Literature DB >> 22930243

Recommendations for including multiple symptoms as endpoints in cancer clinical trials: a report from the ASCPRO (Assessing the Symptoms of Cancer Using Patient-Reported Outcomes) Multisymptom Task Force.

Charles S Cleeland1, Jeff A Sloan, David Cella, Connie Chen, Amylou C Dueck, Nora A Janjan, Astra M Liepa, Rajiv Mallick, Ann O'Mara, Jay D Pearson, Yasuhiro Torigoe, Xin Shelley Wang, Loretta A Williams, Jeanie F Woodruff.   

Abstract

The multiple symptoms arising from cancer and its treatment impose significant distress for patients. However, in clinical research, there is no agreed-upon way of assessing and presenting the effects of treatment on multiple symptoms, as either individual scores or a composite score. The ASCPRO (Assessing the Symptoms of Cancer Using Patient-Reported Outcomes) Multisymptom Task Force was established to make recommendations about measuring multiple symptoms as outcomes in cancer clinical trials. The Multisymptom Task Force addressed how to choose the symptoms to be assessed and how multiple individual symptom scores or composite scores of several symptoms might be used as clinical trial outcomes. Consensus was reached on a definition of a multisymptom outcome, the problem of source attribution, and the need for a hypothesis-driven conceptual framework to measure multisymptom outcomes. Validated single-item and multi-item measures currently available or that can be easily generated for oncology use were deemed sufficient for measuring multiple symptoms. The relative value of a composite score versus a set of individual symptom scores was discussed, along with issues in developing and deploying such a composite measure. The results indicated that more research on combining scores of different symptoms is needed. Symptom data should be a required component of cancer clinical trials. Patient-reported symptoms provide a unique patient perspective on treatment benefit and risk that goes beyond clinician-reported adverse events. A representation of changes in multiple symptoms would clarify the impact of treatment and enhance the interpretation of cancer clinical trials for clinicians, patients, and those who make health care policy.
Copyright © 2012 American Cancer Society.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2012        PMID: 22930243     DOI: 10.1002/cncr.27744

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Cancer        ISSN: 0008-543X            Impact factor:   6.860


  28 in total

1.  Factors affecting symptom presentation in an early-phase clinical trials clinic patient population.

Authors:  Goldy C George; Tito R Mendoza; Eucharia C Iwuanyanwu; Meryna Manandhar; Solmaz F Afshar; Sarina A Piha-Paul; Apostolia Tsimberidou; Aung Naing; Charles S Cleeland; David S Hong
Journal:  Invest New Drugs       Date:  2019-11-25       Impact factor: 3.850

2.  The Complementary Nature of Patient-Reported Outcomes and Adverse Event Reporting in Cooperative Group Oncology Clinical Trials: A Pooled Analysis (NCCTG N0591).

Authors:  Pamela J Atherton; Deborah W Watkins-Bruner; Carolyn Gotay; Carol M Moinpour; Daniel V Satele; Kathryn A Winter; Paul L Schaefer; Benjamin Movsas; Jeff A Sloan
Journal:  J Pain Symptom Manage       Date:  2015-05-30       Impact factor: 3.612

3.  The symptom burden of treatment-naive patients with head and neck cancer.

Authors:  Ehab Y Hanna; Tito R Mendoza; David I Rosenthal; G Brandon Gunn; Pamela Sehra; Emre Yucel; Charles S Cleeland
Journal:  Cancer       Date:  2014-11-04       Impact factor: 6.860

4.  Nurse-Delivered Symptom Assessment for Individuals With Advanced Lung Cancer.

Authors:  Marie Flannery; Karen F Stein; David W Dougherty; Supriya Mohile; Joseph Guido; Nancy Wells
Journal:  Oncol Nurs Forum       Date:  2018-09-01       Impact factor: 2.172

5.  The symptom burden of cancer: Evidence for a core set of cancer-related and treatment-related symptoms from the Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group Symptom Outcomes and Practice Patterns study.

Authors:  Charles S Cleeland; Fengmin Zhao; Victor T Chang; Jeff A Sloan; Ann M O'Mara; Paul B Gilman; Matthias Weiss; Tito R Mendoza; Ju-Whei Lee; Michael J Fisch
Journal:  Cancer       Date:  2013-09-24       Impact factor: 6.860

Review 6.  Patient-reported outcomes as end points and outcome indicators in solid tumours.

Authors:  Angeles A Secord; Robert L Coleman; Laura J Havrilesky; Amy P Abernethy; Gregory P Samsa; David Cella
Journal:  Nat Rev Clin Oncol       Date:  2015-03-10       Impact factor: 66.675

7.  Measuring individual quality of life in patients receiving radiation therapy: the SEIQoL-Questionnaire.

Authors:  Gerhild Becker; Constanze S Merk; Cornelia Meffert; Felix Momm
Journal:  Qual Life Res       Date:  2014-03-01       Impact factor: 4.147

8.  Patient-Reported Outcomes Are Associated With Enhanced Recovery Status in Patients With Bladder Cancer Undergoing Radical Cystectomy.

Authors:  Janet Baack Kukreja; Qiuling Shi; Courtney M Chang; Mohamed A Seif; Brandon M Sterling; Ting-Yu Chen; Kelly M Creel; Ashish M Kamat; Colin P Dinney; Neema Navai; Jay B Shah; Xin Shelley Wang
Journal:  Surg Innov       Date:  2018-03-20       Impact factor: 2.058

9.  Measuring Therapy-Induced Peripheral Neuropathy: Preliminary Development and Validation of the Treatment-Induced Neuropathy Assessment Scale.

Authors:  Tito R Mendoza; Xin Shelley Wang; Loretta A Williams; Qiuling Shi; Elisabeth G Vichaya; Patrick M Dougherty; Sheeba K Thomas; Emre Yucel; Christel C Bastida; Jeanie F Woodruff; Charles S Cleeland
Journal:  J Pain       Date:  2015-07-22       Impact factor: 5.820

10.  Validating the M. D. Anderson Symptom Inventory (MDASI) for use in patients with ovarian cancer.

Authors:  Mary H Sailors; Diane C Bodurka; Ibrahima Gning; Lois M Ramondetta; Loretta A Williams; Tito R Mendoza; Sonika Agarwal; Charlotte C Sun; Charles S Cleeland
Journal:  Gynecol Oncol       Date:  2013-05-15       Impact factor: 5.482

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.