Ingrid de Kock1, Mehrnoush Mirhosseini2, Francis Lau3, Vincent Thai4, Michael Downing5, Hue Quan6, Mary Lesperance7, Ju Yang3. 1. Division of Palliative Care Medicine, Department of Oncology, University of Alberta, Edmonton Zone Palliative Care Program, Grey Nuns Community Hospital, Edmonton, Alberta, Canada. School of Health Information Science, University of Victoria, Victoria, British Columbia, Canada. 2. Division of Palliative Care Medicine, Department of Oncology, University of Alberta, Alberta, Canada T6L 0A3. 3. School of Health Information Science, University of Victoria, Victoria, British Columbia, Canada. 4. Division of Palliative Care Medicine, Department of Oncology, University of Alberta, Palliative Care Services, University of Alberta Hospital, Edmonton, Alberta, Canada. 5. Division of Palliative Care, University of Victoria, Victoria, British Columbia, Canada. 6. Edmonton Zone Palliative Care Program, Grey Nuns Community Hospital, Edmonton, Alberta, Canada. 7. Department of Mathematics and Statistics, University of Victoria, Victoria, British Columbia, Canada.
Abstract
AIM: The aim of our study was to assess whether the Karnofsky Performance Status (KPS), the Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) Performance Status, and the Palliative Performance Scale (PPS) are interchangeable individually or within two prognostic tools: the Palliative Prognostic Score (PaP) and the Palliative Prognostic Index (PPI). METHODS: We performed a subset analysis of a prospective comparative study of functional and prognostic tools and clinician prediction of survival. We studied 955 patients with advanced life-limiting illnesses (cancer and noncancer) in the acute care and community settings. We used a descriptive statistical model and Spearman's rank correlation to assess these interchangeabilities. RESULTS: There is a direct positive linear relationship between the KPS and the PPS, and a direct negative linear relationship between these tools and the ECOG. Exchange of the KPS and the PPS was possible within the PaP and the PPI. CONCLUSION: The PPS and the KPS can be used interchangeably as functional tools and within prognostic tools. The ECOG is interchangeable with the PPS and the KPS, but this interchangeability is population-specific.
AIM: The aim of our study was to assess whether the Karnofsky Performance Status (KPS), the Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) Performance Status, and the Palliative Performance Scale (PPS) are interchangeable individually or within two prognostic tools: the Palliative Prognostic Score (PaP) and the Palliative Prognostic Index (PPI). METHODS: We performed a subset analysis of a prospective comparative study of functional and prognostic tools and clinician prediction of survival. We studied 955 patients with advanced life-limiting illnesses (cancer and noncancer) in the acute care and community settings. We used a descriptive statistical model and Spearman's rank correlation to assess these interchangeabilities. RESULTS: There is a direct positive linear relationship between the KPS and the PPS, and a direct negative linear relationship between these tools and the ECOG. Exchange of the KPS and the PPS was possible within the PaP and the PPI. CONCLUSION: The PPS and the KPS can be used interchangeably as functional tools and within prognostic tools. The ECOG is interchangeable with the PPS and the KPS, but this interchangeability is population-specific.
Authors: Ilya Laufer; Simon S Lo; Eric L Chang; Jason Sheehan; Matthias Guckenberger; Moon-Jun Sohn; Samuel Ryu; Matthew Foote; Alexander Muacevic; Scott G Soltys; Samuel Chao; Sten Myrehaug; Peter C Gerszten; Eric Lis; Pejman Maralani; Mark Bilsky; Charles Fisher; Laurence Rhines; Jorrit-Jan Verlaan; David Schiff; Michael G Fehlings; Lijun Ma; Susan Chang; Wendy R Parulekar; Michael A Vogelbaum; Arjun Sahgal Journal: Neuro Oncol Date: 2018-08-02 Impact factor: 12.300
Authors: Adam Meier; Adam Yopp; Huram Mok; Pragathi Kandunoori; Jasmin Tiro; Amit G Singal Journal: Qual Life Res Date: 2014-12-13 Impact factor: 4.147
Authors: Anna L Gravier; Omar Shamieh; Carlos Eduardo Paiva; Pedro Emilio Perez-Cruz; Mary Ann Muckaden; Minjeong Park; Eduardo Bruera; David Hui Journal: Support Care Cancer Date: 2019-12-19 Impact factor: 3.603