Agostino; Denise Pergolizzi; Konstantina Matsoukas; Yuelin Li; Ethan Basch Journal: Epidemiol Rev Date: 2017-01-01 Impact factor: 6.222
Authors: A G K McNair; R N Whistance; R O Forsythe; J Rees; J E Jones; A M Pullyblank; K N L Avery; S T Brookes; M G Thomas; P A Sylvester; A Russell; A Oliver; D Morton; R Kennedy; D G Jayne; R Huxtable; R Hackett; S J Dutton; M G Coleman; M Card; J Brown; J M Blazeby Journal: Colorectal Dis Date: 2015-11 Impact factor: 3.788
Authors: Moniek van Zutphen; Renate M Winkels; Fränzel J B van Duijnhoven; Suzanne A van Harten-Gerritsen; Dieuwertje E G Kok; Peter van Duijvendijk; Henk K van Halteren; Bibi M E Hansson; Flip M Kruyt; Ernst J Spillenaar Bilgen; Johannes H W de Wilt; Jaap J Dronkers; Ellen Kampman Journal: BMC Cancer Date: 2017-01-25 Impact factor: 4.430
Authors: Karin M Landsbergen; Judith B Prins; Han G Brunner; Floris W Kraaimaat; Nicoline Hoogerbrugge Journal: Fam Cancer Date: 2009-03-28 Impact factor: 2.375