Explore the vast range of titles available.

A previous review published in 2008 highlighted the prognostic significance of baseline patient-reported outcomes (PROs) as independent predictors of the overall survival of patients with cancer in clinical studies. In response to the methodological limitations of studies included in the previous review, recommendations were subsequently published in the same year to promote a higher level of methodological rigour in studies of prognostic factors. Our systematic review aimed to provide an update on progress with the implementation of these recommendations and to assess whether the methodological quality of prognostic factor analyses has changed over time. Of the 44 studies published between 2006 and 2018 that were included in our review, more standardisation and rigour of the methods used for prognostic factor analysis was found compared with the previous review. 41 (93%) of the trials reported at least one PRO domain as independently prognostic. The most common significant prognostic factors reported were physical functioning (17 [39%] studies) and global health or quality of life (15 [34%] studies). These findings highlight the value of PROs as prognostic or stratification factors in research across most types of cancer.

Patient-reported outcomes (PROs), such as symptoms, function, and other health-related quality-of-life aspects, are increasingly evaluated in cancer randomised controlled trials (RCTs) to provide information about treatment risks, benefits, and tolerability. However, expert opinion and critical review of the literature showed no consensus on optimal methods of PRO analysis in cancer RCTs, hindering interpretation of results. The Setting International Standards in Analyzing Patient-Reported Outcomes and Quality of Life Endpoints Data Consortium was formed to establish PRO analysis recommendations. Four issues were prioritised: developing a taxonomy of research objectives that can be matched with appropriate statistical methods, identifying appropriate statistical methods for PRO analysis, standardising statistical terminology related to missing data, and determining appropriate ways to manage missing data. This Policy Review presents recommendations for PRO analysis developed through critical literature reviews and a structured collaborative process with diverse international stakeholders, which provides a foundation for endorsement; ongoing developments of these recommendations are also discussed.

Background National recommendations state that Danish patients with complex palliative needs should have access to specialized palliative care but little is known about the perceived quality of this care or end of life care in general. Aim To assess how end of life care was evaluated by the bereaved spouses and to investigate whether the perceived quality was associated with (1) quantity of specialized palliative care provided, (2) place of death, and (3) emotional state when completing the questionnaire. Design The bereaved spouses of 1584 cancer patients who had received specialized palliative care were invited to answer the Views Of Informal Carers – Evaluation of Services – Short Form (VOICES-SF) and the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS) approximately 3–9 months after the patient’s death. Results A total of 787 (50%) of the invited spouses participated. In the last 3 months of the patient’s life, the quality of all services taken together was rated as good, excellent, or outstanding in 83% of the cases and it was significantly associated with place of death ( p  = 0.0051, fewest considered it “fair” or “poor” if the patient died at home). In total, 93% reported that the patient died at the right place although only 74% died at the patient’s preferred place. Higher levels of anxiety ( p  = 0.01) but not depression at the time of questionnaire completion was associated with lower satisfaction with the overall quality of care. Conclusion The quality of care was rated very highly by bereaved spouses of patients receiving specialized palliative care.

Purpose Patients in palliative care are willing to answer short questionnaires, like the EORTC QLQ-C15-PAL; however, patients may suffer from other symptoms and problems (S/Ps) not covered by such questionnaires. Therefore, to identify which other S/Ps patients experience, in addition to those already included in the EORTC QLQ-C15-PAL, we developed a brief instrument to supplement this questionnaire named WISP (Write In three Symptoms/Problems), permitting patients to report 1–3 additional S/Ps and their severity. We aim to investigate the nature, prevalence, and severity of S/Ps reported on WISP. Methods A register-based study with data obtained from the Danish Palliative Care Database. This study included adults with advanced cancer admitted to specialized palliative care in Denmark, who reported S/Ps on WISP. S/Ps were categorized qualitatively, and their prevalence and severity were calculated. Results Of the 5447 patients who completed the EORTC QLQ-C15-PAL, 1788 (32.8%) reported at least one symptom/problem using WISP. In total, 2796 S/Ps were reported; 24.8% were already covered by EORTC QLQ-C15-PAL; 63.6% were new, 10.1% were diagnoses and 1.6% could not be coded. S/Ps already covered and new were grouped into 61 categories. The most prevalent S/Ps reported were (in decreasing order) pain, edema, dizziness, impaired physical or emotional function, cough, and sweats. Overall, 85% of the S/Ps were rated as moderate to severe. Conclusions The WISP instrument strongly improves the recognition of S/Ps by combining standardization with individualization. We recommend its use for comprehensive symptom assessment alongside the EORTC QLQ-C15-PAL, and potentially also alongside the EORTC QLQ-C30.

Hypothyroidism is often diagnosed, and subsequently treated, due to health-related quality of life (HRQL) issues. However, HRQL following treatment has never previously been assessed in longitudinal descriptive studies using validated instruments. To investigate disease-specific (ThyPRO) and generic (SF-36) HRQL, following levothyroxine therapy in patients with hypothyroidism due to autoimmune thyroiditis. This prospective cohort study was set at endocrine outpatient clinics at two Danish university hospitals. Seventy-eight consecutive patients were enrolled and completed HRQL questionnaires before, six weeks, and six months after initiation of levothyroxine therapy. Normative ThyPRO (n = 739) and SF-36 (n = 6,638) data were available for comparison and changes in HRQL following treatment were estimated and quantified. Prior to treatment, all ThyPRO scales were significantly impacted (p<0.0001), compared to the general population sample. The same was observed for seven of eight SF-36 scales, the exception being Bodily Pain. Tiredness (ThyPRO) and Vitality (SF-36) were the most markedly impacted scales. After six weeks of treatment, nine of thirteen ThyPRO scales had significantly improved. ThyPRO improvements were consistent at six months, where five of eight SF-36 scales had also significantly improved, but deficits persisted for a subset of both ThyPRO and SF-36 scales. In this population of hypothyroid patients, HRQL was widely affected before treatment, with tiredness as the cardinal impairment according to both ThyPRO and SF-36. Many aspects of HRQL improved during the first six months of LT4 therapy, but full recovery was not obtained. Our results may help clinicians inform patients about expected clinical treatment effects.

Purpose In order to meet the caregiving challenges, informal caregivers often need a substantial level of interaction with health care professionals (HCPs). This study investigated to which extent the cancer caregivers’ needs regarding the interaction with HCPs are met and the associations between dissatisfaction with the interaction and socio-demographic and disease-related variables. Methods In a cross-sectional questionnaire study, cancer patients with various diagnoses and disease stages were invited to pass on the ‘cancer caregiving tasks, consequences and needs questionnaire’ (CaTCoN) to up to three of their caregivers. Results A total of 590 caregivers (related to 415 (55 %) of 752 eligible patients) participated. Although many caregivers were satisfied, considerable proportions experienced problems or had unmet needs regarding the interaction with HCPs. Prominent problematic aspects included optimal involvement of the caregivers in the patients’ disease, treatment and/or care (30 % were dissatisfied), attention to the caregivers’ wellbeing (e.g., 51 % of the caregivers reported that HCPs only sometimes or rarely/never had shown interest in how the caregivers had been feeling), and provision of enough information to the caregivers (e.g. 39 % were dissatisfied with the amount of time spent on informing caregivers). The patients’ adult children and siblings, younger caregivers and caregivers to younger patients tended to report the highest levels of interaction problems and unmet needs. Conclusions The caregivers’ dissatisfaction with the interaction with HCPs was pronounced. More focus on and involvement of the caregivers, in a way that matches the caregivers’ needs, is still warranted.

Background Patient-reported physical function (PF) is a key endpoint in cancer clinical trials. Using complex statistical methods, common metrics have been developed to compare scores from different patient-reported outcome (PRO) measures, but such methods do not account for possible differences in questionnaire content. Therefore, the aim of our study was a content comparison of frequently used PRO measures for PF in cancer patients. Methods Relying on the framework of the International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health (ICF) we categorized the item content of the physical domains of the following measures: EORTC CAT Core, EORTC QLQ-C30, SF-36, PROMIS Cancer Item Bank for Physical Function, PROMIS Short Form for Physical Function 20a, and the FACT-G. Item content was linked to ICF categories by two independent reviewers. Results The 118 items investigated were assigned to 3 components (‘d – Activities and Participation’, ‘b – Body Functions’, and ‘e – Environmental Factors’) and 11 first-level ICF categories. All PF items of the EORTC measures but one were assigned to the first-level ICF categories ‘d4 – Mobility’ and ‘d5 – Self-care’, all within the component ‘d – Activities and Participation’. The SF-36 additionally included item content related to ‘d9 – Community, social and civic life’ and the PROMIS Short Form for Physical Function 20a also included content related to ‘d6 – domestic life’. The PROMIS Cancer Item Bank (v1.1) covered, in addition, two first-level categories within the component ‘b – Body Functions’. The FACT-G Physical Well-being scale was found to be the most diverse scale with item content partly not covered by the ICF framework. Discussion Our results provide information about conceptual differences between common PRO measures for the assessment of PF in cancer patients. Our results complement quantitative information on psychometric characteristics of these measures and provide a better understanding of the possibilities of establishing common metrics.

Measures of health-related quality of life (HRQOL) and other patient-reported outcomes generate important data in cancer randomised trials to assist in assessing the risks and benefits of cancer therapies and fostering patient-centred cancer care. However, the various ways these measures are analysed and interpreted make it difficult to compare results across trials, and hinders the application of research findings to inform publications, product labelling, clinical guidelines, and health policy. To address these problems, the Setting International Standards in Analyzing Patient-Reported Outcomes and Quality of Life Endpoints Data (SISAQOL) initiative has been established. This consortium, directed by the European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC), was convened to provide recommendations on how to standardise the analysis of HRQOL and other patient-reported outcomes data in cancer randomised trials. This Personal View discusses the reasons why this project was initiated, the rationale for the planned work, and the expected benefits to cancer research, patient and provider decision making, care delivery, and policy making.

Background Computerized adaptive test (CAT) provides individualized measurement, using the patient’s previous responses to select the next most informative item. However, the first item, the start item, is usually not individualized as no score estimate is available a priori. The European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) CAT Core covers 15 health-related quality of life domains. Scores for one domain may be used to obtain initial score estimates for another domain. We assessed the potential for using such cross-domain information to individualize start item selection for the EORTC CAT Core physical functioning. Methods The potential for predicting physical functioning (PF) scores from each of the 14 other domains using linear regression was assessed in an international, mixed sample comprising 10,084 cancer patient assessments. Using Monte Carlo CAT simulations, the impact of individually selected PF start items vs. fixed start item for CAT measurement precision was assessed. Results Depending on the domain predicting PF, the correlation of predicted and observed PF scores ranged 0.25–0.71 and the predicted PF scores were within 1SD of the observed PF scores for 57–85% of the patients. The CAT simulations showed that individually selected start items improved measurement precision for the initial steps of CATs. The application of individual start items had trivial or no impact on measurement precision when the CAT asked three or more items. Conclusions Simple linear regression may provide useful cross-domain predictions. Using individualized start items may increase measurement precision of the EORTC CAT Core for the initial steps of CAT which may be of relevance for short CATs.

The use of item libraries for patient-reported outcome (PRO) measurement in oncology allows for the customisation of PRO assessment to measure key health-related quality of life concepts of relevance to the target population and intervention. However, no high-level recommendations exist to guide users on the design and implementation of these customised PRO measures (item lists) across different PRO measurement systems. To address this issue, a working group was set up, including international stakeholders (academic, independent, industry, health technology assessment, regulatory, and patient advocacy), with the goal of creating recommendations for the use of item libraries in oncology trials. A scoping review was carried out to identify relevant publications and highlight any gaps. Stakeholders commented on the available guidance for each research question, proposed recommendations on how to address gaps in the literature, and came to an agreement using discussion-based methods. Nine primary research questions were identified that formed the scope and structure of the recommendations on how to select items and implement item lists created from item libraries. These recommendations address methods to drive item selection, plan the structure and analysis of item lists, and facilitate their use in conjunction with other measures. The findings resulted in high-level, instrument-agnostic recommendations on the use of item-library-derived item lists in oncology trials.