Teresa Sequeira

Geriatric oncology: comparing health related quality of life in head and neck cancer patients.

BackgroundPopulation ageing is increasing the number of people annually diagnosed with cancer worldwide, once most types of tumours are age-dependent. High-quality healthcare in geriatric oncology requires a multimodal approach and should take into account stratified patient outcomes based on factors other than chronological age in order to develop interventions able to optimize oncology care.This study aims to evaluate the Health Related Quality of Life in head and neck cancer patients and compare the scores in geriatric and younger patients.MethodsTwo hundred and eighty nine head and neck cancer patients from the Oncology Portuguese Institute participated in the Health Related Quality of Life assessment. Two patient groups were considered: the geriatric (≥ 65 years old, n = 115) and the younger (45-60 years old, n= 174). The EORTC QLQ-C30 and EORTC QLQ-H&N35 questionnaires were used.ResultsHead and neck cancer patients were mostly males, 77.4% within geriatric group and 91.4% among younger patients group.The most frequent tumour locations were similar in both groups: larynx, oral cavity and oropharynx - base of the tongue.At the time of diagnosis, most of younger male patients were at disease stage III/IV (55.9%) whereas the majority of younger female patients were at disease stage I/II (83.4%). The geriatric patient distribution was found to be similar in any of the four disease stages and no gender differences were observed.We found that age (geriatrics scored generally worse), gender (females scored generally worse), and tumour site (larynx tumours denounce more significant problems between age groups) clearly influences Health Related Quality of Life perceptions.ConclusionsGeriatric oncology assessments signalize age-independent indicators that might guide oncologic geriatric care optimization. Decision-making in geriatric oncology must be based on tumour characteristics and chronological age but also on performance status evaluation, co-morbidity, and patient reported outcomes assessment.

Oncologia de Cabeça e Pescoço: enquadramento epidemiológico e clínico na avaliação da Qualidade de Vida Relacionada com a Saúde

The importance of oncology diseases as a cause of morbidity and mortality is increasing worldwide, and their social impact is being recognized due to economic and social costs involved in prevention, treatment and rehabilitation. Head and neck cancer is one of the six most prevalent neoplasms worldwide, with an estimated 900,000 new cases diagnosed annually. Regardless of tumor site, deterioration of basic functions affecting head and neck areas are perceived and affect patients lives. Appropriate cancer registration may provide a better analysis of health-related quality of life outcomes. In this study, 380 head and neck cancer patients were evaluated. The study showed that women have lower overall Quality of Life results. It also emphasizes the importance of early diagnosis, which often relates to stages with better prognosis and better Quality of Life outcomes. The study concluded that tumor location has an impact on Quality of Life self-perception. Values of Health Related Quality of Life should be analyzed along with socio-demographic and clinical variables in order to better understand the epidemiology, pathogenesis, and prevention of Head and Neck Cancer.

Patient reported outcomes in head and neck cancer: selecting instruments for quality of life integration in clinical protocols

BackgroundHealth Related Quality of Life has been used in medical research for more than twenty years, being progressively accepted during the last decade as an important patient reported outcome. Considering the multidimensional approach involved in Health Related Quality of Life assessment, instrument applicability and cultural adaptation must be tested for each population. In order to select the most appropriate instrument for Head and Neck cancer patients, two major Health Related Quality of Life specific questionnaires for Head and Neck cancer patients were compared. Conceptual differences, psychometric characteristics, scores, reliability, construct validity and sensitivity to symptomatology, tumour location, tumour size were analyzed.Methods102 consecutive Head and Neck cancer patients completed two different Health Related Quality of Life questionnaires: EORTC QLQ-C30 and its specific head and neck module QLQ-H&N35 and the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy Scales (FACT-H&N). Patients completed the questionnaires, immediately before consultation as a part of the routine evaluation.ResultsA greater variability was always found in the EORTC QLC-C30 questionnaires scores for all comparable domains. Both instruments revealed a good internal consistency and demonstrated to be good tools to distinguish symptomatic patients. The EORTC questionnaires still demonstrated sensitivity to distinguish T3 and T4 staging. Conceptual differences and the psychometric characteristics are discussed. Our results suggest that these two instruments assess different aspects of Health Related Quality of Life - the questionnaires should be used separately and chosen according to the study objectives and methodology.ConclusionsThis study emphases the importance in selecting the appropriate tool as a critical success factor in implementing routine Health Related Quality of Life assessment in clinical practice. This decision assumes particularly importance when utilization of results in real time and integration into clinical protocols are considered.

Head and Neck Cancer: Improving Patient-Reported Outcome Measures for Clinical Practice

Opinion statementHead and neck cancer includes a wide range of tumors that occur in several areas of the upper aerodigestive tract. Most head and neck cancer patients report treatment-related late effects (both physical and psycho-social). High-quality and patient-centered care in head and neck cancer depend on the understanding of the continuum patient’s experience—the disease pathway. Healthcare has been improved by involving patients more actively in the disease process, and a few reports support that patient-reported outcomes—built around the patient’s experience—given in a timely manner to oncologists are extremely valuable in oncology clinical care. Implementation and clinical use of patient-reported outcomes requires some procedures involving head and neck cancer patients, clinicians, researchers, and institutional leaders The unified and integrated vision is still absent and some current concerns are being discussed to optimize benefits of patient-reported outcomes use in clinical practice. The inclusion of all first-line caregivers, team formation and training, continuous monitoring improvement, and analysis are critical success factors to consider. Our team developed a broader and inclusive understanding of patient-reported outcomes. Patient-reported outcome (Health-Related Quality of Life) assessment is implemented as a systematic and routine process in Head and Neck Unit. Head and neck cancer patients consider the questionnaire administration as part of the clinical approach. We are currently working in a program (PROimp) using mathematical models to identify common head and neck cancer patterns and building prognostic predictive models, to predict future outcomes, to appraise risk/benefit of treatments (standard or new), and to estimate patient’s risk of future disease development. It is our aim to better comprehend the singular and unexpected perceptions to really provide directed and personalized cancer care defining the patient pathway. The future holds promising for PROs that are ascending as a nuclear outcome in head and neck oncology.