Fabio Efficace

The Prognostic Significance of Patient-Reported Outcomes in Cancer Clinical Trials

PURPOSE Patient-reported outcomes (PROs), routinely collected as a part of cancer clinical trials, have been linked with survival in numerous clinical studies, but a comprehensive critical review has not been reported. This study systematically assessed the impact of PROs on patient survival after a cancer diagnosis within the context of clinical trials. DESIGN Cancer clinical trials that assessed baseline PROs and mortality were identified through MEDLINE (through December 2006) supplemented by the Cochrane database, American Society of Clinical Oncology/European Society for Medical Oncology abstracts and hand searches. Inclusion criteria were publication in English language and use of multivariate analyses of PROs that controlled for one or more clinical factors. Two raters reviewed each study, abstracted data, and assessed study quality; two additional raters verified abstractions. RESULTS In 36 of 39 studies (N = 13,874), at least one PRO was significantly associated with survival (P < .05) in multivariate analysis, with varying effect sizes. Studies of lung (n = 12) and breast cancer (n = 8) were most prevalent. The most commonly assessed PRO was quality of life, measured by the European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Questionnaire C30 in 56% of studies. Clinical variables adjusted for included performance status (PS), treatment arm, stage, weight loss, and serum markers. Results indicated that PROs provide distinct prognostic information beyond standard clinical measures in cancer clinical trials. CONCLUSION PROs might be considered for stratification purposes in future trials, as they were often better predictors of survival than PS. Studies are needed to determine whether interventions that improve PROs also increase survival and to identify explanatory mechanisms through which PROs relate to survival.

Beyond the Development of Health-Related Quality-of-Life (HRQOL) Measures: A Checklist for Evaluating HRQOL Outcomes in Cancer Clinical Trials—Does HRQOL Evaluation in Prostate Cancer Research Inform Clinical Decision Making?

PURPOSE The aim of this study was to evaluate whether the inclusion of health-related quality of life (HRQOL), as a part of the trial design in a randomized controlled trial (RCT) setting, has supported clinical decision making for the planning of future medical treatments in prostate cancer. MATERIALS AND METHODS A minimum standard checklist for evaluating HRQOL outcomes in cancer clinical trials was devised to assess the quality of the HRQOL reporting and to classify the studies on the grounds of their robustness. It comprises 11 key HRQOL issues grouped into four broader sections: conceptual, measurement, methodology, and interpretation. Relevant studies were identified in a number of databases, including MEDLINE and the Cochrane Controlled Trials Register. Both their HRQOL and traditional clinical reported outcomes were systematically analyzed to evaluate their consistency and their relevance for supporting clinical decision making. RESULTS Although 54% of the identified studies did not show any differences in traditional clinical end points between treatment arms and 17% showed a difference in overall survival, 74% of the studies showed some difference in terms of HRQOL outcomes. One third of the RCTs provided a comprehensive picture of the whole treatment including HRQOL outcomes to support their conclusions. CONCLUSION A minimum set of criteria for assessing the reported outcomes in cancer clinical trials is necessary to make informed decisions in clinical practice. Using a checklist developed for this study, it was found that HRQOL is a valuable source of information in RCTs of treatment in metastatic prostate cancer.

An international field study of the EORTC QLQ-PR25: A questionnaire for assessing the health-related quality of life of patients with prostate cancer

AIM To evaluate the psychometrics of the EORTC QLQ-PR25, a questionnaire assessing the health-related quality of life of prostate cancer patients. METHODS The QLQ-PR25 and the QLQ-C30 were administered to 642 prostate cancer patients from 13 countries treated with curative or palliative intent. The QLQ-PR25 assesses urinary, bowel and sexual symptoms and functioning, and the side-effects of hormonal treatment. RESULTS Five hundred and nine patients were available for the final analysis. Multitrait scaling analyses confirmed the hypothesised scale structure of the QLQ-PR25. Internal consistency reliability was good (coefficient alpha=0.70-0.86) for the urinary symptoms and sexual function scales, but lower for the bowel function and side-effects of hormonal treatment scales (alpha<0.70). The module discriminated clearly between clinically distinct patient subgroups, and was responsive to changes in health status over time. CONCLUSION In general, the QLQ-PR25 demonstrates acceptable psychometric properties and clinical validity. Some caution should be used in interpreting the bowel function and side-effects of hormonal therapy scales; results can be reported at the individual item and scale level.

Health-related quality of life in chronic myeloid leukemia patients receiving long-term therapy with imatinib compared with the general population

The main objective of this study was to investigate whether patients with chronic myeloid leukemia (CML) in treatment with long-term therapy imatinib have a different health-related quality-of-life (HRQOL) profile compared with the general population. In total, 448 CML patients were enrolled, and the SF-36 Health Survey was used to compare generic HRQOL profiles. Symptoms were also assessed. HRQOL comparisons were adjusted for key possible confounders. The median age of patients was 57 years and the median time of imatinib treatment was 5 years (range 3-9 years). The largest HRQOL differences were found in younger patients. In particular, patients aged between 18 and 39 years had marked impairments in role limitations because of physical and emotional problems, respectively: -22.6 (P < .001), -22.3 (P < .001). Patients with CML age 60 or older had a HRQOL profile very similar to that reported by the general population. Women had a worse profile than men when each were compared with their peers in the general population. Fatigue was the most frequently reported symptom. The HRQOL of CML patients is comparable with that of population norms in many areas, however, younger and female patients seem to report the major limitations.

Patient-reported outcomes in randomized clinical trials: Development of ISOQOL reporting standards

PurposeTo develop expert consensus on a suite of reporting standards for HRQL outcomes of RCTs.MethodsA Task Force of The International Society of Quality of Life Research (ISOQOL) undertook a systematic review of the literature to identify candidate reporting standards for HRQL in RCTs. Subsequently, a web-based survey was circulated to the ISOQOL membership. Respondents were asked to rate candidate standards on a 4-point Likert scale based on their perceived value in reporting studies in which HRQL was a study outcome (primary or secondary). Results were synthesized into draft reporting guidelines, which were further reviewed by the membership to inform the final guidance.ResultsForty-six existing candidate standards for reporting HRQL results in RCTs were synthesized to produce a 40 item survey that was completed electronically by 161 respondents. The majority of respondents rated all 40 items to be either ‘essential’ or ‘desirable’ when HRQL was a primary RCT outcome. Ratings changed when HRQL was a secondary study outcome. Feedback on the survey findings resulted in the Task Force generalizing the guidance to include patient-reported outcomes (PROs). The final guidance, which recommends standards for use in reporting PROs generally, and more specifically, for PROs identified as primary study outcomes, was approved by the ISOQOL Board of Directors.ConclusionsISOQOL has developed a suite of recommended standards for reporting PRO results of RCTs. Improved reporting of PROs will enable accurate interpretation of evidence to inform patient choice, aid clinical decision making, and inform health policy.

Health-related quality of life parameters as prognostic factors in a nonmetastatic breast cancer population: An international multicenter study

PURPOSE The purpose of this research was to evaluate whether baseline health-related quality of life (HRQOL) parameters are prognostic factors for survival in locally advanced breast cancer patients. Although the literature highlights the important role of HRQOL parameters in predicting survival in advanced metastatic disease, little evidence exists for earlier stages. PATIENTS AND METHODS The overall sample consisted of 448 patients randomly assigned to receive cyclophosphamide, epirubicin, and fluorouracil versus epirubicin, cyclophosphamide, and granulocyte colony-stimulating factor. Patients were enrolled in 12 countries. HRQOL baseline scores were assessed using the European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Questionnaire C30. The Cox proportional hazards regression model was used for both univariate and multivariate analyses of survival. In addition, a bootstrap resampling technique was used to assess the stability of the outcomes. Bootstrap results were then applied for model averaging purposes as a means to account for the observed model selection uncertainty. RESULTS The final multivariate model retained inflammatory breast cancer (T4d) as the only factor predicting overall survival (OS) with a hazard ratio of 1.375 (95% CI, 1.027 to 1.840; P =.03). The presence of inflammatory breast cancer lowers the median survival time from 6.6 to 4.2 years (36% reduction). None of the preselected HRQOL variables were prognostic for OS or disease-free survival, in either the univariate or multivariate analysis. CONCLUSION Our findings suggest that baseline HRQOL parameters have no prognostic value in a nonmetastatic breast cancer population.

The prognostic value of health-related quality-of-life data in predicting survival in glioblastoma cancer patients: results from an international randomised phase III EORTC Brain Tumour and Radiation Oncology Groups, and NCIC Clinical Trials Group study

This is one of the few studies that have explored the value of baseline symptoms and health-related quality of life (HRQOL) in predicting survival in brain cancer patients. Baseline HRQOL scores (from the EORTC QLQ-C30 and the Brain Cancer Module (BN 20)) were examined in 490 newly diagnosed glioblastoma cancer patients for the relationship with overall survival by using Cox proportional hazards regression models. Refined techniques as the bootstrap re-sampling procedure and the computation of C-indexes and R2-coefficients were used to try and validate the model. Classical analysis controlled for major clinical prognostic factors selected cognitive functioning (P=0.0001), global health status (P=0.0055) and social functioning (P<0.0001) as statistically significant prognostic factors of survival. However, several issues question the validity of these findings. C-indexes and R2-coefficients, which are measures of the predictive ability of the models, did not exhibit major improvements when adding selected or all HRQOL scores to clinical factors. While classical techniques lead to positive results, more refined analyses suggest that baseline HRQOL scores add relatively little to clinical factors to predict survival. These results may have implications for future use of HRQOL as a prognostic factor in cancer patients.

Health-related quality of life in non-small-cell lung cancer: Methodologic issues in randomized controlled trials

PURPOSE Non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC), a leading cause of cancer-related deaths in both developed and developing countries, heavily impacts patient health-related quality of life (HRQOL). Although recent research has found many positive and significant steps in randomized controlled trials (RCTs) in which HRQOL has been used as an outcome, questions remain regarding methodologic quality and impact value of HRQOL outcome assessments in some RCTs. To date, no detailed systematic review exists of HRQOL methodology in NSCLC RCTs. METHODS A systematic review using Cochrane methodology evaluated HRQOL components in RCTs. Identified studies were evaluated independently by three reviewers on a broad set of predetermined criteria. RESULTS Twenty-nine published RCTs (NSCLC patient samples total, N = 8445) with an HRQOL component were identified. Although most trials exhibited good-quality research and useful HRQOL and clinical data, the weaknesses identified in some trials include such common limitations as no clear hypothesis, lack of a clear approach to missing data and data analysis, and limited presentation of results. CONCLUSION Although it is clear that HRQOL is an important end point in NSCLC RCTs because the information helps to influence treatment recommendations, the identified weaknesses in conducting HRQOL measurement in NSCLC RCTs and the reporting of results need to be addressed.

Health related quality of life assessment methodology and reported outcomes in randomised controlled trials of primary brain cancer patients

Over the last 20 years, the assessment of quality of life (QOL) has become an important endpoint in cancer clinical trials, helping us to understand patient survival and QOL experiences and aiding clinicians in providing the best possible treatment and care, with the least toxicity and ill-effects. In primary brain cancer, these are critical issues. Survival is often limited and treatment difficult to tolerate. In recent years, some authors have questioned the methodological quality of the investigations and the reporting of QOL assessments from randomised controlled trials (RCTs), of cancer patients yet this assessment has never specifically focused on brain cancer. This paper therefore reports a systematic review of the research methodology and QOL assessment reporting in brain cancer patients in RCTs. The search was mainly performed on the following databases: Medline, Cancerlit and the Cochrane Controlled Trials Register. We identified only five RCTs, enrolling a total of 1026 patients. In many of these studies, we had identified methodological limitations which would hinder the interpretation of the results. These included a lack of detailed reporting regarding missing data, use of poorly validated tools, and general limitations regarding the presentation and interpretation of the results. Based on the results of our review, we make recommendations for future investigations to avoid these shortcomings.

Health related quality of life in prostate carcinoma patients: a systematic review of randomized controlled trials.

Health related quality of life (HRQOL) is increasingly reported as an important endpoint in cancer clinical trials. However, evidence suggests that HRQOL reporting is often inadequate. Given this, the authors undertook a systematic review to evaluate HRQOL assessment methodology and reported outcomes of randomized controlled clinical trials (RCTs) with prostate carcinoma patients.