Bradley J Monk1, Helen Q Huang, David Cella, Harry J Long. 1. Division of Gynecologic Oncology, Chao Family Comprehensive Cancer Center, University of California Irvine Medical Center, Orange, CA, USA.
Abstract
PURPOSE: To prospectively assess the impact of treatment with cisplatin alone or in combination with topotecan (CT) on quality of life (QOL) in patients with advanced or recurrent cervical cancer, and to explore the prognostic value of baseline QOL scores. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients entered on Gynecologic Oncology Group (GOG) Protocol 179 were expected to complete QOL assessments at four time points using Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-General (FACT-G), Cervix subscale (Cx subscale), FACT/GOG-Neurotoxicity subscale (NTX subscale), Brief Pain Inventory (BPI), and UNISCALE (UNI). Adjusting for patient age, baseline scores, and effects of time, we longitudinally examined treatment effect on QOL during and after chemotherapy. RESULTS: Among patients randomly allocated to receive cisplatin (n = 146) or CT (n = 147), there were no statistically significant differences in QOL up to 9 months after randomization despite more hematologic toxicity in the combination arm. QOL assessments were completed at rates of 98%, 85%, 68%, and 59%, respectively, for the four time points, with similar rates and reasons for nonparticipation between regimens. Baseline FACT-G (P = .0016) and BPI (P = .0001) scores were significantly associated with patient age; older patients had better QOL and less pain. Baseline UNI was positively correlated with FACT-G (r = 0.66; P < .001) and Cx subscale (r = 0.29; P < .001), and negatively related to BPI (r = -0.41; P < .0001). Baseline FACT-Cx (FACT-G + Cx subscale) was associated with survival. CONCLUSION: Despite increased toxicity, CT did not significantly reduce patient QOL when compared with cisplatin alone. Patient-reported QOL measures may be an important prognostic tool in advanced cervix cancer.
RCT Entities:
PURPOSE: To prospectively assess the impact of treatment with cisplatin alone or in combination with topotecan (CT) on quality of life (QOL) in patients with advanced or recurrent cervical cancer, and to explore the prognostic value of baseline QOL scores. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients entered on Gynecologic Oncology Group (GOG) Protocol 179 were expected to complete QOL assessments at four time points using Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-General (FACT-G), Cervix subscale (Cx subscale), FACT/GOG-Neurotoxicity subscale (NTX subscale), Brief Pain Inventory (BPI), and UNISCALE (UNI). Adjusting for patient age, baseline scores, and effects of time, we longitudinally examined treatment effect on QOL during and after chemotherapy. RESULTS: Among patients randomly allocated to receive cisplatin (n = 146) or CT (n = 147), there were no statistically significant differences in QOL up to 9 months after randomization despite more hematologic toxicity in the combination arm. QOL assessments were completed at rates of 98%, 85%, 68%, and 59%, respectively, for the four time points, with similar rates and reasons for nonparticipation between regimens. Baseline FACT-G (P = .0016) and BPI (P = .0001) scores were significantly associated with patient age; older patients had better QOL and less pain. Baseline UNI was positively correlated with FACT-G (r = 0.66; P < .001) and Cx subscale (r = 0.29; P < .001), and negatively related to BPI (r = -0.41; P < .0001). Baseline FACT-Cx (FACT-G + Cx subscale) was associated with survival. CONCLUSION: Despite increased toxicity, CT did not significantly reduce patient QOL when compared with cisplatin alone. Patient-reported QOL measures may be an important prognostic tool in advanced cervix cancer.
Authors: David Cella; Joseph C Cappelleri; Andrew Bushmakin; Claudie Charbonneau; Jim Z Li; Sindy T Kim; Isan Chen; M Dror Michaelson; Robert J Motzer Journal: J Oncol Pract Date: 2009-03 Impact factor: 3.840
Authors: B K Hamilton; A D Law; L Rybicki; D Abounader; J Dabney; R Dean; H K Duong; A T Gerds; R Hanna; B T Hill; D Jagadeesh; M E Kalaycio; C Lawrence; L McLellan; B Pohlman; R M Sobecks; B J Bolwell; N S Majhail Journal: Bone Marrow Transplant Date: 2015-06-01 Impact factor: 5.483
Authors: Bruno Kovic; Xuejing Jin; Sean Alexander Kennedy; Mathieu Hylands; Michal Pedziwiatr; Akira Kuriyama; Huda Gomaa; Yung Lee; Morihiro Katsura; Masafumi Tada; Brian Y Hong; Sung Min Cho; Patrick Jiho Hong; Ashley M Yu; Yasmin Sivji; Augustin Toma; Li Xie; Ludwig Tsoi; Marcin Waligora; Manya Prasad; Neera Bhatnagar; Lehana Thabane; Michael Brundage; Gordon Guyatt; Feng Xie Journal: JAMA Intern Med Date: 2018-12-01 Impact factor: 21.873
Authors: Richard T Penson; Helen Q Huang; Lari B Wenzel; Bradley J Monk; Sharon Stockman; Harry J Long; Lois M Ramondetta; Lisa M Landrum; Ana Oaknin; Thomas J A Reid; Mario M Leitao; Michael Method; Helen Michael; Krishnansu S Tewari Journal: Lancet Oncol Date: 2015-01-29 Impact factor: 41.316
Authors: Edward L Nelson; Lari B Wenzel; Kathryn Osann; Aysun Dogan-Ates; Nissa Chantana; Astrid Reina-Patton; Amanda K Laust; Kevin P Nishimoto; Alexandra Chicz-DeMet; Nefertiti du Pont; Bradley J Monk Journal: Clin Cancer Res Date: 2008-04-01 Impact factor: 12.531