Richard P McQuellon1, Howard T Thaler, David Cella, David H Moore. 1. Psychosocial Oncology, Comprehensive Cancer Center of Wake Forest University, Department of Internal Medicine, Medical Center Boulevard, Winston-Salem, NC 27157-1082, USA. rmcquell@wfubmc.edu
Abstract
OBJECTIVE:Chemotherapy can profoundly affect patients' quality of life (QOL), yet few clinical trials in advanced cervical cancer have included QOL outcomes. Our purpose was to assess the impact of cisplatin (C) versus cisplatin plus paclitaxel (CP) on overall QOL and pain in cervical cancer patients. METHODS:QOL was assessed using FACT-Cx, consisting of the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy (FACT-G) plus a cervix cancer-specific subscale, the Brief Pain Inventory-Short Form (BPI-SF), and a neurotoxicity subscale. Time points were: baseline (prior to randomization) and prior to chemotherapy cycles 2, 3, and 4. RESULTS:Overall (FACT-G) scores did not differ significantly between arms at the fourth assessment (C = 70.3 (19.6); CP = 72.8 (17.4)). Scores were stable over time and considerably lower than the general population norms. The BPI-SF revealed a decline in pain scores in both arms from the first to fourth assessments. The CP arm produced a significantly higher response rate and progression-free survival (PFS) but not overall survival (OS). Greater myelosuppression was reported in the combination arm. The rate of QOL drop-out for any reason was higher for C (53%) compared to CP (38%) (P < 0.05). At the fourth time point, 60% of living patients in both arms completed a QOL assessment. CONCLUSION: There was no significant difference in overall QOL scores between treatment arms or serially. Combined with QOL results, the significant increase in response and PFS in the CP arm and the higher drop-out rate in the C arm suggest a better outcome for the combination regimen despite its increased myelosuppression.
RCT Entities:
OBJECTIVE: Chemotherapy can profoundly affect patients' quality of life (QOL), yet few clinical trials in advanced cervical cancer have included QOL outcomes. Our purpose was to assess the impact of cisplatin (C) versus cisplatin plus paclitaxel (CP) on overall QOL and pain in cervical cancerpatients. METHODS: QOL was assessed using FACT-Cx, consisting of the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy (FACT-G) plus a cervix cancer-specific subscale, the Brief Pain Inventory-Short Form (BPI-SF), and a neurotoxicity subscale. Time points were: baseline (prior to randomization) and prior to chemotherapy cycles 2, 3, and 4. RESULTS: Overall (FACT-G) scores did not differ significantly between arms at the fourth assessment (C = 70.3 (19.6); CP = 72.8 (17.4)). Scores were stable over time and considerably lower than the general population norms. The BPI-SF revealed a decline in pain scores in both arms from the first to fourth assessments. The CP arm produced a significantly higher response rate and progression-free survival (PFS) but not overall survival (OS). Greater myelosuppression was reported in the combination arm. The rate of QOL drop-out for any reason was higher for C (53%) compared to CP (38%) (P < 0.05). At the fourth time point, 60% of living patients in both arms completed a QOL assessment. CONCLUSION: There was no significant difference in overall QOL scores between treatment arms or serially. Combined with QOL results, the significant increase in response and PFS in the CP arm and the higher drop-out rate in the C arm suggest a better outcome for the combination regimen despite its increased myelosuppression.
Authors: L M Wiltink; M King; F Müller; M S Sousa; M Tang; A Pendlebury; J Pittman; N Roberts; L Mileshkin; R Mercieca-Bebber; M-A Tait; R Campbell; C Rutherford Journal: Support Care Cancer Date: 2020-06-18 Impact factor: 3.603
Authors: Susan Yount; Marcy List; Hongyan Du; Kathleen Yost; Rita Bode; Bruce Brockstein; Athanassios Argiris; Everett Vokes; Ezra E W Cohen; Bruce Campbell; Veronica Valenzuela; Jacquelyn George; Robyn Egan; Jessica Chen; David Meddis; David Cella Journal: Qual Life Res Date: 2007-10-06 Impact factor: 4.147
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: Adrienne R Hill; Richard P McQuellon; Gregory B Russell; Perry Shen; John H Stewart; Edward A Levine Journal: Ann Surg Oncol Date: 2011-06-15 Impact factor: 5.344
Authors: Karen M Gil; Stephanie L Pugh; Ann H Klopp; Anamaria R Yeung; Lari Wenzel; Shannon N Westin; David K Gaffney; William Small; Spencer Thompson; Desiree E Doncals; Guilherme H C Cantuaria; Brian P Yaremko; Amy Chang; Vijayananda Kundapur; Dasarahally S Mohan; Michael L Haas; Yong Bae Kim; Catherine L Ferguson; Snehal Deshmukh; Lisa A Kachnic; Deborah W Bruner Journal: Gynecol Oncol Date: 2019-05-16 Impact factor: 5.482
Authors: David Cella; Helen Q Huang; Bradley J Monk; Lari Wenzel; Jo Benda; D Scott McMeekin; David Cohn; Lois Ramondetta; Cecelia H Boardman Journal: Gynecol Oncol Date: 2010-09-15 Impact factor: 5.482
Authors: Frederick B Stehman; Shamshad Ali; Henry M Keys; Laila I Muderspach; Weldon E Chafe; Donald G Gallup; Joan L Walker; Deborah Gersell Journal: Am J Obstet Gynecol Date: 2007-11 Impact factor: 8.661