Validity and usefulness of a single-item measure of patient-reported bother from side effects of cancer therapy.

BACKGROUND: The improving efficacy of cancer treatment has resulted in an increasing array of treatment-related symptoms and associated burdens imposed on individuals undergoing aggressive treatment of their disease. Often, clinical trials compare therapies that have different types, and severities, of adverse effects. Whether rated by clinicians or patients themselves, it can be difficult to know which side effect profile is more disruptive or bothersome to patients. A simple summary index of bother can help to adjudicate the variability in adverse effects across treatments being compared with each other. METHODS: Across 4 studies, a total of 5765 patients enrolled in cooperative group studies and industry-sponsored clinical trials were the subjects of the current study. Patients were diagnosed with a range of primary cancer sites, including bladder, brain, breast, colon/rectum, head/neck, hepatobiliary, kidney, lung, ovary, pancreas, and prostate as well as leukemia and lymphoma. All patients were administered the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-General version (FACT-G). The single item "I am bothered by side effects of treatment" (GP5), rated on a 5-point Likert scale, is part of the FACT-G. To determine its validity as a useful summary measure from the patient perspective, it was correlated with individual and aggregated clinician-rated adverse events and patient reports of their general ability to enjoy life. RESULTS: Analyses of pharmaceutical trials demonstrated that mean GP5 scores ("I am bothered by side effects of treatment") significantly differed by maximum adverse event grade (P<.001) in all trials, with a clear trend toward increasing GP5 scores with level of increasing adverse event grade. Effect sizes ranged from 0.13 to 0.46. Analyses of cooperative group trials demonstrated a significant correlation between GP5 and item GF3 ("I am able to enjoy life") in the predicted direction. CONCLUSIONS: The single FACT-G item "I am bothered by side effects of treatment" is significantly associated with clinician-reported adverse events and with patients' ability to enjoy their lives. It has promise as an overall summary measure of the burden of a given set of treatment toxicities compared with another. Future research can identify the contribution of individual side effects compared with one another in terms of how each may contribute to overall bother. Cancer 2018;124:991-7. © 2017 American Cancer Society.

Health-related quality of life in patients with neuroendocrine tumors: an investigation of treatment type, disease status, and symptom burden.

INTRODUCTION: Neuroendocrine tumors (NETs) are malignant solid tumors arising in hormone-secreting tissue. They have historically been very difficult to treat, and advanced NETs are considered incurable. Surgery is the only potentially curative treatment option, though research is ongoing, investigating the efficacy of targeted therapies combined with more traditional chemotherapies. Frequent bowel movements and episodes of flushing are the most common symptoms. METHODS: The present study reports data from an anonymous patient survey of 663 eligible NET patients, identified with the assistance of patient advocacy groups. This study investigated the impact of treatment (surgery alone; surgery plus somatostatin analogue; other treatments) on quality of life (QOL). Finally, we investigate whether recurrent disease results in poorer QOL compared to disease treated curatively with surgery and remaining in remission. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION: Results suggest that increased frequency of bowel movements and presence of any flushing symptoms are correlated with decreased quality of life. Treatment groups differed on most Patient Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS) global health and PROMIS-29 scores, including physical function, fatigue, pain, social function, and general physical and mental health, with the surgery group reporting significantly better scores than the other groups (effect size of differences ranged from 0.28 to 0.54). This may be possibly due to effective symptom control reached for these patients through surgery alone. After adjustment for carcinoid syndrome, the association with the treatment group disappeared for all domains except physical functioning. In terms of disease status, patients with recurrent disease reported poorer physical, social, and mental functions. Depression scores were similar between groups; however, patients with recurrent disease reported significantly higher anxiety compared to those with no current NET. Physical functioning was even more markedly different between groups, with recurrent NET patients reporting significantly impaired overall physical function, impaired sleep, and significant fatigue compared to those with no current NET. To our knowledge, this is the first study to comprehensively examine the effect of treatment group, disease status, and symptom burden on the quality of life in NET patients in a large sample. Limitations and future research directions are discussed.

Fertility Preservation Preferences and Perspectives Among Adult Male Survivors of Pediatric Cancer and Their Parents.

Purpose: In this study, we set out to determine the preferences, concerns, and attitudes toward fertility preservation of adult male survivors of pediatric cancer and their parents. Methods: We conducted 3 focus groups with a total of 15 male survivors of pediatric cancer (age at diagnosis: mean=14, range: 10-20; age at study: mean=35, range: 25-47) and 2 groups with a total of 7 parents of survivors. Grounded theory methodology was used for the identification and analysis of recurrent themes expressed by survivors and their parents in the course of focus group discussions. Results: Themes most frequently expressed by survivors included concern regarding long-term treatment effects and a retrospective desire for fertility impairment to have been discussed when they were originally diagnosed with cancer. Parental themes included the same hindsight desire, as well as reliance upon the treating oncologist for direction in selecting the course of treatment, and an acknowledgment that input from a specialist in fertility preservation would have been beneficial. Conclusions: Although future reproductive potential was not consistently reported as a source of apprehension when diagnosed with cancer, both survivors and their parents noted it to be a paramount concern later in life. Parents and survivors both reported that fertility preservation discussions should be routinely incorporated in the clinical context of a pediatric cancer diagnosis.

Delusional disorder and oncology: review of the literature and case report.

OBJECTIVE: Delusional disorder is an infrequent diagnosis in outpatient clinical practice. While delusional thought processes are a fairly common part of symptom clusters in chronic psychiatric disorders such as schizophrenia and bipolar disorders, true delusional disorders are believed to be fairly rare. METHOD: In this article, we review scientific data on incidence, diagnosis, and treatment of delusional disorders. This was done by PubMed search utilizing the search terms "delusional disorder," "oncology," "diagnosis," and "treatment." Relevant articles were excluded if they dealt predominantly with schizophrenia instead of primary delusional disorder. RESULTS: We present a case of a patient diagnosed with follicular lymphoma and an apparent longstanding history of persecutory delusions. The patient's symptoms eventually led to intervention in the oncology practice involving the medical center faculty and staff, as well as local police and the court system. CONCLUSIONS: Delusional disorder is an under-researched condition, and limited information is known regarding the treatment of this condition when it impacts upon medical care. Future research directions are proposed.

Evaluation of treatment- and disease-related symptoms in advanced head and neck cancer: validation of the national comprehensive cancer network-functional assessment of cancer therapy-head and neck cancer symptom index-22 (NFHNSI-22).

CONTEXT: The Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-Head and Neck is a well-validated assessment of quality of life used with patients diagnosed with head and neck cancers (HCNs). The present study is an attempt to evaluate and modify this instrument as necessary in light of the recent regulatory guidelines from the Food and Drug Administration on the use of patient-reported outcomes in clinical trials. OBJECTIVES: Overall, the goal was to identify patients' highest priority cancer symptoms, compare these symptoms with those suggested by oncology experts, and construct a brief symptom index to assess these symptoms and categorize them as treatment-related, disease-related, or related to general function and well-being. METHODS: Patients (N=49) with advanced (Stages III and IV) HCNs were recruited from participating National Comprehensive Cancer Network institutions and community cancer support organizations in the Chicago area. Patients completed open-ended interviews and symptom checklists. Participating oncology physician experts also rated symptoms. Content validity was obtained by evaluating results alongside items in the Functional Assessment of Chronic Illness Therapy system. Eleven oncologists categorized symptoms in terms of importance and also whether the symptoms were primarily related to disease, treatment, or functional well-being. RESULTS: HCN-related symptoms endorsed as high priority by both patients and oncology experts were selected for the new National Comprehensive Cancer Network-Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-Head and Neck Cancer Symptom Index-22. The final version includes 22 items, which are broken down into disease-related symptoms, treatment side effects, or general function and well-being. The new scale has acceptable internal consistency (Cronbach's coefficient alpha=0.86), content validity for use in chemotherapy trials of patients with advanced disease, and concurrent validity as demonstrated by moderate-to-strong correlations with the existing Functional Assessment of Chronic Illness Therapy measure. CONCLUSION: The National Comprehensive Cancer Network-Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-Head and Neck Cancer Symptom Index-22 adequately reflects symptom and side effect concerns of advanced HCN patients as well as oncology physicians. This instrument can be used to evaluate the most important disease-related symptoms, treatment side effects, and function/well-being in patients with advanced HCNs in clinical practice and research.