GOALS: The aim of the study was to determine the feasibility and validity of a newly developed patient-based instrument--the Patient Neurotoxicity Questionnaire (PNQ)--for grading chemotherapy-induced peripheral neuropathy (CIPN). PATIENTS AND METHODS: We prospectively collected data from 300 female patients who were treated withtaxane chemotherapyfor primary breast cancer as part of a national multicenter phase III randomized trial (N-SAS BC 02). We evaluated patient compliance with the PNQ and several validation parameters, including concordance between CIPN grades noted by physicians (National Cancer Institute Common Toxicity Criteria) and patients (PNQ), and the concurrent validity and responsiveness of the PNQ versus the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy/Gynecologic Oncology Group-Neurotoxicity (FACT/GOG-Ntx) utilizing data at pre-treatment and before three, five, and seven treatment cycles. MAIN RESULTS: The questionnaire completion rate was >90% at all assessments. Evaluation by physicians always resulted in lower neuropathy assessment scores compared with those reported directly by patients (weighted kappa coefficients, 0.02-0.06). Both PNQ sensory and motor scores were significantly correlated with the FACT/GOG-Ntx (r = 0.66 and 0.51, respectively). In the repeated measures analysis of variance model, PNQ grades increased considerably as treatment continued, indicating progressively worsening CIPN over time. CONCLUSIONS: The PNQ has an applicable degree of feasibility and validity, useful for the diagnosis of CIPN as well as for clinical treatment decision-making, where the development of CIPN is a potential treatment-limiting consideration. Physicians underreport and underestimate the severity of CIPN symptoms compared with patients, thereby supporting the importance of assessing patient-reported outcomes using the PNQ.
RCT Entities:
GOALS: The aim of the study was to determine the feasibility and validity of a newly developed patient-based instrument--the PatientNeurotoxicity Questionnaire (PNQ)--for grading chemotherapy-induced peripheral neuropathy (CIPN). PATIENTS AND METHODS: We prospectively collected data from 300 female patients who were treated with taxane chemotherapy for primary breast cancer as part of a national multicenter phase III randomized trial (N-SAS BC 02). We evaluated patient compliance with the PNQ and several validation parameters, including concordance between CIPN grades noted by physicians (National Cancer Institute Common Toxicity Criteria) and patients (PNQ), and the concurrent validity and responsiveness of the PNQ versus the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy/Gynecologic Oncology Group-Neurotoxicity (FACT/GOG-Ntx) utilizing data at pre-treatment and before three, five, and seven treatment cycles. MAIN RESULTS: The questionnaire completion rate was >90% at all assessments. Evaluation by physicians always resulted in lower neuropathy assessment scores compared with those reported directly by patients (weighted kappa coefficients, 0.02-0.06). Both PNQ sensory and motor scores were significantly correlated with the FACT/GOG-Ntx (r = 0.66 and 0.51, respectively). In the repeated measures analysis of variance model, PNQ grades increased considerably as treatment continued, indicating progressively worsening CIPN over time. CONCLUSIONS: The PNQ has an applicable degree of feasibility and validity, useful for the diagnosis of CIPN as well as for clinical treatment decision-making, where the development of CIPN is a potential treatment-limiting consideration. Physicians underreport and underestimate the severity of CIPN symptoms compared with patients, thereby supporting the importance of assessing patient-reported outcomes using the PNQ.
Authors: Jeff A Sloan; Lawrence Berk; Joseph Roscoe; Michael J Fisch; Edward G Shaw; Gwen Wyatt; Gary R Morrow; Amylou C Dueck Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2007-11-10 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: N K Aaronson; S Ahmedzai; B Bergman; M Bullinger; A Cull; N J Duez; A Filiberti; H Flechtner; S B Fleishman; J C de Haes Journal: J Natl Cancer Inst Date: 1993-03-03 Impact factor: 13.506
Authors: Jennifer Le-Rademacher; Rahul Kanwar; Drew Seisler; Deirdre R Pachman; Rui Qin; Alexej Abyzov; Kathryn J Ruddy; Michaela S Banck; Ellen M Lavoie Smith; Susan G Dorsey; Neil K Aaronson; Jeff Sloan; Charles L Loprinzi; Andreas S Beutler Journal: Support Care Cancer Date: 2017-06-20 Impact factor: 3.603
Authors: Jacobien M Kieffer; Tjeerd J Postma; Lonneke van de Poll-Franse; Floortje Mols; Jan J Heimans; Guido Cavaletti; Neil K Aaronson Journal: Qual Life Res Date: 2017-06-20 Impact factor: 4.147
Authors: Weidong Lu; Anita Giobbie-Hurder; Rachel A Freedman; Im Hee Shin; Nancy U Lin; Ann H Partridge; David S Rosenthal; Jennifer A Ligibel Journal: Oncologist Date: 2019-10-14
Authors: Grace A Kanzawa-Lee; Robert Knoerl; Clare Donohoe; Celia M Bridges; Ellen M Lavoie Smith Journal: Semin Oncol Nurs Date: 2019-04-30 Impact factor: 2.315
Authors: Delma Aurélia da Silva Simão; Antônio Lúcio Teixeira; Raissa Silva Souza; Elenice Dias Ribeiro de Paula Lima Journal: Support Care Cancer Date: 2014-05-09 Impact factor: 3.603
Authors: Gary R Zirpoli; Susan E McCann; Lara E Sucheston-Campbell; Dawn L Hershman; Gregory Ciupak; Warren Davis; Joseph M Unger; Halle C F Moore; James A Stewart; Claudine Isaacs; Timothy J Hobday; Muhammad Salim; Gabriel N Hortobagyi; Julie R Gralow; G Thomas Budd; Kathy S Albain; Christine B Ambrosone Journal: J Natl Cancer Inst Date: 2017-12-01 Impact factor: 13.506