Literature DB >> 8973130

An exploratory study of frequent pain measurement in a cancer clinical trial.

J Ingham1, A Seidman, T J Yao, J Lepore, R Portenoy.   

Abstract

The ideal methodology for quality of life (QOL) measurement in cancer clinical trials matches the evaluation to the anticipated outcomes, thereby increasing the likelihood that clinically relevant changes are captured. The present study explored the importance of such methodological 'tailoring' in a phase II trial of paclitaxel and recombinant human granulocyte-colony stimulating factor (rhG-CSF) for metastatic breast cancer. Prior to the trial, clinical observation suggested that frequent short-lived episodes of pain might occur during this treatment regimen. Twenty-one patients provided longitudinal data for at least three cycles of chemotherapy. To assess transient pain, a routine QOL assessment at baseline and every third cycle was supplemented with pain measurements twice weekly. The interval assessment included a multidimensional QOL instrument (Functional Living Index-Cancer) and measures of psychological state (Rand Mental Health Inventory), symptom distress (Memorial Symptom Assessment Scale), and performance status (Karnofsky Performance Status Score). The frequent pain measurements were acquired using visual analogue and categorical scales for pain intensity (Memorial Pain Assessment Card). From baseline to the end of cycle three, global pain scores declined and the results on other QOL measures were variable. The data obtained using these measures did not reveal the existence of episodic pains. In contrast, the twice weekly pain measurements clearly demonstrated transient severe pains in approximately half the patients. These data highlight the importance of specific measurement of troubling symptoms or other relevant QOL concerns at clinically appropriate intervals during the routine QOL assessment of clinical trials. The additional burden involved in these assessments is warranted if the information derived is highly relevant, would not be adequately captured otherwise and could improve therapy.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  1996        PMID: 8973130     DOI: 10.1007/bf00540023

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Qual Life Res        ISSN: 0962-9343            Impact factor:   4.147


  22 in total

Review 1.  Quality of life end points in cancer clinical trials: review and recommendations.

Authors:  C M Moinpour; P Feigl; B Metch; K A Hayden; F L Meyskens; J Crowley
Journal:  J Natl Cancer Inst       Date:  1989-04-05       Impact factor: 13.506

Review 2.  Quality-of-life assessment in cancer treatment protocols: research issues in protocol development.

Authors:  C C Gotay; E L Korn; M S McCabe; T D Moore; B D Cheson
Journal:  J Natl Cancer Inst       Date:  1992-04-15       Impact factor: 13.506

3.  A modular approach to quality-of-life assessment in cancer clinical trials.

Authors:  N K Aaronson; M Bullinger; S Ahmedzai
Journal:  Recent Results Cancer Res       Date:  1988

Review 4.  Recombinant granulocyte colony-stimulating factor (rG-CSF). A review of its pharmacological properties and prospective role in neutropenic conditions.

Authors:  L M Hollingshead; K L Goa
Journal:  Drugs       Date:  1991-08       Impact factor: 9.546

5.  Quality of life in phase II trials: a study of methodology and predictive value in patients with advanced breast cancer treated with paclitaxel plus granulocyte colony-stimulating factor.

Authors:  A D Seidman; R Portenoy; T J Yao; J Lepore; E K Mont; J Kortmansky; N Onetto; L Ren; J Grechko; M Beltangady
Journal:  J Natl Cancer Inst       Date:  1995-09-06       Impact factor: 13.506

6.  Measuring the quality of life of cancer patients: the Functional Living Index-Cancer: development and validation.

Authors:  H Schipper; J Clinch; A McMurray; M Levitt
Journal:  J Clin Oncol       Date:  1984-05       Impact factor: 44.544

7.  Development of the Wisconsin Brief Pain Questionnaire to assess pain in cancer and other diseases.

Authors:  R L Daut; C S Cleeland; R C Flanery
Journal:  Pain       Date:  1983-10       Impact factor: 6.961

8.  The Memorial Symptom Assessment Scale: an instrument for the evaluation of symptom prevalence, characteristics and distress.

Authors:  R K Portenoy; H T Thaler; A B Kornblith; J M Lepore; H Friedlander-Klar; E Kiyasu; K Sobel; N Coyle; N Kemeny; L Norton
Journal:  Eur J Cancer       Date:  1994       Impact factor: 9.162

Review 9.  Methodologic issues in assessing the quality of life of cancer patients.

Authors:  N K Aaronson
Journal:  Cancer       Date:  1991-02-01       Impact factor: 6.860

10.  Paclitaxel as second and subsequent therapy for metastatic breast cancer: activity independent of prior anthracycline response.

Authors:  A D Seidman; B S Reichman; J P Crown; T J Yao; V Currie; T B Hakes; C A Hudis; T A Gilewski; J Baselga; P Forsythe
Journal:  J Clin Oncol       Date:  1995-05       Impact factor: 44.544

View more
  3 in total

1.  Linguistic adaptation and validation of the Spanish version of the Memorial Pain Assessment Card (MPAC).

Authors:  Yolanda Escobar; Manuel Domine; Jorge Contreras; Francisco Valcárcel
Journal:  Clin Transl Oncol       Date:  2009-06       Impact factor: 3.405

2.  Predicting the Trajectories of Perceived Pain Intensity in Southern Community-Dwelling Older Adults: The Role of Religiousness.

Authors:  Fei Sun; Nan Sook Park; Jana Wardian; Beom S Lee; Lucinda L Roff; David L Klemmack; Michael W Parker; Harold G Koenig; Patricia L Sawyer; Richard M Allman
Journal:  Res Aging       Date:  2013-11-01

Review 3.  Cytokines as Mediators of Pain-Related Process in Breast Cancer.

Authors:  Carolina Panis; Wander Rogério Pavanelli
Journal:  Mediators Inflamm       Date:  2015-11-09       Impact factor: 4.711

  3 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.