Fabio Efficace1, Peter Fayers2, Andrea Pusic3, Yeliz Cemal3, Jane Yanagawa4, Marc Jacobs5, Andrea la Sala6, Valentina Cafaro1, Katie Whale7, Jonathan Rees7, Jane Blazeby7. 1. Data Center and Health Outcomes Research Unit, Italian Group for Adult Hematologic Diseases, Rome, Italy. 2. Institute of Applied Health Sciences, University of Aberdeen, Aberdeen, United Kingdom. 3. Department of Surgery, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, New York. 4. Department of Surgery, David Geffen School of Medicine, University of California Los Angeles, Los Angeles, California. 5. Department of Medical Psychology, Academic Medical Center/University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands. 6. Laboratory of Molecular and Cellular Immunology, Scientific Hospitalization and Care Institution San Raffaele Pisana, Rome, Italy. 7. Bristol Centre for Surgical Research, School of Social and Community Medicine, University of Bristol, Bristol, United Kingdom.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The main objectives of this study were to identify the number of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) including a patient-reported outcome (PRO) endpoint across a wide range of cancer specialties and to evaluate the completeness of PRO reporting according to the Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials (CONSORT) PRO extension. METHODS: RCTs with a PRO endpoint that had been performed across several cancer specialties and published between 2004 and 2013 were considered. Studies were evaluated on the basis of previously defined criteria, including the CONSORT PRO extension and the Cochrane Collaboration's tool for assessing the risk of bias of RCTs. Analyses were also conducted by the type of PRO endpoint (primary vs secondary) and by the cancer disease site. RESULTS: A total of 56,696 potentially eligible records were scrutinized, and 557 RCTs with a PRO evaluation, enrolling 254,677 patients overall, were identified. PROs were most frequently used in RCTs of breast (n = 123), lung (n = 85), and colorectal cancer (n = 66). Overall, PROs were secondary endpoints in 421 RCTs (76%). Four of 6 evaluated CONSORT PRO items were documented in less than 50% of the RCTs. The level of reporting was higher in RCTs with a PRO as a primary endpoint. The presence of a supplementary report was the only statistically significant factor associated with greater completeness of reporting for both RCTs with PROs as primary endpoints (β = .19, P = .001) and RCTs with PROs as secondary endpoints (β = .30, P < .001). CONCLUSIONS: Implementation of the CONSORT PRO extension is equally important across all cancer specialties. Its use can also contribute to revealing the robust PRO design of some studies, which might be obscured by poor outcome reporting.
BACKGROUND: The main objectives of this study were to identify the number of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) including a patient-reported outcome (PRO) endpoint across a wide range of cancer specialties and to evaluate the completeness of PRO reporting according to the Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials (CONSORT) PRO extension. METHODS: RCTs with a PRO endpoint that had been performed across several cancer specialties and published between 2004 and 2013 were considered. Studies were evaluated on the basis of previously defined criteria, including the CONSORT PRO extension and the Cochrane Collaboration's tool for assessing the risk of bias of RCTs. Analyses were also conducted by the type of PRO endpoint (primary vs secondary) and by the cancer disease site. RESULTS: A total of 56,696 potentially eligible records were scrutinized, and 557 RCTs with a PRO evaluation, enrolling 254,677 patients overall, were identified. PROs were most frequently used in RCTs of breast (n = 123), lung (n = 85), and colorectal cancer (n = 66). Overall, PROs were secondary endpoints in 421 RCTs (76%). Four of 6 evaluated CONSORT PRO items were documented in less than 50% of the RCTs. The level of reporting was higher in RCTs with a PRO as a primary endpoint. The presence of a supplementary report was the only statistically significant factor associated with greater completeness of reporting for both RCTs with PROs as primary endpoints (β = .19, P = .001) and RCTs with PROs as secondary endpoints (β = .30, P < .001). CONCLUSIONS: Implementation of the CONSORT PRO extension is equally important across all cancer specialties. Its use can also contribute to revealing the robust PRO design of some studies, which might be obscured by poor outcome reporting.
Authors: C Begg; M Cho; S Eastwood; R Horton; D Moher; I Olkin; R Pitkin; D Rennie; K F Schulz; D Simel; D F Stroup Journal: JAMA Date: 1996-08-28 Impact factor: 56.272
Authors: Melanie Calvert; Jane Blazeby; Douglas G Altman; Dennis A Revicki; David Moher; Michael D Brundage Journal: JAMA Date: 2013-02-27 Impact factor: 56.272
Authors: Hugo E R Ford; Andrea Marshall; John A Bridgewater; Tobias Janowitz; Fareeda Y Coxon; Jonathan Wadsley; Wasat Mansoor; David Fyfe; Srinivasan Madhusudan; Gary W Middleton; Daniel Swinson; Stephen Falk; Ian Chau; David Cunningham; Paula Kareclas; Natalie Cook; Jane M Blazeby; Janet A Dunn Journal: Lancet Oncol Date: 2013-12-10 Impact factor: 41.316
Authors: Efstathios Zikos; Irina Ghislain; Corneel Coens; Divine E Ediebah; Elizabeth Sloan; Chantal Quinten; Michael Koller; Jan P van Meerbeeck; Hans-Henning Flechtner; Roger Stupp; Athanasios Pallis; Agnes Czimbalmos; Mirjam A G Sprangers; Andrew Bottomley Journal: Lancet Oncol Date: 2014-02 Impact factor: 41.316
Authors: Susan J Dutton; David R Ferry; Jane M Blazeby; Haider Abbas; Asa Dahle-Smith; Wasat Mansoor; Joyce Thompson; Mark Harrison; Anirban Chatterjee; Stephen Falk; Angel Garcia-Alonso; David W Fyfe; Richard A Hubner; Tina Gamble; Lynnda Peachey; Mina Davoudianfar; Sarah R Pearson; Patrick Julier; Janusz Jankowski; Rachel Kerr; Russell D Petty Journal: Lancet Oncol Date: 2014-06-17 Impact factor: 41.316
Authors: Derek Kyte; Helen Duffy; Benjamin Fletcher; Adrian Gheorghe; Rebecca Mercieca-Bebber; Madeleine King; Heather Draper; Jonathan Ives; Michael Brundage; Jane Blazeby; Melanie Calvert Journal: PLoS One Date: 2014-10-15 Impact factor: 3.240
Authors: Fabio Efficace; Michael Feuerstein; Peter Fayers; Valentina Cafaro; James Eastham; Andrea Pusic; Jane Blazeby Journal: Eur Urol Date: 2013-10-30 Impact factor: 20.096
Authors: Linda Dirven; Martin J B Taphoorn; Jaap C Reijneveld; Jane Blazeby; Marc Jacobs; Andrea Pusic; Edoardo La Sala; Roger Stupp; Peter Fayers; Fabio Efficace Journal: Eur J Cancer Date: 2014-07-14 Impact factor: 9.162
Authors: Fabio Efficace; Marc Jacobs; Andrea Pusic; Elfriede Greimel; Alfonso Piciocchi; Jacobien M Kieffer; Alexandra Gilbert; Peter Fayers; Jane Blazeby Journal: Eur J Cancer Date: 2014-05-10 Impact factor: 9.162
Authors: Rebecca Mercieca-Bebber; Julie Rouette; Melanie Calvert; Madeleine T King; Lori McLeod; Patricia Holch; Michael J Palmer; Michael Brundage Journal: Qual Life Res Date: 2017-02-07 Impact factor: 4.147
Authors: E Charton; B Cuer; F Cottone; F Efficace; C Touraine; Z Hamidou; F Fiteni; F Bonnetain; M-C Woronoff-Lemsi; C Bascoul-Mollevi; A Anota Journal: Qual Life Res Date: 2019-11-27 Impact factor: 4.147
Authors: Brian D Gonzalez; Sarah L Eisel; Kristina E Bowles; Aasha I Hoogland; Brian W James; Brent J Small; Susan Sharpe; Kelly A Hyland; Hailey W Bulls; Shannon M Christy; Jori Mansfield; Ashley M Nelson; Raviteja Alla; Kelly Maharaj; Brittany Kennedy; Elizabeth Lafranchise; Noelle L Williams; Sarah Jennewein; Laura B Oswald; Michael A Postow; Adam P Dicker; Heather S L Jim Journal: J Natl Cancer Inst Date: 2022-06-13 Impact factor: 11.816
Authors: Louis Garnier; Emilie Charton; Antoine Falcoz; Sophie Paget-Bailly; Dewi Vernerey; Marine Jary; François Ducray; Elsa Curtit Journal: Neurooncol Pract Date: 2020-11-11
Authors: Melanie Calvert; Madeleine King; Rebecca Mercieca-Bebber; Olalekan Aiyegbusi; Derek Kyte; Anita Slade; An-Wen Chan; E Basch; Jill Bell; Antonia Bennett; Vishal Bhatnagar; Jane Blazeby; Andrew Bottomley; Julia Brown; Michael Brundage; Lisa Campbell; Joseph C Cappelleri; Heather Draper; Amylou C Dueck; Carolyn Ells; Lori Frank; Robert M Golub; Ingolf Griebsch; Kirstie Haywood; Amanda Hunn; Bellinda King-Kallimanis; Laura Martin; Sandra Mitchell; Thomas Morel; Linda Nelson; Josephine Norquist; Daniel O'Connor; Michael Palmer; Donald Patrick; Gary Price; Antoine Regnault; Ameeta Retzer; Dennis Revicki; Jane Scott; Richard Stephens; Grace Turner; Antonia Valakas; Galina Velikova; Maria von Hildebrand; Anita Walker; Lari Wenzel Journal: BMJ Open Date: 2021-06-30 Impact factor: 2.692
Authors: Rebecca Mercieca-Bebber; Michael J Palmer; Michael Brundage; Melanie Calvert; Martin R Stockler; Madeleine T King Journal: BMJ Open Date: 2016-06-15 Impact factor: 2.692