Claudia Rutherford1,2, Rachel Campbell3, Kate White4, Madeleine King3. 1. Faculty of Science, School of Psychology, Quality of Life Office, The University of Sydney, Sydney, NSW, Australia. claudia.rutherford@sydney.edu.au. 2. Faculty of Medicine and Health, The University of Sydney Susan Wakil School of Nursing and Midwifery, Cancer Nursing Research Unit (CNRU), The University of Sydney, Sydney, NSW, 2006, Australia. claudia.rutherford@sydney.edu.au. 3. Faculty of Science, School of Psychology, Quality of Life Office, The University of Sydney, Sydney, NSW, Australia. 4. Faculty of Medicine and Health, The University of Sydney Susan Wakil School of Nursing and Midwifery, Cancer Nursing Research Unit (CNRU), The University of Sydney, Sydney, NSW, 2006, Australia.
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: The prognostic value of patient-reported outcomes (PROs) has been determined in some cancers, but a focussed review in colorectal cancer (CRC) has not yet been conducted. We systematically reviewed PRO predictors of CRC patient survival. METHODS: We searched four electronic databases (from inception to May 2018), reference lists and professional organisations to identify studies reporting pre-treatment PRO predictors of overall survival (OS) or progression-free survival (PFS) in CRC identified through univariate or multivariate models. Two reviewers independently applied inclusion criteria and extracted data on study characteristics, median and 1-year survival rates, PROs assessed and model results. RESULTS: In 25 of 27 studies (n = 12,544), at least one PRO was significantly associated with survival. Physical functioning, fatigue, pain and appetite loss predicted OS more often than other PROs in metastatic disease (19/27 studies). One study explored PRO predictors in early-stage CRC, finding emotional well-being and mood predicted OS. In mixed-stage samples (7/27 studies), physical functioning predicted OS more often than other PROs. Few studies modelled PFS, for which few PROs had predictive value. CONCLUSIONS: Physical and psychological functioning, pain, fatigue and appetite loss had prognostic significance above and beyond clinical predictors in CRC. Routine monitoring of these PROs may allow earlier detection and amelioration of problems, which may improve quality of life and perhaps extend survival. More research is needed to determine prognostic value of PROs in early-stage CRC, and prognostic significance of changes in PRO scores.
INTRODUCTION: The prognostic value of patient-reported outcomes (PROs) has been determined in some cancers, but a focussed review in colorectal cancer (CRC) has not yet been conducted. We systematically reviewed PRO predictors of CRC patient survival. METHODS: We searched four electronic databases (from inception to May 2018), reference lists and professional organisations to identify studies reporting pre-treatment PRO predictors of overall survival (OS) or progression-free survival (PFS) in CRC identified through univariate or multivariate models. Two reviewers independently applied inclusion criteria and extracted data on study characteristics, median and 1-year survival rates, PROs assessed and model results. RESULTS: In 25 of 27 studies (n = 12,544), at least one PRO was significantly associated with survival. Physical functioning, fatigue, pain and appetite loss predicted OS more often than other PROs in metastatic disease (19/27 studies). One study explored PRO predictors in early-stage CRC, finding emotional well-being and mood predicted OS. In mixed-stage samples (7/27 studies), physical functioning predicted OS more often than other PROs. Few studies modelled PFS, for which few PROs had predictive value. CONCLUSIONS: Physical and psychological functioning, pain, fatigue and appetite loss had prognostic significance above and beyond clinical predictors in CRC. Routine monitoring of these PROs may allow earlier detection and amelioration of problems, which may improve quality of life and perhaps extend survival. More research is needed to determine prognostic value of PROs in early-stage CRC, and prognostic significance of changes in PRO scores.
Authors: Hans Wildiers; Murielle Mauer; Athanasios Pallis; Arti Hurria; Supriya G Mohile; Andrea Luciani; Giuseppe Curigliano; Martine Extermann; Stuart M Lichtman; Karla Ballman; Harvey Jay Cohen; Hyman Muss; Ulrich Wedding Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2013-09-09 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: Chantal Quinten; Francesca Martinelli; Corneel Coens; Mirjam A G Sprangers; Jolie Ringash; Carolyn Gotay; Kristin Bjordal; Eva Greimel; Bryce B Reeve; John Maringwa; Divine E Ediebah; Efstathios Zikos; Madeleine T King; David Osoba; Martin J Taphoorn; Henning Flechtner; Joseph Schmucker-Von Koch; Joachim Weis; Andrew Bottomley Journal: Cancer Date: 2013-10-11 Impact factor: 6.860
Authors: Fabio Efficace; Andrew Bottomley; Corneel Coens; Kristel Van Steen; Thierry Conroy; Patrick Schöffski; Hans Schmoll; Eric Van Cutsem; Claus-Henning Köhne Journal: Eur J Cancer Date: 2005-11-18 Impact factor: 9.162
Authors: Carmen Rosa Hernández-Socorro; Pedro Saavedra; José Ramírez Felipe; Uriel Bohn Sarmiento; Sergio Ruiz-Santana Journal: Med Clin (Barc) Date: 2017-01-07 Impact factor: 1.725
Authors: Momar Diouf; Benoist Chibaudel; Thomas Filleron; Christophe Tournigand; Marine Hug de Larauze; Marie-Line Garcia-Larnicol; Sarah Dumont; Christophe Louvet; Nathalie Perez-Staub; Alexandra Hadengue; Aimery de Gramont; Franck Bonnetain Journal: Health Qual Life Outcomes Date: 2014-05-13 Impact factor: 3.186
Authors: Clara Breidenbach; Christoph Kowalski; Simone Wesselmann; Nora Tabea Sibert Journal: BMC Health Serv Res Date: 2021-05-11 Impact factor: 2.655