Antonia V Bennett1,2, Bryce B Reeve3,4, Ethan M Basch5,4, Sandra A Mitchell6, Mathew Meeneghan5,4, Claudio L Battaglini7,4, Abbie E Smith-Ryan7, Brett Phillips4, Thomas C Shea5,4, William A Wood5,4. 1. Department of Health Policy and Management, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Campus Box 7411, Chapel Hill, NC, 27599, USA. avbenn@unc.edu. 2. Lineberger Comprehensive Cancer Center, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Campus Box 7295, Chapel Hill, NC, 27599, USA. avbenn@unc.edu. 3. Department of Health Policy and Management, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Campus Box 7411, Chapel Hill, NC, 27599, USA. 4. Lineberger Comprehensive Cancer Center, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Campus Box 7295, Chapel Hill, NC, 27599, USA. 5. Department of Medicine, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Campus Box 7305, Chapel Hill, NC, 27599, USA. 6. Division of Cancer Control and Population Sciences, Outcomes Research Branch, National Cancer Institute, 9609 Medical Center Drive, East Tower, Room 3-448, Rockville, MD, 20850, USA. 7. Department of Exercise and Sports Science, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Campus Box 8700, Chapel Hill, NC, 27599, USA.
Abstract
AIMS: We evaluated pedometry as a novel patient-centered outcome because it enables passive continuous assessment of activity and may provide information about the consequences of symptomatic toxicity complementary to self-report. METHODS: Adult patients undergoing hematopoietic cell transplant (HCT) wore pedometers and completed PRO assessments during transplant hospitalization (4 weeks) and 4 weeks post-discharge. Patient reports of symptomatic treatment toxicities (single items from PRO-CTCAE, http://healthcaredelivery.cancer.gov/pro-ctcae ) and symptoms, physical health, mental health, and quality of life (PROMIS(®) Global-10, http://nih.promis.org ), assessed weekly with 7-day recall on Likert scales, were compared individually with pedometry data, summarized as average daily steps per week, using linear mixed models. RESULTS: Thirty-two patients [mean age 55 (SD = 14), 63 % male, 84 % white, 56 % autologous, 43 % allogeneic] completed a mean 4.6 (SD = 1.5, range 1-8) evaluable assessments. Regression model coefficients (β) indicated within-person decrements in average daily steps were associated with increases in pain (β = -852; 852 fewer steps per unit increase in pain score, p < 0.001), fatigue (β = -886, p < 0.001), vomiting (β = -518, p < 0.01), shaking/chills (β = -587, p < 0.01), diarrhea (β = -719, p < 0.001), shortness of breath (β = -1018, p < 0.05), reduction in carrying out social activities (β = 705, p < 0.01) or physical activities (β = 618, p < 0.01), and global physical health (β = 101, p < 0.001), but not global mental health or quality of life. CONCLUSIONS: In this small sample of HCT recipients, more severe symptoms, impaired physical health, and restrictions in the performance of usual daily activities were associated with statistically significant decrements in objectively measured daily steps. Pedometry may be a valuable outcome measure and validation anchor in clinical research.
AIMS: We evaluated pedometry as a novel patient-centered outcome because it enables passive continuous assessment of activity and may provide information about the consequences of symptomatic toxicity complementary to self-report. METHODS: Adult patients undergoing hematopoietic cell transplant (HCT) wore pedometers and completed PRO assessments during transplant hospitalization (4 weeks) and 4 weeks post-discharge. Patient reports of symptomatic treatment toxicities (single items from PRO-CTCAE, http://healthcaredelivery.cancer.gov/pro-ctcae ) and symptoms, physical health, mental health, and quality of life (PROMIS(®) Global-10, http://nih.promis.org ), assessed weekly with 7-day recall on Likert scales, were compared individually with pedometry data, summarized as average daily steps per week, using linear mixed models. RESULTS: Thirty-two patients [mean age 55 (SD = 14), 63 % male, 84 % white, 56 % autologous, 43 % allogeneic] completed a mean 4.6 (SD = 1.5, range 1-8) evaluable assessments. Regression model coefficients (β) indicated within-person decrements in average daily steps were associated with increases in pain (β = -852; 852 fewer steps per unit increase in pain score, p < 0.001), fatigue (β = -886, p < 0.001), vomiting (β = -518, p < 0.01), shaking/chills (β = -587, p < 0.01), diarrhea (β = -719, p < 0.001), shortness of breath (β = -1018, p < 0.05), reduction in carrying out social activities (β = 705, p < 0.01) or physical activities (β = 618, p < 0.01), and global physical health (β = 101, p < 0.001), but not global mental health or quality of life. CONCLUSIONS: In this small sample of HCT recipients, more severe symptoms, impaired physical health, and restrictions in the performance of usual daily activities were associated with statistically significant decrements in objectively measured daily steps. Pedometry may be a valuable outcome measure and validation anchor in clinical research.
Authors: Neil Aaronson; Jordi Alonso; Audrey Burnam; Kathleen N Lohr; Donald L Patrick; Edward Perrin; Ruth E Stein Journal: Qual Life Res Date: 2002-05 Impact factor: 4.147
Authors: Eduardo Ferriolli; Richard J E Skipworth; Paul Hendry; Angela Scott; Jacob Stensteth; Max Dahele; Lucy Wall; Carolyn Greig; Marie Fallon; Florian Strasser; Tom Preston; Kenneth C H Fearon Journal: J Pain Symptom Manage Date: 2012-01-24 Impact factor: 3.612
Authors: Lee W Jones; Whitney E Hornsby; Amy Goetzinger; Lindsay M Forbes; Emily L Sherrard; Morten Quist; Amy T Lane; Miranda West; Neil D Eves; Margaret Gradison; April Coan; James E Herndon; Amy P Abernethy Journal: Lung Cancer Date: 2011-11-22 Impact factor: 5.705
Authors: Claire F Snyder; Neil K Aaronson; Ali K Choucair; Thomas E Elliott; Joanne Greenhalgh; Michele Y Halyard; Rachel Hess; Deborah M Miller; Bryce B Reeve; Maria Santana Journal: Qual Life Res Date: 2011-11-03 Impact factor: 4.147
Authors: J Bernhard; D F Cella; A S Coates; L Fallowfield; P A Ganz; C M Moinpour; P Mosconi; D Osoba; J Simes; C Hürny Journal: Stat Med Date: 1998 Mar 15-Apr 15 Impact factor: 2.373
Authors: Jennifer L Hay; Thomas M Atkinson; Bryce B Reeve; Sandra A Mitchell; Tito R Mendoza; Gordon Willis; Lori M Minasian; Steven B Clauser; Andrea Denicoff; Ann O'Mara; Alice Chen; Antonia V Bennett; Diane B Paul; Joshua Gagne; Lauren Rogak; Laura Sit; Vish Viswanath; Deborah Schrag; Ethan Basch Journal: Qual Life Res Date: 2013-07-20 Impact factor: 4.147
Authors: Michael Brundage; Jane Blazeby; Dennis Revicki; Brenda Bass; Henrica de Vet; Helen Duffy; Fabio Efficace; Madeleine King; Cindy L K Lam; David Moher; Jane Scott; Jeff Sloan; Claire Snyder; Susan Yount; Melanie Calvert Journal: Qual Life Res Date: 2012-09-18 Impact factor: 4.147
Authors: Moira A Visovatti; Mi Sook Jung; Heidi Mason; Mary Beth DeRubeis; Francis P Worden; Debra L Barton Journal: Cancer Nurs Date: 2022-01-12 Impact factor: 2.760
Authors: Bronwen E Shaw; Karen L Syrjala; Lynn E Onstad; Eric J Chow; Mary E Flowers; Heather Jim; K Scott Baker; Sarah Buckley; Diane L Fairclough; Mary M Horowitz; Stephanie J Lee Journal: Cancer Date: 2017-10-26 Impact factor: 6.860
Authors: Laleh G Melstrom; Andrei S Rodin; Lorenzo A Rossi; Paul Fu; Yuman Fong; Virginia Sun Journal: J Surg Oncol Date: 2020-09-24 Impact factor: 3.454