OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to test the reliability, psychometric, and clinical validity of the use of the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy--Brain (FACT-Br) in patients with brain metastases. METHODS: Patients with brain metastases were interviewed using the FACT-Br (including the FACT-general) 1 week prior to treatment. All patients completed a follow-up assessment 1 month post-treatment. Patients with a good performance status and receiving stereotactic radiosurgery completed an additional 1 week follow-up assessment after the initial baseline interview to assess test-retest reliability. RESULTS: Forty patients had complete 1 month follow-up data. Ten of these patients also completed the 1 week follow-up assessment from baseline. The median Karnofsky performance status of patients was 80 and the median age was 64 years. All subscales of the FACT-Br were found to be conceptually related (except for two correlations) using the following subscales: physical well-being (PWB), social/family well-being (SWB), emotional well-being (EWB), functional well-being (FWB), FACT-G total score, brain cancer subscale (BrC), and the FACT-Br total score. All FACT-Br scores demonstrated excellent reliability, except for the SWB scale which revealed good reliability. The FACT-Br scores showed no significant change in the quality of life (QoL) of patients from baseline to 1 month follow-up. CONCLUSION: The use of the combined FACT-G and FACT-Br Subscale to assess QoL specifically in patients with brain metastases has successfully undergone psychometric validation. Future clinical trials should use the FACT-G and FACT-Br Subscale to assess QoL in this patient population.
OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to test the reliability, psychometric, and clinical validity of the use of the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy--Brain (FACT-Br) in patients with brain metastases. METHODS:Patients with brain metastases were interviewed using the FACT-Br (including the FACT-general) 1 week prior to treatment. All patients completed a follow-up assessment 1 month post-treatment. Patients with a good performance status and receiving stereotactic radiosurgery completed an additional 1 week follow-up assessment after the initial baseline interview to assess test-retest reliability. RESULTS: Forty patients had complete 1 month follow-up data. Ten of these patients also completed the 1 week follow-up assessment from baseline. The median Karnofsky performance status of patients was 80 and the median age was 64 years. All subscales of the FACT-Br were found to be conceptually related (except for two correlations) using the following subscales: physical well-being (PWB), social/family well-being (SWB), emotional well-being (EWB), functional well-being (FWB), FACT-G total score, brain cancer subscale (BrC), and the FACT-Br total score. All FACT-Br scores demonstrated excellent reliability, except for the SWB scale which revealed good reliability. The FACT-Br scores showed no significant change in the quality of life (QoL) of patients from baseline to 1 month follow-up. CONCLUSION: The use of the combined FACT-G and FACT-Br Subscale to assess QoL specifically in patients with brain metastases has successfully undergone psychometric validation. Future clinical trials should use the FACT-G and FACT-Br Subscale to assess QoL in this patient population.
Authors: A Bezjak; J Adam; R Barton; T Panzarella; N Laperriere; C S Wong; W Mason; C Buckley; W Levin; M McLean; J S Y Wu; M Sia; P Kirkbride Journal: Eur J Cancer Date: 2002-03 Impact factor: 9.162
Authors: Megan Doyle; Nicole Marie Eve Bradley; Kathy Li; Emily Sinclair; Kelvin Lam; Grace Chan; Edward Chow; Elizabeth A Barnes; Cyril Danjoux; May N Tsao Journal: J Palliat Med Date: 2007-04 Impact factor: 2.947
Authors: S Nicole Culos-Reed; Heather J Leach; Lauren C Capozzi; Jacob Easaw; Neil Eves; Guillaume Y Millet Journal: Support Care Cancer Date: 2016-12-17 Impact factor: 3.603
Authors: Janneke van Roij; Heidi Fransen; Lonneke van de Poll-Franse; Myrte Zijlstra; Natasja Raijmakers Journal: Qual Life Res Date: 2018-02-10 Impact factor: 4.147
Authors: Glenn Bauman; Slav Yartsev; David Roberge; Robert MacRae; Wilson Roa; Valerie Panet-Raymond; Laura Masucci; Brian Yaremko; David D'Souza; David Palma; Tracy Sexton; Edward Yu; Jason R Pantarotto; Belal Ahmad; Barbara Fisher; A Rashid Dar; Carole Lambert; Gregory Pond; Larry Stitt; Keng Yeow Tay; George Rodrigues Journal: J Neurooncol Date: 2016-04-15 Impact factor: 4.130
Authors: Justine V Cohen; Hussain Tawbi; Kim A Margolin; Ravi Amravadi; Marcus Bosenberg; Priscilla K Brastianos; Veronica L Chiang; John de Groot; Isabella C Glitza; Meenhard Herlyn; Sheri L Holmen; Lucia B Jilaveanu; Andrew Lassman; Stergios Moschos; Michael A Postow; Reena Thomas; John A Tsiouris; Patrick Wen; Richard M White; Timothy Turnham; Michael A Davies; Harriet M Kluger Journal: Pigment Cell Melanoma Res Date: 2016-10-22 Impact factor: 4.693
Authors: Terri S Armstrong; Marcia Y Shade; Ghislain Breton; Mark R Gilbert; Anita Mahajan; Michael E Scheurer; Elizabeth Vera; Ann M Berger Journal: Neuro Oncol Date: 2017-03-01 Impact factor: 12.300
Authors: Nadia N Laack; Stephanie L Pugh; Paul D Brown; Sherry Fox; Jeffrey S Wefel; Christina Meyers; Ali Choucair; Deepak Khuntia; John H Suh; David Roberge; Merideth M Wendland; Deborah Bruner Journal: Neurooncol Pract Date: 2018-12-03