O P Geerse1, D Brandenbarg2, H A M Kerstjens3, A J Berendsen2, S F A Duijts2, H Burger4, G A Holtman2, J E H M Hoekstra-Weebers5, T J N Hiltermann3. 1. University of Groningen, University Medical Center Groningen, Department of Pulmonary Diseases, Groningen, the Netherlands; University of Groningen, University Medical Center Groningen, Department of General Practice and Elderly Care Medicine, Groningen, the Netherlands. Electronic address: o.p.geerse@umcg.nl. 2. University of Groningen, University Medical Center Groningen, Department of General Practice and Elderly Care Medicine, Groningen, the Netherlands. 3. University of Groningen, University Medical Center Groningen, Department of Pulmonary Diseases, Groningen, the Netherlands. 4. University of Groningen, University Medical Center Groningen, Department of General Practice and Elderly Care Medicine, Groningen, the Netherlands; Amsterdam University Medical Center, Academic Medical Center, Department of Psychiatry, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, the Netherlands. 5. University of Groningen, University Medical Center Groningen, Wenckebach Institute, Groningen, the Netherlands; Netherlands Comprehensive Cancer Organization (IKNL), The Netherlands.
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: The use of patient-reported outcome measures is increasingly advocated to support high-quality cancer care. We therefore investigated the added value of the Distress Thermometer (DT) when combined with known predictors to assess one-year survival in patients with lung cancer. METHODS:All patients had newly diagnosed or recurrent lung cancer, started systemic treatment, and participated in the intervention arm of a previously published randomised controlled trial. A Cox proportional hazards model was fitted based on five selected known predictors for survival. The DT-score was added to this model and contrasted to models including the EORTC-QLQ-C30 global QoL score (quality of life) or the HADS total score (symptoms of anxiety and depression). Model performance was evaluated through improvement in the -2 log likelihood, Harrell's C-statistic, and a risk classification. RESULTS: In total, 110 patients were included in the analysis of whom 97 patients accurately completed the DT. Patients with a DT score ≥5 (N = 51) had a lower QoL, more symptoms of anxiety and depression, and a shorter median survival time (7.6 months vs 10.0 months; P = 0.02) than patients with a DT score <5 (N = 46). Addition of the DT resulted in a significant improvement in the accuracy of the model to predict one-year survival (P < 0.001) and the discriminatory value (C-statistic) marginally improved from 0.69 to 0.71. The proportion of patients correctly classified as high risk (≥85% risk of dying within one year) increased from 8% to 28%. Similar model performance was observed when combining the selected predictors with QoL and symptoms of anxiety or depression. CONCLUSIONS: Use of the DT allows clinicians to better identify patients with lung cancer at risk for poor outcomes, to further explore sources of distress, and subsequently personalize care accordingly.
RCT Entities:
INTRODUCTION: The use of patient-reported outcome measures is increasingly advocated to support high-quality cancer care. We therefore investigated the added value of the Distress Thermometer (DT) when combined with known predictors to assess one-year survival in patients with lung cancer. METHODS: All patients had newly diagnosed or recurrent lung cancer, started systemic treatment, and participated in the intervention arm of a previously published randomised controlled trial. A Cox proportional hazards model was fitted based on five selected known predictors for survival. The DT-score was added to this model and contrasted to models including the EORTC-QLQ-C30 global QoL score (quality of life) or the HADS total score (symptoms of anxiety and depression). Model performance was evaluated through improvement in the -2 log likelihood, Harrell's C-statistic, and a risk classification. RESULTS: In total, 110 patients were included in the analysis of whom 97 patients accurately completed the DT. Patients with a DT score ≥5 (N = 51) had a lower QoL, more symptoms of anxiety and depression, and a shorter median survival time (7.6 months vs 10.0 months; P = 0.02) than patients with a DT score <5 (N = 46). Addition of the DT resulted in a significant improvement in the accuracy of the model to predict one-year survival (P < 0.001) and the discriminatory value (C-statistic) marginally improved from 0.69 to 0.71. The proportion of patients correctly classified as high risk (≥85% risk of dying within one year) increased from 8% to 28%. Similar model performance was observed when combining the selected predictors with QoL and symptoms of anxiety or depression. CONCLUSIONS: Use of the DT allows clinicians to better identify patients with lung cancer at risk for poor outcomes, to further explore sources of distress, and subsequently personalize care accordingly.
Authors: Jimmie C Holland; Barbara Andersen; William S Breitbart; Bruce Compas; Moreen M Dudley; Stewart Fleishman; Caryl D Fulcher; Donna B Greenberg; Carl B Greiner; George F Handzo; Laura Hoofring; Paul B Jacobsen; Sara J Knight; Kate Learson; Michael H Levy; Matthew J Loscalzo; Sharon Manne; Randi McAllister-Black; Michelle B Riba; Kristin Roper; Alan D Valentine; Lynne I Wagner; Michael A Zevon Journal: J Natl Compr Canc Netw Date: 2010-04 Impact factor: 11.908
Authors: Jennifer S Temel; Joseph A Greer; Alona Muzikansky; Emily R Gallagher; Sonal Admane; Vicki A Jackson; Constance M Dahlin; Craig D Blinderman; Juliet Jacobsen; William F Pirl; J Andrew Billings; Thomas J Lynch Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2010-08-19 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: Ahmedin Jemal; Freddie Bray; Melissa M Center; Jacques Ferlay; Elizabeth Ward; David Forman Journal: CA Cancer J Clin Date: 2011-02-04 Impact factor: 508.702
Authors: Youssef Ben Bouazza; Ibrahim Chiairi; Ouiam El Kharbouchi; Lesley De Backer; Greetje Vanhoutte; Annelies Janssens; Jan P Van Meerbeeck Journal: Lung Cancer Date: 2017-09-23 Impact factor: 5.705
Authors: Yingwei Qi; Steven E Schild; Sumithra J Mandrekar; Angelina D Tan; James E Krook; Kendrith M Rowland; Yolanda I Garces; Gamini S Soori; Alex A Adjei; Jeff A Sloan Journal: J Thorac Oncol Date: 2009-09 Impact factor: 15.609
Authors: Kuan Liao; Tianxiao Wang; Jake Coomber-Moore; David C Wong; Fabio Gomes; Corinne Faivre-Finn; Matthew Sperrin; Janelle Yorke; Sabine N van der Veer Journal: BMC Cancer Date: 2022-10-19 Impact factor: 4.638
Authors: Moritz Philipp Günther; Johannes Kirchebner; Jan Ben Schulze; Roland von Känel; Sebastian Euler Journal: Eur J Cancer Care (Engl) Date: 2022-02-09 Impact factor: 2.328
Authors: Miss Charlotte L Moss; Ajay Aggarwal; Asad Qureshi; Benjamin Taylor; Teresa Guerrero-Urbano; Mieke Van Hemelrijck Journal: Health Qual Life Outcomes Date: 2021-01-15 Impact factor: 3.186