BACKGROUND: Head and neck cancer (HNC) and its treatment can affect communication, nutrition, and physical appearance, and the global impact of this disease on patients' quality of life may be substantial. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this systematic literature review was to describe the impact of HNC and its treatment on the physical, emotional, and social well-being of patients over time, by examining longitudinal studies of patient-reported outcomes (PRO) evaluating these domains. METHODS: Databases (MEDLINE and Embase) were searched to identify studies published in English between January 2004 and January 2014 analyzing the humanistic aspects of HNC in adult patients. Additional relevant publications were identified through manual searches of abstracts from recent conference proceedings. RESULTS: Of 1,566 studies initially identified, 130 met the inclusion criteria and were evaluated in the assessment. Investigations using a variety of PRO instruments in heterogeneous patient populations consistently reported that PRO scores decrease significantly from diagnosis through the treatment period, but generally recover to baseline in the first year post-treatment. This trend was observed for many functional domains, although some side effects, such as xerostomia, persisted well beyond 1 year. In addition, considerable evidence exists that baseline PRO scores can predict clinical endpoints such as overall and progression-free survival. CONCLUSIONS: Many aspects of HNC, both disease and treatment specific, profoundly affect patients' quality of life. Improved knowledge of these effects on PRO may allow for more informed treatment decisions and can help physicians to better prepare patients for changes they may experience during therapy. Furthermore, the predictive value of baseline PRO data may enable healthcare providers to identify at-risk patients in need of more intensive intervention.
BACKGROUND: Head and neck cancer (HNC) and its treatment can affect communication, nutrition, and physical appearance, and the global impact of this disease on patients' quality of life may be substantial. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this systematic literature review was to describe the impact of HNC and its treatment on the physical, emotional, and social well-being of patients over time, by examining longitudinal studies of patient-reported outcomes (PRO) evaluating these domains. METHODS: Databases (MEDLINE and Embase) were searched to identify studies published in English between January 2004 and January 2014 analyzing the humanistic aspects of HNC in adult patients. Additional relevant publications were identified through manual searches of abstracts from recent conference proceedings. RESULTS: Of 1,566 studies initially identified, 130 met the inclusion criteria and were evaluated in the assessment. Investigations using a variety of PRO instruments in heterogeneous patient populations consistently reported that PRO scores decrease significantly from diagnosis through the treatment period, but generally recover to baseline in the first year post-treatment. This trend was observed for many functional domains, although some side effects, such as xerostomia, persisted well beyond 1 year. In addition, considerable evidence exists that baseline PRO scores can predict clinical endpoints such as overall and progression-free survival. CONCLUSIONS: Many aspects of HNC, both disease and treatment specific, profoundly affect patients' quality of life. Improved knowledge of these effects on PRO may allow for more informed treatment decisions and can help physicians to better prepare patients for changes they may experience during therapy. Furthermore, the predictive value of baseline PRO data may enable healthcare providers to identify at-risk patients in need of more intensive intervention.
Authors: Andrew Bottomley; Gloria Tridello; Corneel Coens; Frederic Rolland; Margot E T Tesselaar; C Rene Leemans; Pierre Hupperets; Lisa Licitra; Jan B Vermorken; Danielle Van Den Weyngaert; Gilles Truc; Isabelle Barillot; Jean-Louis Lefebvre Journal: Cancer Date: 2013-10-25 Impact factor: 6.860
Authors: Abrahim Al-Mamgani; Peter C Levendag; Peter van Rooij; Cees A Meeuwis; Aniel Sewnaik; David N Teguh Journal: Head Neck Date: 2013-03-09 Impact factor: 3.147
Authors: Edward B Rubenstein; Douglas E Peterson; Mark Schubert; Dorothy Keefe; Deborah McGuire; Joel Epstein; Linda S Elting; Philip C Fox; Catherine Cooksley; Stephen T Sonis Journal: Cancer Date: 2004-05-01 Impact factor: 6.860
Authors: Simon N Rogers; John Devine; Derek Lowe; Parminder Shokar; James S Brown; E David Vaugman Journal: Head Neck Date: 2004-01 Impact factor: 3.147
Authors: Carrie A Karvonen-Gutierrez; David L Ronis; Karen E Fowler; Jeffrey E Terrell; Stephen B Gruber; Sonia A Duffy Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2008-06-01 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: Annemieke H Ackerstaff; Alfons J M Balm; Coen R N Rasch; Jan Paul de Boer; Ruud Wiggenraad; Derk H F Rietveld; R Theo Gregor; Robert Kröger; Frans J M Hilgers Journal: Head Neck Date: 2009-01 Impact factor: 3.147
Authors: Lauren J Breen; Moira O'Connor; Samuel Calder; Vivian Tai; Jade Cartwright; Janet M Beilby Journal: Support Care Cancer Date: 2017-03-03 Impact factor: 3.603
Authors: Valentina Bressan; Annamaria Bagnasco; Giuseppe Aleo; Gianluca Catania; Milko P Zanini; Fiona Timmins; Loredana Sasso Journal: Support Care Cancer Date: 2017-02-15 Impact factor: 3.603