Stefan Stefanovic1, Markus Wallwiener2, Uros Karic3, Christoph Domschke1, Luka Katic3, Florin-Andrei Taran4, Aleksandra Pesic3, Andreas Hartkopf4, Peyman Hadji5, Martin Teufel6, Florian Schuetz1, Christof Sohn1, Peter Fasching7, Andreas Schneeweiss1,8, Sara Brucker9. 1. Department of Gynecology and Obstetrics, Heidelberg University Hospital, Im Neuenheimer Feld 440, 69120, Heidelberg, Germany. 2. Department of Gynecology and Obstetrics, Heidelberg University Hospital, Im Neuenheimer Feld 440, 69120, Heidelberg, Germany. markus.wallwiener@med.uni-heidelberg.de. 3. IMDI Science Center, International Medical Diplomacy Institute, Vodovodska 27a, Belgrade, 11000, Serbia. 4. Department of Women's Health, University Hospital Tuebingen, Calwerstr. 7, 72076, Tübingen, Germany. 5. Department of Bone Oncology, Gynecological Endocrinology and Reproductive Medicine, Philipps-University of Marburg-Krankenhaus Nordwest, Steinbacher Hohl 2-26, 60488, Frankfurt am Main, Germany. 6. Department of Psychosomatic Medicine and Psychotherapy/Psycho-Oncology, Tuebingen University Hospital, Osianderstr. 5, 72076, Tuebingen, Germany. 7. Department of Gynecology and Obstetrics, Erlangen University Hospital, Universitätsstraße 21-23, 91054, Erlangen, Germany. 8. National Center for Tumor Diseases (NCT) Heidelberg, Im Neuenheimer Feld 460, 69120, Heidelberg, Germany. 9. Department of Women's Health, Research Institute for Women's Health, Tuebingen University Hospital, Calwerstr. 7, 72076, Tuebingen, Germany.
Abstract
PURPOSE: The capture of adequate treatment outcomes and quality of life (QOL) of advanced breast cancer patients in clinical routine represents a great challenge. Patient-reported outcomes (PROs) are data elements directly reported by patients about experiences with care, including symptoms, functional status, or quality of life. There is growing interest in the medical community for the evaluation and implementation of PROs of adverse events (PRO-AEs). Recent interest in PROs in health care has evolved in the context of patient centeredness. Our primary objective was to identify trials that had implemented PRO-AEs in the breast cancer treatment setting, thereby demonstrating its feasibility. We aimed to identify published studies that used patient reports to assess AEs during and after breast cancer treatment, to identify clinician underreported and modifiable AEs that are important to patients, and to analyze the feasibility and usefulness of PRO instrument implementation in everyday oncological practice with special attention given to electronic-based PRO instruments. METHODS: We conducted a systematic search of PubMed for studies that used PRO instruments to assess AEs of breast cancer treatment in the metastatic and adjuvant settings. Two authors independently reviewed the search results and decided which studies fully met the predefined inclusion criteria. RESULTS: The search yielded 606 publications. The two reviewers found that 9 studies met the inclusion criteria. Three AEs were identified as important to patients but inadequately reported by health care providers, namely hot flushes, vaginal dryness, and weight gain. CONCLUSIONS: PROs and PRO-AEs are the consequence of contemporary concepts of patient-centered medicine and the growing feasibility, utility, and implications of collecting data using modern technology. Furthermore, the willingness of patients to utilize innovative applications for their own health has been increasing in parallel to the enhanced impact of the World Wide Web. Especially, the coverage of the metastatic situation promises numerous findings on the structure and quality of health care, enabling implementation of individually tailored interventions. Remote electronic self-reporting (i.e., home reporting) is feasible and is associated with high compliance levels.
PURPOSE: The capture of adequate treatment outcomes and quality of life (QOL) of advanced breast cancerpatients in clinical routine represents a great challenge. Patient-reported outcomes (PROs) are data elements directly reported by patients about experiences with care, including symptoms, functional status, or quality of life. There is growing interest in the medical community for the evaluation and implementation of PROs of adverse events (PRO-AEs). Recent interest in PROs in health care has evolved in the context of patient centeredness. Our primary objective was to identify trials that had implemented PRO-AEs in the breast cancer treatment setting, thereby demonstrating its feasibility. We aimed to identify published studies that used patient reports to assess AEs during and after breast cancer treatment, to identify clinician underreported and modifiable AEs that are important to patients, and to analyze the feasibility and usefulness of PRO instrument implementation in everyday oncological practice with special attention given to electronic-based PRO instruments. METHODS: We conducted a systematic search of PubMed for studies that used PRO instruments to assess AEs of breast cancer treatment in the metastatic and adjuvant settings. Two authors independently reviewed the search results and decided which studies fully met the predefined inclusion criteria. RESULTS: The search yielded 606 publications. The two reviewers found that 9 studies met the inclusion criteria. Three AEs were identified as important to patients but inadequately reported by health care providers, namely hot flushes, vaginal dryness, and weight gain. CONCLUSIONS: PROs and PRO-AEs are the consequence of contemporary concepts of patient-centered medicine and the growing feasibility, utility, and implications of collecting data using modern technology. Furthermore, the willingness of patients to utilize innovative applications for their own health has been increasing in parallel to the enhanced impact of the World Wide Web. Especially, the coverage of the metastatic situation promises numerous findings on the structure and quality of health care, enabling implementation of individually tailored interventions. Remote electronic self-reporting (i.e., home reporting) is feasible and is associated with high compliance levels.
Entities:
Keywords:
Adjuvant; Adverse events; Breast cancer; Metastatic; Patient-reported outcome
Authors: Peter T Katzmarzyk; Bruce A Reeder; Susan Elliott; Michel R Joffres; Punam Pahwa; Kim D Raine; Susan A Kirkland; Gilles Paradis Journal: Can J Public Health Date: 2012 Mar-Apr
Authors: Chantal Quinten; John Maringwa; Carolyn C Gotay; Francesca Martinelli; Corneel Coens; Bryce B Reeve; Henning Flechtner; Eva Greimel; Madeleine King; David Osoba; Charles Cleeland; Jolie Ringash; Joseph Schmucker-Von Koch; Martin J B Taphoorn; Joachim Weis; Andrew Bottomley Journal: J Natl Cancer Inst Date: 2011-12-07 Impact factor: 13.506
Authors: K Ribi; J Bernhard; K Rufibach; B Thürlimann; R von Moos; T Ruhstaller; A Glaus; C Böhme Journal: Support Care Cancer Date: 2007-05-26 Impact factor: 3.603
Authors: Carissa A Low; Anind K Dey; Denzil Ferreira; Thomas Kamarck; Weijing Sun; Sangwon Bae; Afsaneh Doryab Journal: J Med Internet Res Date: 2017-12-19 Impact factor: 5.428
Authors: Joachim Graf; Sara Y Brucker; Markus Wallwiener; Lina Matthies; Elisabeth Simoes; Lucia Keilmann; Andreas D Hartkopf; Alexander N Sokolov; Christina B Walter; Nina Sickenberger; Stephanie Wallwiener; Manuel Feisst; Paul Gass; Peter A Fasching; Michael P Lux; Diethelm Wallwiener; Florin-Andrei Taran; Joachim Rom; Andreas Schneeweiss Journal: J Med Internet Res Date: 2017-09-14 Impact factor: 5.428
Authors: Elena Garcia Farina; Jessi Rowell; Anna Revette; Ellana K Haakenstad; Jessica L F Cleveland; Rachel Allende; Michael Hassett; Deborah Schrag; Nadine J McCleary Journal: JAMA Netw Open Date: 2022-07-01
Authors: Lina Maria Matthies; Florin-Andrei Taran; Joachim Graf; Markus Wallwiener; Lucia Keilmann; Andreas Schneeweiss; Elisabeth Simoes; Andreas D Hartkopf; Alexander N Sokolov; Christina B Walter; Nina Sickenberger; Stephanie Wallwiener; Manuel Feisst; Paul Gass; Michael P Lux; Florian Schuetz; Peter A Fasching; Christof Sohn; Sara Y Brucker Journal: J Med Internet Res Date: 2019-01-22 Impact factor: 5.428