Literature DB >> 26714759

The Added Value of Analyzing Pooled Health-Related Quality of Life Data: A Review of the EORTC PROBE Initiative.

Efstathios Zikos1, Corneel Coens2, Chantal Quinten2, Divine E Ediebah2, Francesca Martinelli2, Irina Ghislain2, Madeleine T King2, Carolyn Gotay2, Jolie Ringash2, Galina Velikova2, Bryce B Reeve2, Eva Greimel2, Charles S Cleeland2, Henning Flechtner2, Martin J B Taphoorn2, Joachim Weis2, Joseph Schmucker-von Koch2, Mirjam A G Sprangers2, Andrew Bottomley2.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: The European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) Patient-Reported Outcomes and Behavioural Evidence (PROBE) initiative was established to investigate critical topics to better understand health-related quality of life (HRQOL) of cancer patients and to educate clinicians, policy makers, and healthcare providers.
METHODS: The aim of this paper is to review the major research outcomes of the pooled analysis of HRQOL data along with the clinical data. We identified 30 pooled EORTC randomized controlled trials (RCTs), 18 NCIC-Clinical Trials Group RCTs, and two German Ovarian Cancer Study Group RCTs, all using the EORTC QLQ-C30. All statistical tests were two-sided.
RESULTS: Evidence was found that HRQOL data can offer prognostic information beyond clinical measures and improve prognostic accuracy in cancer RCTs (by 5.9%-8.3%). Moreover, models that considered both patient- and clinician-reported scores gained more prognostic overall survival accuracy for fatigue (P < .001), vomiting (P = .01), nausea (P < .001), and constipation (P = .01). Greater understanding of the association between symptom and/or functioning scales was developed by identifying physical, psychological, and gastrointestinal clusters. Additionally, minimally important differences in interpreting HRQOL changes for improvement and deterioration were found to vary across different patient populations and disease stages. Finally, HRQOL scores are statistically significantly affected by deviations from the intended time point at which the questionnaire is completed.
CONCLUSIONS: The use of existing pooled data shows that it is possible to learn about general aspects of cancer HRQOL and methodology. Our work shows that setting up international pooled datasets holds great promise for understanding patients' unmet psychosocial needs and calls for additional empirical investigation to improve clinical care and understand cancer through retrospective HRQOL analyses.
© The Author 2015. Published by Oxford University Press. All rights reserved. For Permissions, please e-mail: journals.permissions@oup.com.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2015        PMID: 26714759     DOI: 10.1093/jnci/djv391

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Natl Cancer Inst        ISSN: 0027-8874            Impact factor:   13.506


  14 in total

1.  Determining clinically important differences in health-related quality of life in older patients with cancer undergoing chemotherapy or surgery.

Authors:  C Quinten; C Kenis; L Decoster; P R Debruyne; I De Groof; C Focan; F Cornelis; V Verschaeve; C Bachmann; D Bron; S Luce; G Debugne; H Van den Bulck; J C Goeminne; A Baitar; K Geboers; B Petit; C Langenaeken; R Van Rijswijk; P Specenier; G Jerusalem; J P Praet; K Vandenborre; M Lycke; J Flamaing; K Milisen; J P Lobelle; H Wildiers
Journal:  Qual Life Res       Date:  2018-12-03       Impact factor: 4.147

2.  The prognostic performance of adding patient-reported outcomes to the MASCC risk index to identify low-risk febrile neutropenia patients with solid tumors and lymphomas.

Authors:  Xiao Jun Wang; Denise Yun Ting Goh; Sreemanee Raaj Dorajoo; Alexandre Chan
Journal:  Support Care Cancer       Date:  2017-04-11       Impact factor: 3.603

3.  Patient-reported outcomes as predictors of survival in patients with bowel cancer: a systematic review.

Authors:  Claudia Rutherford; Rachel Campbell; Kate White; Madeleine King
Journal:  Qual Life Res       Date:  2019-07-30       Impact factor: 4.147

Review 4.  Systems Chronotherapeutics.

Authors:  Annabelle Ballesta; Pasquale F Innominato; Robert Dallmann; David A Rand; Francis A Lévi
Journal:  Pharmacol Rev       Date:  2017-04       Impact factor: 25.468

5.  General health-related quality of life scores from head and neck squamous cell carcinoma patients obtained throughout the first year following diagnosis predicted up to 10-year overall survival.

Authors:  Hans Jørgen Aarstad; Arild Andrè Østhus; Helene Hersvik Aarstad; Stein Lybak; Anne Kari Hersvik Aarstad
Journal:  Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol       Date:  2017-11-20       Impact factor: 2.503

6.  Quality of Life in Palliative Care.

Authors:  Mellar P Davis; David Hui
Journal:  Expert Rev Qual Life Cancer Care       Date:  2017-11-08

7.  Quality of life predicts overall survival in women with platinum-resistant ovarian cancer: an AURELIA substudy.

Authors:  F T Roncolato; E Gibbs; C K Lee; R Asher; L C Davies; V J Gebski; M Friedlander; F Hilpert; L Wenzel; M R Stockler; M King; E Pujade-Lauraine
Journal:  Ann Oncol       Date:  2017-08-01       Impact factor: 32.976

Review 8.  Fatigue in patients with low grade glioma: systematic evaluation of assessment and prevalence.

Authors:  Ellen M P van Coevorden-van Loon; Marijke B Coomans; Majanka H Heijenbrok-Kal; Gerard M Ribbers; Martin J van den Bent
Journal:  J Neurooncol       Date:  2017-05-24       Impact factor: 4.130

9.  Return to work of cancer patients after a multidisciplinary intervention including occupational counselling and physical exercise in cancer patients: a prospective study in the Netherlands.

Authors:  Monique C J Leensen; Iris F Groeneveld; Iris van der Heide; Tomas Rejda; Peter L J van Veldhoven; Sietske van Berkel; Aernout Snoek; Wim van Harten; Monique H W Frings-Dresen; Angela G E M de Boer
Journal:  BMJ Open       Date:  2017-06-15       Impact factor: 2.692

10.  Evaluating methodological quality of Prognostic models Including Patient-reported HeAlth outcomes iN oncologY (EPIPHANY): a systematic review protocol.

Authors:  Nina Deliu; Francesco Cottone; Gary S Collins; Amélie Anota; Fabio Efficace
Journal:  BMJ Open       Date:  2018-10-24       Impact factor: 2.692

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.