| 1. |
- Joly, Florence, et al.
(författare)
-
Quality of life and patient-reported outcomes in endometrial cancer clinical trials : a call for action!
- 2014
-
Ingår i: International Journal of Gynecological Cancer. - : Lippincott Williams & Wilkins. - 1048-891X .- 1525-1438. ; 24:9, s. 1693-1699
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- BACKGROUND: There is increasing recognition that quality of life (QoL) and patient-reported outcomes (PROs) are of fundamental importance and particularly relevant given the relatively high likelihood of long-term survival in most women with endometrial cancer (EC). However, there has been relatively little research focused on this topic. Our objective was to analyze our current knowledge and identify research questions to be included in the design of next clinical trials.METHODS: Analyze and critically assess reported clinical trials in EC that have included QoL and PROs as primary or secondary end points.RESULTS: Surgery has a significant impact on physical and functional domains of QoL particularly in the first 6 months after diagnosis. Minimally invasive surgery is associated with less acute morbidity than open procedures and this persists over time. Lymphadenectomy is associated with increased incidence of lymphedema, important late effect. Adjuvant external irradiation may cause gastrointestinal and genitourinary symptoms that impact on physical functioning and which can persist over time. In contrast, vaginal brachytherapy has less toxicity and fewer late effects than external irradiation. The impact of treatment on sexuality has been poorly evaluated in EC survivors. There are few published data on QoL and PROs in patients treated with chemotherapy and the long-term impact has not been addressed. There is no evidence that palliative chemotherapy reduces symptoms and improves QoL. There are very few longitudinal studies on survivorship that is an important concern in EC survivors.CONCLUSIONS: Although there have been some studies addressing QoL and PROs in EC, we have identified deficiencies and gaps in our knowledge. Careful consideration of QoL and PROs end points and how to include them in clinical trials will result in a better appreciation of how treatments can impact on patients QoL and lead to conduct interventions to reduce late effects.
|
|
| 2. |
- McAlpine, Jessica N, et al.
(författare)
-
Quality of life research in endometrial cancer : what is needed to advance progress in this disease site? Methodological considerations from the Gynecologic Cancer InterGroup Symptom Benefit Working Group brainstorming session, Leiden 2012.
- 2014
-
Ingår i: International Journal of Gynecological Cancer. - : Lippincott Williams & Wilkins. - 1048-891X .- 1525-1438. ; 24:9, s. 1686-1692
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- BACKGROUND: Quality of life (QoL) in endometrial cancer (EC) is understudied. Incorporation of QoL questionnaires and patient-reported outcomes in clinical trials has been inconsistent, and the tools and interpretation of these measures are unfamiliar to most practitioners. In 2012, the Gynecologic Cancer InterGroup Symptom Benefit Working Group convened for a brainstorming collaborative session to address deficiencies and work toward improving the quality and quantity of QoL research in women with EC.METHODS: Through literature review and international expert contributions, we compiled a comprehensive appraisal of current generic and disease site-specific QoL assessment tools, strengths and weaknesses of these measures, assessment of sexual health, statistical considerations, and an exploration of the unique array of histopathologic and clinical factors that may influence QoL outcomes in women with EC.RESULTS: This collaborative composition is the first publication specific to EC that addresses methodology in QoL research and the components necessary to achieve high quality QoL data in clinical trials. Future recommendations regarding (1) the incorporation of patient-reported outcomes in all clinical trials in EC, (2) definition of an a priori hypothesis, (3) utilization of validated tools and consideration of new tools corresponding to new therapies or specific symptoms, (4) publication within the same time frame as clinical outcome data, and (5) attempt to correct for disease site-specific potential confounders are presented.CONCLUSIONS: Improved understanding of methodology in QoL research and an increased undertaking of EC-specific QoL research in clinical trials are imperative if we are to improve outcomes in women with EC.
|
|
