Literature DB >> 33007114

Discrepancies between genitourinary cancer patients' and clinicians' characterization of the Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status.

Cristiane Decat Bergerot1, Errol J Philip2, Paulo Gustavo Bergerot1, JoAnn Hsu1, Nazli Dizman1, Megan Salgia1, Nicholas Salgia1, Ulka Vaishampayan3, Dena Battle4, Matthew Loscalzo5, William Dale5, Sumanta Kumar Pal1.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Patient-reported outcomes have been used to assess treatment effectiveness and actively engage patients in their disease management. This study was designed to describe the patient-reported performance status (PS) and the provider-reported PS.
METHODS: Patients with metastatic genitourinary cancers were recruited from a single cancer center before the initiation of a new line of treatment. PS (Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group [ECOG]), quality of life (Functional Assessment of Chronic Illness Therapy-General), and distress (Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System Anxiety and Depression) were self-reported by patients. Clinical data (eg, age, sex, diagnosis, and physician-reported ECOG PS) were extracted from medical records. Multivariate analysis was used to determine the association between PS, quality of life, and psychological symptoms.
RESULTS: One hundred forty-five patients were enrolled (76.6% male, 70.3% White, 81.4% married, and 76.6% well educated). The median age was 67 years; 66.9% were diagnosed with renal cell carcinoma, 20.0% were diagnosed with urothelial carcinoma, and 13.1% were diagnosed with prostate cancer. Clinicians more frequently classified patients' ECOG PS as 0 in comparison with the patients themselves (92.4% vs 64.1%; P = .001). Higher clinician-reported ECOG PS was associated with poorer physical and functional well-being and higher rates of depression (P < .01), whereas higher patient-reported ECOG PS was associated with worse psychosocial outcomes (P < .01).
CONCLUSIONS: Discrepancies were noted between the patient- and provider-reported ECOG PS, with clinicians overestimating the ECOG PS in comparison with the patients themselves. This study's findings suggest that patients incorporate their social and emotional well-being into their PS score in addition to their physical well-being. This information is not immediately accessible to most clinicians from just a standard patient interview and likely accounts for the overestimation of the patients' ECOG PS by the clinicians.
© 2020 American Cancer Society.

Entities:  

Keywords:  decision making; genitourinary cancers; perception of prognosis; treatment outcomes understanding

Year:  2020        PMID: 33007114     DOI: 10.1002/cncr.33238

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Cancer        ISSN: 0008-543X            Impact factor:   6.860


  3 in total

1.  Controlling Nutritional Status Score Before Receiving Treatment as a Prognostic Indicator for Patients With Urothelial Cancer: An Exploration Evaluation Methods.

Authors:  Lei Peng; Chunxiao Du; Chunyang Meng; Jinze Li; Chengyu You; Xianhui Li; Pan Zhao; Dehong Cao; Yunxiang Li
Journal:  Front Oncol       Date:  2021-10-13       Impact factor: 6.244

2.  Construction and Validation of Prediction Model of Severe Abdominal Pain Post-Transarterial Chemoembolization in Patients with HBV-Associated Primary Liver Cancer.

Authors:  Yaobo Yang; Sipan Chen; Zhaoyong Yan; Yang Jiao; Xiang Yan; Yulong Li
Journal:  Comput Math Methods Med       Date:  2022-07-30       Impact factor: 2.809

3.  Modified Glasgow Prognostic Score associated with survival in metastatic renal cell carcinoma treated with immune checkpoint inhibitors.

Authors:  Jacqueline T Brown; Yuan Liu; Julie M Shabto; Dylan Martini; Deepak Ravindranathan; Emilie Elise Hitron; Greta Anne Russler; Sarah Caulfield; Lauren Yantorni; Shreyas Subhash Joshi; Haydn Kissick; Kenneth Ogan; Bassel Nazha; Bradley C Carthon; Omer Kucuk; Wayne B Harris; Viraj A Master; Mehmet Asim Bilen
Journal:  J Immunother Cancer       Date:  2021-07       Impact factor: 13.751

  3 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.