Literature DB >> 7591900

RTOG's first quality of life study--RTOG 90-20: a phase II trial of external beam radiation with etanidazole for locally advanced prostate cancer.

D Watkins-Bruner1, C Scott, C Lawton, J DelRowe, M Rotman, L Buswell, C Beard, D Cella.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: To assess institutional and patient compliance with quality of life (QL) instruments in RTOG clinical trials. To assess feasibility of using the Functional Assessment Cancer Therapy (FACT), Sexual Adjustment Questionnaire (SAQ), and Changes in Urinary Function (CUF) QL instruments in a prostate clinical trial and to compare patient self-report of symptoms to medical professional ratings of the same symptoms using the RTOG acute toxicity rating scales. METHODS AND MATERIALS: Three self-assessment QL instruments, the FACT, the SAQ, and CUF, were to be administered to patients on a Phase II locally advanced prostate trial at specified time points. Specific instructions for both data managers and for patients on when, how, and why to fill out the questionnaires were included.
RESULTS: Sixty-seven percent (24 out of 36) of patients accrued to RTOG 90-20 completed both the initial FACT and SAQ. Eighty-five percent completed FACT at end of RT and 73% at 3 months. Eighty-one percent completed SAQ at end of treatment, while 69% completed this form at 3 months. Compliance drops off thereafter. Seventy-five percent of patients who had their symptom of dysuria rated by a medical professional as 0 on the RTOG toxicity rating scale self-reported the same. Only 56% of patient self-reports on FACT regarding diarrhea were in agreement with the medical professional's RTOG rating of 0 toxicity. The measures were determined to be in moderate agreement when the patient evaluated a symptom as a 1 on the FACT and the medical professional rated the same symptom as a 0 on the RTOG toxicity rating scale. There was moderate agreement in 13% of patients with dysuria and 31% of patients with diarrhea. Low agreement occurred when the patient evaluated a symptom as a 2 or 3 on the FACT and the medical professional rated the same symptom as a 0 on the RTOG scale. Low agreement occurred in 13% of both patients reporting dysuria and diarrhea. Differences between how medical professionals and patients were able to rate erectile function make direct comparisons difficult, but the trend towards significant discrepancies is still noteworthy.
CONCLUSIONS: Quality of life assessments are necessary and attainable in RTOG clinical trials. Compliance rates for both institutional and patient participation were acceptable at initial and 3 month follow-up. Reasons for noncompliance were predominantly institution related and not patient related. Strategies to address both institution and patient compliance have been developed and implemented within the RTOG. Serious disagreement between patient self-reports of symptoms on the FACT QL scale and medical professional ratings on the RTOG acute toxicity rating scales of the same symptoms was 13% at 3 months follow-up. This warrants continued use of QL self-assessments in clinical trials.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  1995        PMID: 7591900     DOI: 10.1016/0360-3016(95)02002-5

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys        ISSN: 0360-3016            Impact factor:   7.038


  12 in total

1.  The Complementary Nature of Patient-Reported Outcomes and Adverse Event Reporting in Cooperative Group Oncology Clinical Trials: A Pooled Analysis (NCCTG N0591).

Authors:  Pamela J Atherton; Deborah W Watkins-Bruner; Carolyn Gotay; Carol M Moinpour; Daniel V Satele; Kathryn A Winter; Paul L Schaefer; Benjamin Movsas; Jeff A Sloan
Journal:  J Pain Symptom Manage       Date:  2015-05-30       Impact factor: 3.612

Review 2.  Patient-reported outcomes and survivorship in radiation oncology: overcoming the cons.

Authors:  Farzan Siddiqui; Arthur K Liu; Deborah Watkins-Bruner; Benjamin Movsas
Journal:  J Clin Oncol       Date:  2014-08-11       Impact factor: 44.544

3.  Stakeholder perspectives on implementing the National Cancer Institute's patient-reported outcomes version of the Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (PRO-CTCAE).

Authors:  Deborah Watkins Bruner; Laura J Hanisch; Bryce B Reeve; Andy M Trotti; Deborah Schrag; Laura Sit; Tito R Mendoza; Lori Minasian; Ann O'Mara; Andrea M Denicoff; Julia H Rowland; Michael Montello; Cindy Geoghegan; Amy P Abernethy; Steven B Clauser; Kathleen Castro; Sandra A Mitchell; Laurie Burke; Ann Marie Trentacosti; Ethan M Basch
Journal:  Transl Behav Med       Date:  2011-03       Impact factor: 3.046

Review 4.  Issues and challenges with integrating patient-reported outcomes in clinical trials supported by the National Cancer Institute-sponsored clinical trials networks.

Authors:  Deborah Watkins Bruner; Charlene J Bryan; Neil Aaronson; C Craig Blackmore; Michael Brundage; David Cella; Patricia A Ganz; Carolyn Gotay; Pamela S Hinds; Alice B Kornblith; Benjamin Movsas; Jeff Sloan; Lari Wenzel; Giles Whalen
Journal:  J Clin Oncol       Date:  2007-11-10       Impact factor: 44.544

5.  Longitudinal analysis of quality of life in patients receiving conformal radiation therapy for prostate cancer.

Authors:  Hans Geinitz; Reinhard Thamm; Christian Scholz; Christine Heinrich; Nina Prause; Simone Kerndl; Monika Keller; Raymonde Busch; Michael Molls; Frank B Zimmermann
Journal:  Strahlenther Onkol       Date:  2009-12-28       Impact factor: 3.621

6.  Utilizing Multidimensional Computer Adaptive Testing to Mitigate Burden With Patient Reported Outcomes.

Authors:  Michael Bass; Scott Morris; Richard Neapolitan
Journal:  AMIA Annu Symp Proc       Date:  2015-11-05

7.  Outcomes research in cancer clinical trial cooperative groups: the RTOG model.

Authors:  D W Bruner; B Movsas; A Konski; M Roach; M Bondy; C Scarintino; C Scott; W Curran
Journal:  Qual Life Res       Date:  2004-08       Impact factor: 4.147

8.  Quality of Life in Patients With Low-Risk Prostate Cancer Treated With Hypofractionated vs Conventional Radiotherapy: A Phase 3 Randomized Clinical Trial.

Authors:  Deborah W Bruner; Stephanie L Pugh; W Robert Lee; William A Hall; James J Dignam; Daniel Low; Gregory P Swanson; Amit B Shah; Shawn Malone; Jeff M Michalski; Ian S Dayes; Samantha A Seaward; Paul L Nguyen; Thomas M Pisansky; Yuhchyau Chen; Howard M Sandler; Benjamin Movsas
Journal:  JAMA Oncol       Date:  2019-05-01       Impact factor: 31.777

9.  Advancing the efficiency and efficacy of patient reported outcomes with multivariate computer adaptive testing.

Authors:  Scott Morris; Mike Bass; Mirinae Lee; Richard E Neapolitan
Journal:  J Am Med Inform Assoc       Date:  2017-09-01       Impact factor: 4.497

10.  Meta-analysis provides evidence-based interpretation guidelines for the clinical significance of mean differences for the FACT-G, a cancer-specific quality of life questionnaire.

Authors:  Madeleine T King; David Cella; David Osoba; Martin Stockler; David Eton; Joanna Thompson; Amy Eisenstein
Journal:  Patient Relat Outcome Meas       Date:  2010-09-23
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.