M E Hamaker1, K J Schulkes2, D Ten Bokkel Huinink3, B C van Munster4,5, L H van Huis3, F van den Bos6. 1. Department of Geriatric Medicine, Diakonessenhuis Utrecht/Zeist/Doorn, Professor Lorentzlaan 76, 3707 HL, Zeist, The Netherlands. mhamaker@diakhuis.nl. 2. Department of Geriatric Medicine, Diakonessenhuis Utrecht, Utrecht, The Netherlands. 3. Department of Oncology, Diakonessenhuis, Utrecht, Utrecht, The Netherlands. 4. Department of Geriatric Medicine, Gelre Hospitals, Apeldoorn, The Netherlands. 5. Department of Medicine, University Medical Center Groningen, Groningen, The Netherlands. 6. Department of Internal Medicine, Haga Hospital, The Hague, The Netherlands.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Quality of life (QoL) should be included in trials where treatment is expected to have a limited impact on long-term survival. We set out to determine whether phase III chemotherapy trials addressing solid malignancies with a poor prognosis include QoL as a study objective and to assess the extent to which these data have been published. METHODS: We performed a search of the National Institutes of Health clinical trial registry website to identify phase III chemotherapy trials for poor prognosis solid malignancies. The retrieved protocols were subsequently reviewed, to assess whether QoL was included as an outcome measure. Subsequently, a Medline, Embase and world-wide-web search was performed to identify any full text publication or conference abstract regarding the outcome of trials including QoL, which were then reviewed to determine whether and to what extend quality of life results were included. RESULTS: For the 201 included studies, we found that 57 % of trials did not include QoL as a study objective. Of the remaining trials, 50 % have not reported the QoL results in a full text publication, or presented these only as a single sentence statement. CONCLUSION: Evaluation and publication of QoL results of phase III chemotherapy trials for poor prognosis solid malignancies remains limited. This must be improved in order to provide patients suffering from these malignancies with adequate information regarding the benefits and risks of the treatment in terms of both prolongation and quality of life.
BACKGROUND: Quality of life (QoL) should be included in trials where treatment is expected to have a limited impact on long-term survival. We set out to determine whether phase III chemotherapy trials addressing solid malignancies with a poor prognosis include QoL as a study objective and to assess the extent to which these data have been published. METHODS: We performed a search of the National Institutes of Health clinical trial registry website to identify phase III chemotherapy trials for poor prognosis solid malignancies. The retrieved protocols were subsequently reviewed, to assess whether QoL was included as an outcome measure. Subsequently, a Medline, Embase and world-wide-web search was performed to identify any full text publication or conference abstract regarding the outcome of trials including QoL, which were then reviewed to determine whether and to what extend quality of life results were included. RESULTS: For the 201 included studies, we found that 57 % of trials did not include QoL as a study objective. Of the remaining trials, 50 % have not reported the QoL results in a full text publication, or presented these only as a single sentence statement. CONCLUSION: Evaluation and publication of QoL results of phase III chemotherapy trials for poor prognosis solid malignancies remains limited. This must be improved in order to provide patients suffering from these malignancies with adequate information regarding the benefits and risks of the treatment in terms of both prolongation and quality of life.
Entities:
Keywords:
Malignancies; Poor prognosis; Quality of life assessment
Authors: Michael Brundage; Brenda Bass; Judith Davidson; John Queenan; Andrea Bezjak; Jolie Ringash; Anna Wilkinson; Deb Feldman-Stewart Journal: Qual Life Res Date: 2010-11-26 Impact factor: 4.147
Authors: Susanne Joëlle de Kort; Pax H B Willemse; Jolanda M Habraken; Hanneke C J M de Haes; Dick L Willems; Dick J Richel Journal: Eur J Cancer Date: 2006-02-14 Impact factor: 9.162
Authors: E A Schlenk; J A Erlen; J Dunbar-Jacob; J McDowell; S Engberg; S M Sereika; J M Rohay; M J Bernier Journal: Qual Life Res Date: 1998-01 Impact factor: 4.147
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: Min Kyoung Kim; Jae-Lyun Lee; Myung Soo Hyun; Young Rok Do; Hong Suk Song; Jong Gwang Kim; Sung Hwa Bae; Hun Mo Ryoo; Keon Uk Park; Kyung Hee Lee Journal: Jpn J Clin Oncol Date: 2008-01-31 Impact factor: 3.019
Authors: N K Aaronson; S Ahmedzai; B Bergman; M Bullinger; A Cull; N J Duez; A Filiberti; H Flechtner; S B Fleishman; J C de Haes Journal: J Natl Cancer Inst Date: 1993-03-03 Impact factor: 13.506
Authors: Marlies L van Bekkum; Barbara C van Munster; Peter L M Thunnissen; Carolien H Smorenburg; Marije E Hamaker Journal: J Geriatr Oncol Date: 2014-10-03 Impact factor: 3.599
Authors: Karlijn J G Schulkes; Carin A M Pouw; Elisabeth J M Driessen; Leontine J R van Elden; Frederiek van den Bos; Maryska L G Janssen-Heijnen; Jan-Willem J Lammers; Marije E Hamaker Journal: Lung Date: 2017-06-19 Impact factor: 2.584
Authors: Petronella A L Nelleke Seghers; Anke Wiersma; Suzanne Festen; Mariken E Stegmann; Pierre Soubeyran; Siri Rostoft; Shane O'Hanlon; Johanneke E A Portielje; Marije E Hamaker Journal: Cancers (Basel) Date: 2022-02-23 Impact factor: 6.639