Development of standard computerised adaptive test (CAT) settings for the EORTC CAT Core.

AIMS: Computerised adaptive test (CAT) provides individualised patient reported outcome measurement while retaining direct comparability of scores across patients and studies. Optimal CAT measurement requires an appropriate CAT-setting, the set of criteria defining the CAT including start item, item selection criterion, and stop criterion. The European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) CAT Core allows for assessing the 14 functional and symptom domains covered by the EORTC QLQ-C30 questionnaire. The aim was to present a general approach for selecting CAT-settings and to use this to develop a portfolio of standard settings for the EORTC CAT Core optimised for different purposes and populations. METHODS: Using simulations, the measurement properties of CATs of different length and precision were evaluated and compared allowing for identifying the most suitable settings. All CATs were initiated with the most informative QLQ-C30 item. For each domain two fixed-length and two fixed-precision standard CATs were selected focusing on efficiency (brief version) and precision (long), respectively. RESULTS: The brief fixed-length CATs included 3-5 items each while the long versions included 5-8 items. The fixed-precision CATs aimed for reliability of 0.65-0.95 (brief versions) and 0.85-0.98 (long versions), respectively. Median sample size savings using the CATs compared to the QLQ-C30 scales ranged 20%-31%, although savings varied considerably across the domains. CONCLUSION: The EORTC CAT Core standard settings simplify selection of relevant and appropriate CATs. The CATs prioritise either brevity and efficiency or precision, but all provide increased measurement precision and hence, reduced sample size requirements compared to the QLQ-C30 scales. The CATs may be used as they are or modified to accommodate specific requirements.

Setting International Standards in Analyzing Patient-Reported Outcomes and Quality of Life Endpoints in Cancer Clinical Trials-Innovative Medicines Initiative (SISAQOL-IMI): stakeholder views, objectives, and procedures.

Patient-reported outcomes (PROs), such as symptoms, functioning, and other health-related quality-of-life concepts are gaining a more prominent role in the benefit-risk assessment of cancer therapies. However, varying ways of analysing, presenting, and interpreting PRO data could lead to erroneous and inconsistent decisions on the part of stakeholders, adversely affecting patient care and outcomes. The Setting International Standards in Analyzing Patient-Reported Outcomes and Quality of Life Endpoints in Cancer Clinical Trials-Innovative Medicines Initiative (SISAQOL-IMI) Consortium builds on the existing SISAQOL work to establish recommendations on design, analysis, presentation, and interpretation for PRO data in cancer clinical trials, with an expanded set of topics, including more in-depth recommendations for randomised controlled trials and single-arm studies, and for defining clinically meaningful change. This Policy Review presents international stakeholder views on the need for SISAQOL-IMI, the agreed on and prioritised set of PRO objectives, and a roadmap to ensure that international consensus recommendations are achieved.

Patient-reported outcome measures for emotional functioning in cancer patients: Content comparison of the EORTC CAT Core, FACT-G, HADS, SF-36, PRO-CTCAE, and PROMIS instruments.

BACKGROUND: Cancer and its treatment can have substantial impact on patients' emotional functioning. Several patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) assessing emotional functioning are available, but differences in content limit the comparability of results. To better understand conceptual (dis)similarities, we conducted a content comparison of commonly used PROMs. METHODS: We included emotional functioning items, scales, and item banks from the EORTC CAT Core, EORTC QLQ-C30, FACT-G, Hospital anxiety and depression scale (HADS), SF-36, PRO-CTCAE, and PROMIS (item banks for anxiety, depression, and anger). Item content was linked to the International Classification of Functioning, Disability, and Health (ICF) and a hierarchical framework established for PROMIS. Single items could be coded with more than one ICF category but were solely assigned to one facet within the PROMIS framework. RESULTS: The measures comprise 132 unique items covering the ICF components 'Body functions' (136/153 codings, 88.9%) and 'Activities and participation' (15/153, 9.8%). Most ICF codings (112/153, 73.2%) referred to the third-level category 'b1528 Emotional functions, other specified'. According to the PROMIS framework 48.5% of the items assessed depression (64/132 items), followed by anxiety (41/132, 31.1%) and anger (26/132, 19.7%). The EORTC measures covered depression, anxiety, and anger in a single measure, while the PROMIS inventory provides separate item banks for these concepts. The FACT-G, SF-36, PRO-CTCAE and HADS covered depression and anxiety, but not anger. CONCLUSION: Our results provide an in-depth conceptual understanding of selected PROMs and important qualitative information going beyond psychometric evidence. Such information supports the identification of PROMs for which scores can be meaningfully linked with quantitative methods.

Content comparison of the EORTC CAT Core, SF-36, FACT-G, and PROMIS role and social functioning measures based on the International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health.

OBJECTIVES: In line with the World Health Organizations' health definition, patient-reported outcome (PRO) measures frequently cover aspects of social health. Our study aimed to evaluate the role functioning (RF) and social functioning (SF) contents assessed by PRO measures commonly used in cancer patients. METHODS: We analysed the item content of the SF and RF domains of the EORTC CAT Core, the EORTC QLQ-C30, the SF-36, and the FACT-G as well as the PROMIS item bank covering the Ability to Participate in Social Roles and Activities. Following an established methodology we linked item content to the International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health (ICF) framework. RESULTS: The content of 85 items was assigned to three ICF components ('Activities and Participation', 'Body Functions', and 'Environmental Factors'). The EORTC CAT Core RF items were mostly related to the first-level ICF categories 'Domestic life' and 'Community, social and civic life', while its SF item bank focused on 'Interpersonal interactions and relationships'. These three categories were also covered by the PROMIS social participation item bank. The FACT-G Social/Family scale focused on environmental factors ('Support and Relationships' and 'Attitudes') while the SF-36 Role-physical/emotional scales had a stronger focus on 'General tasks and demands' and 'Major life areas'. CONCLUSIONS: Our results highlight conceptual overlap and differences among PRO measures for the assessment of social health in cancer. This information may help to select the most appropriate measure for a specific setting or study purpose and to better understand the possibilities of linking scores across different PRO measures.

Adherence to Patient-Reported Symptom Monitoring and Subsequent Clinical Interventions for Patients With Multiple Myeloma in Outpatient Care: Longitudinal Observational Study.

BACKGROUND: The use of software to monitor patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) can improve outcomes for patients with cancer receiving anticancer therapy; however, evidence from applications used in routine clinical practice is lacking. OBJECTIVE: We aimed to investigate adherence to and patient perceptions of a weekly, web-based PROM symptom monitoring program in routine clinical practice for patients with Multiple Myeloma. Moreover, we aimed to capture how clinical alerts prompted by the system influenced clinical care. METHODS: We conducted a single-center longitudinal observational study to evaluate patient adherence to and perceptions of the PROM monitoring software in routine practice. Patients with Multiple Myeloma remotely completed weekly treatment-specific PROMs to monitor key symptoms via a dedicated web-based platform. Alarming symptoms triggered clinical alerts in the application for the treatment team, which could initiate clinical interventions. The primary outcomes were the web-based assessment completion rate and patients' perceptions of the monitoring program, as assessed by an evaluation questionnaire. Moreover, clinical alerts prompted by the system and consequential clinical interventions were analyzed. RESULTS: Between July 2021 and June 2022, a total of 55 patients were approached for participation; 39 patients participated (24, 61% male, mean age 63.2, SD 9.2 years). The median assessment completion rate out of all weekly scheduled assessments was 70.3% (IQR 41.2%-89.6%). Most patients (77%) felt that the health care team was better informed about their health status due to the web-based assessments. Clinical alerts were triggered for 1758 of 14,639 (12%) reported symptoms. For 548 of 1758 (31.2%) alerts, the symptom had been registered before and no further action was required; for 348 of 1758 (19.9%) alerts, telephone consultation and self-management advice sufficed. Higher-level interventions were seldom needed in response to alerts: referral to a doctor or specialist (88/1758, 5% alerts), medication changes (22/1758, 1.3%), scheduling additional diagnostics (9/1758, 0.5%), or unplanned emergency visits (7/1758, 0.4%). Most patients (55%) reported the calls in response to alerts gave them "quite a bit" or "very much" of an added feeling of security during therapy. CONCLUSIONS: Our study shows that high adherence to regular and tailored PROM monitoring can be achieved in routine clinical care. The findings provide valuable insight into how the PROM monitoring program and the clinical alerts and resulting interventions shaped clinical practice. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT05036863; https://clinicaltrials.gov/study/NCT05036863.

Identifying health-related quality of life cut-off scores that indicate the need for supportive care in young adults with cancer.

PURPOSE: Using patient-reported outcomes in routine cancer care may improve health outcomes. However, a lack of information about which scores are problematic in specific populations can impede use. To facilitate interpretation of the European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer Core Questionnaire (EORTC QLQ-C30), we identified cut-off scores that indicate need for support by comparing each scale to relevant items from the Supportive Care Needs Survey (SCNS-LF59) in a young adult (YA) population. METHODS: We conducted a cross-sectional survey amongst YAs with cancer ages 25-39 at diagnosis. Participants completed the EORTC QLQ-C30 and SCNS-LF59. Patient, clinician and research experts matched supportive care needs from the SCNS-LF59 to quality of life domains of the EORTC QLQ-C30. We evaluated the EORTC QLQ-C30 domain score's ability to detect patients with need using receiver operator characteristic (ROC) analysis, calculating the area under the ROC curve and sensitivity and specificity for selected cut-offs. Cut-offs were chosen by maximising Youden's J statistic and ensuring sensitivity passed 0.70. Sensitivity analyses were conducted to examine the variability of the cut-off scores by treatment status. RESULTS: Three hundred and forty-seven YAs took part in the survey. Six experts matched SCNS-LF59 items to ten EORTC QLQ-C30 domains. The AUC ranged from 0.78 to 0.87. Cut-offs selected ranged from 8 (Nausea and Vomiting and Pain) to 97 (Physical Functioning). All had adequate sensitivity (above 0.70) except the Financial Difficulties scale (0.64). Specificity ranged from 0.61 to 0.88. Four of the cut-off scores differed by treatment status. CONCLUSION: Cut-offs with adequate sensitivity were calculated for nine EORTC QLQ-C30 scales for use with YAs with cancer. Cut-offs are key to interpretability and use of the EORTC QLQ-C30 in routine care to identify patients with supportive care need.

EORTC QLQ-C30 general population normative data for Italy by sex, age and health condition: an analysis of 1,036 individuals.

BACKGROUND: General population normative values for the widely used health-related quality of life (HRQoL) measure, European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Questionnaire - Core 30 (EORTC QLQ-C30), are available for a range of countries. These are mostly countries in northern Europe. However, there is still a lack of such normative values for southern Europe. Therefore, this study aims to provide sex-, age- and health condition-specific normative values for the general Italian population for the EORTC QLQ-C30. MATERIAL AND METHODS: This study is based on Italian EORTC QLQ-C30 general population data previously collected in an international EORTC project comprising over 15,000 respondents across 15 countries. Recruitment and assessment were carried out via online panels. Quota sampling was used for sex and age groups (18|-|39, 40-49, 50-59, 60-69 and ≥ 70 years), separately for each country. We applied weights to match the age and sex distribution in our sample with UN statistics for Italy. Along with descriptive statistics, linear regression models were estimated to describe the associations of sex, age and health condition with the EORTC QLQ-C30 scores. RESULTS: A total of 1,036 respondents from Italy were included in our analyses. The weighted mean age was 49.3 years, and 536 (51.7%) participants were female. Having at least one health condition was reported by 60.7% of the participants. Men reported better scores than women on all EORTC QLQ-C30 scales but diarrhoea. While the impact of age differed across scales, older age was overall associated with better HRQoL as shown by the summary score. For all scales, differences were in favour of participants who did not report any health condition, compared to those who reported at least one. CONCLUSION: The Italian normative values for the EORTC QLQ-C30 scales support the interpretation of HRQoL profiles in Italian cancer populations. The strong impact of health conditions on EORTC QLQ-C30 scores highlights the importance of adjusting for the impact of comorbidities in cancer patients when interpreting HRQoL data.

Usability evaluation of the Computer-Based Health Evaluation System (CHES) eDiary for patients with faecal incontinence: a pilot study.

BACKGROUND: Faecal incontinence (FI) is prevalent in 15-20% of elderly individuals and is frequently monitored in clinical trials and practice. Bowel diaries are the most common way to document FI, but, in clinical practice, are mainly used as paper-based versions. Electronic diaries (eDiaries) offer many potential benefits over paper-based diaries. The aim of this study was to develop and test an eDiary to document FI. METHODS: We migrated a paper FI diary to an eDiary app based on the Computer-based Health Evaluation System (CHES). To assess usability, we conducted functionality and usability tests at two time points in a sample of patients with FI. In the first assessment, the eDiary functionalities were tested, patients completed the System Usability Scale (SUS, range 0-100) and compared the paper diary with the eDiary. We set a threshold for minimum acceptable average usability at 70 points. Patients were then instructed to use the eDiary for 2 days at home and contacted to report on their usage and completed the SUS a second time. RESULTS: We recruited a sample of N = 14 patients to use the eDiary. All patients were able to use all functionalities of the eDiary and only a few patients with lower technological literacy or access to devices (n = 3) needed initial assistance. The mean usability rating given at the first time point was high with 88 points (SD 18, 95% CI 78.2-96.8) and most patients (n = 10) reported they would prefer the eDiary over the paper-based version. Nine patients (n = 9) participated in the follow-up assessment and the mean SUS rating at the second time point was 97 points (SD 7, 95% CI 92.8-100). CONCLUSION: The eDiary showed excellent usability scores for the assessment of FI at both assessments. Generally, patients preferred the eDiary over the paper-based version. We recommend the eDiary for usage with patients who own and use a smartphone and discuss potential solutions for patients with lower technological literacy or access.

Injuries to the anterolateral ligament are observed more frequently compared to lesions to the deep iliotibial tract (Kaplan fibers) in anterior cruciate ligamant deficient knees using magnetic resonance imaging.

PURPOSE: To determine the accuracy of detection, injury rate and inter- and intrarater reproducibility in visualizing lesions to the anterolateral ligament (ALL) and the deep portion of the iliotibial tract (dITT) in anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) deficient knees. METHODS: Ninety-one consecutive patients, out of those 25 children (age 14.3 ± 3.5 years), with diagnosed ACL tears were included. Two musculoskeletal radiologists retrospectively reviewed MRI data focusing on accuracy of detection and potential injuries to the ALL or dITT. Lesion were diagnosed in case of discontinued fibers in combination with intra- or peri-ligamentous edema and graded as intact, partial or complete tears. Cohen's Kappa and 95% confidence intervals (95% CI) were determined for inter- and intrarater reliability measures. RESULTS: The ALL and dITT were visible in 52 (78.8%) and 56 (84.8%) of adult-and 25 (100%) and 19 (76.0%) of pediatric patients, respectively. The ALL was injured in 45 (58.5%; partial: 36.4%, compleate: 22.1%) patients. Partial and comleate tears, where visualized in 21 (40.4%) and 16 (30.8%) adult- and seven (28.0%) and one (4%) peditric patients. A total of 16 (21.3%; partial: 13.3%, compleate: 8.0%) dITT injuries were identified. Partal and complete lesions were seen in seven (12.5%) and five (8.9%) adult- and three (15.8%) and one (5.3%) pediatric patients. Combined injuries were visualized in nine (12.7%) patients. Inter-observer (0.91-0.95) and intra-observer (0.93-0.95) reproducibility was high. CONCLUSION: In ACL injured knees, tears of the ALL are observed more frequently compared to lesions to the deep iliotibial tract. Combined injuries of both structures are rare. Clinically, the preoperative visualization of potentially injured structures of the anterolateral knee is crucial and is important for a more personalized preoperative planning and tailored anatomical reconstruction. The clinical implication of injuries to the anterolateral complex of the knee needs further investigation. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: II.

Investigating Trends in the Quality of Reporting of Patient-Reported Outcomes in Oncology Over Time: Analysis of 631 Randomized Controlled Trials Published Between 2004 and 2019.

OBJECTIVES: Incomplete reporting of key information on patient-reported outcomes (PROs) in randomized controlled trials (RCTs) in oncology has been highlighted repeatedly as a major barrier to the use of study findings in clinical practice. We investigated whether the quality of reporting of PRO data in cancer RCTs has improved over the last 15 years. METHODS: We identified all cancer RCTs with PRO endpoints conducted across the most prevalent solid tumor types worldwide published between 2004 and 2019. The quality of PRO reporting was assessed using the International Society for Quality of Life Research recommended standards, which include important aspects related to assessment methodology, statistical analyses, and interpretation of data. RESULTS: We assessed a total of 631 cancer RCTs in breast (n = 187), lung (n = 131), prostate (n = 120), colorectal (n = 107), and gynecological (n = 86) cancer. We observed a higher adherence to the International Society for Quality of Life Research reporting criteria in the more recently published studies. In a multivariable linear regression analysis, we observed a statistically significant improvement in the quality of PRO reporting over time (P<.001), and this relationship was independent of other measured confounding factors, such as sample size and study sponsorship. Overall, the quality of PRO reporting was higher for studies published after the publication of the Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials-PRO Extension. CONCLUSIONS: The quality of PRO reporting in cancer RCTs published in the last 15 years has improved significantly. Our findings are encouraging because better reporting of PRO results may translate into a greater impact of study findings on real-world practice.

Past and Current Practice of Patient-Reported Outcome Measurement in Randomized Cancer Clinical Trials: A Systematic Review.

OBJECTIVES: In our systematic review, we assessed past and current practice of patient-reported outcome (PRO) measurement in cancer randomized, controlled trials (RCTs). METHODS: We included RCTs with PRO endpoints evaluating conventional medical treatments, conducted in patients with the most prevalent solid tumor types (breast, lung, colorectal, prostate, bladder, and gynecological cancers) and either published in 2004 to 2018 or registered on clinicaltrials.gov and initiated in 2014 to 2019. Frequency of use of individual PRO measures was assessed overall, over time, and by cancer site. RESULTS: Screening of 42 095 database records and 3425 registered trials identified 480 published and 537 registered trials meeting inclusion criteria. Among published trials, the European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) measures were used most often (54.8% of trials), followed by the Functional Assessment of Chronic Illness Therapy (FACIT) measures (35.8%), the EQ-5D (10.2%), the SF-36 (7.3%), and the MD Anderson Symptom Inventory (MDASI; 2.5%). Among registered trials, the EORTC measures were used in 66.1% of the trials, followed by the FACIT measures (25.9%), the EQ-5D (23.1%), the SF-36 (4.8%), the Patient-Reported Outcomes version of the Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (PRO-CTCAE; 2.2%), the Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS) measures (1.7%), and the MDASI measures (1.1%). CONCLUSION: The PRO measures most frequently used in RCTs identified in our review differ substantially in terms of content and domains, reflecting the ongoing debate among the scientific community, healthcare providers, and regulators on the type of PRO to be measured. Current findings may contribute to better informing the development of an internationally agreed core outcome set for future cancer trials.

Patient-Reported Outcomes as Independent Prognostic Factors for Survival in Oncology: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

OBJECTIVES: Assessment of patient-reported outcomes (PROs) in oncology is of critical importance because it provides unique information that may also predict clinical outcomes. METHODS: We conducted a systematic review of prognostic factor studies to examine the prognostic value of PROs for survival in cancer. A systematic literature search was performed in PubMed for studies published between 2013 and 2018. We considered any study, regardless of the research design, that included at least 1 PRO domain in the final multivariable prognostic model. The protocol (EPIPHANY) was published and registered in the International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (CRD42018099160). RESULTS: Eligibility criteria selected 138 studies including 158 127 patients, of which 43 studies were randomized, controlled trials. Overall, 120 (87%) studies reported at least 1 PRO to be statistically significantly prognostic for overall survival. Lung (n = 41, 29.7%) and genitourinary (n = 27, 19.6%) cancers were most commonly investigated. The prognostic value of PROs was investigated in secondary data analyses in 101 (73.2%) studies. The EORTC QLQ-C30 questionnaire was the most frequently used measure, and its physical functioning scale (range 0-100) the most frequent independent prognostic PRO, with a pooled hazard ratio estimate of 0.88 per 10-point increase (95% CI 0.84-0.92). CONCLUSIONS: There is convincing evidence that PROs provide independent prognostic information for overall survival across cancer populations and disease stages. Further research is needed to translate current evidence-based data into prognostic tools to aid in clinical decision making.

Estimating seroprevalence of SARS-CoV-2 antibodies using three self-reported symptoms: development of a prediction model based on data from Ischgl, Austria.

We report the development of a regression model to predict the prevalence of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus (SARS-CoV-2) antibodies on a population level based on self-reported symptoms. We assessed participant-reported symptoms in the past 12 weeks, as well as the presence of SARS-CoV-2 antibodies during a study conducted in April 2020 in Ischgl, Austria. We conducted multivariate binary logistic regression to predict seroprevalence in the sample. Participants (n = 451) were on average 47.4 years old (s.d. 16.8) and 52.5% female. SARS-CoV-2 antibodies were found in n = 197 (43.7%) participants. In the multivariate analysis, three significant predictors were included and the odds ratios (OR) for the most predictive categories were cough (OR 3.34, CI 1.70-6.58), gustatory/olfactory alterations (OR 13.78, CI 5.90-32.17) and limb pain (OR 2.55, CI 1.20-6.50). The area under the receiver operating characteristic curve was 0.773 (95% CI 0.727-0.820). Our regression model may be used to estimate the seroprevalence on a population level and a web application is being developed to facilitate the use of the model.

General Spanish population normative data analysis for the EORTC QLQ-C30 by sex, age, and health condition.

PURPOSE: General population normative data for the European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) QLQ-C30 questionnaire facilitates interpretation of data assessed from cancer patients. This study aims to present normative data of the general Spanish population. METHODS/PATIENTS: Data were obtained from a prior larger study collecting EORTC QLQ-C30 norm data across 15 countries. Data were stratified by sex and age groups (18-39, 40-49, 50-59, 60-69 and > 70 years). Sex and age distribution were weighted according to population distribution statistics. Sex- and age-specific normative values were analysed separately, as were participants with versus those without health conditions. Multiple linear regression was used to estimate the association of each of the EORTC QLQ-C30 scales with the determinants age, sex, sex-by-age interaction term, and health condition. RESULTS: In total, 1,165 Spanish individuals participated in the study. Differences were found by sex and age. The largest sex-related differences were seen in fatigue, emotional functioning, and global QOL (Quality of Life), favouring men. The largest age differences were seen in emotional functioning, insomnia, and pain, with middle-aged groups having the worst scores. Those > 60 years old scored better than those < 60 years old on all scales except for physical functioning. Participants with no health conditions scored better in all QLQ-C30 domains. CONCLUSIONS: The present study highlights differences in HRQOL between specific sex/age strata and especially between people with and without a health condition in the general Spanish population. These factors must be considered when comparing general population HRQOL data with that of cancer patients.

Functional health and symptoms in Spain before and during the COVID-19 pandemic.

BACKGROUND: The impact of the coronavirus disease (COVID-19) pandemic on wellbeing and health has so far been studied using mostly cross-sectional designs. To place recent findings into context, we compared symptoms and functional health status in two independent samples assessed before and during the COVID-19 pandemic. METHODS: Participants were recruited via an online panel using quota sampling. We assessed symptoms, functional health, and global quality of life with the EORTC QLQ-C30 in two general population samples in Spain (collected in July 2019 and April 2020). We also assessed several COVID-19 related variables, such as adherence to social distancing. RESULTS: Data from N = 1010 participants before the pandemic (mean age 47.1 years, 50.5% female) were compared with data from N = 504 participants during the pandemic (mean age 47.1 years, 50.8% female). Participants during the pandemic (vs. before the pandemic) reported lower role functioning and emotional functioning, as well as less symptom burden. A lower degree of social distancing was associated with better functional health and lower symptom burden. CONCLUSION: Our findings indicate an impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on functional health and symptom burden in the Spanish general population. The comparison of before and during the pandemic can be used to benchmark results raised only during the pandemic.

Using the Computer-based Health Evaluation System (CHES) to Support Self-management of Symptoms and Functional Health: Evaluation of Hematological Patient Use of a Web-Based Patient Portal.

BACKGROUND: Patient portals offer the possibility to assess patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) remotely, and first evidence has demonstrated their potential benefits. OBJECTIVE: In this study, we evaluated patient use of a web-based patient portal that provides patient information and allows online completion of PROMs. A particular focus was on patient motivation for (not) using the portal. The portal was developed to supplement routine monitoring at the Department of Internal Medicine V in Innsbruck. METHODS: We included patients with multiple myeloma and chronic lymphocytic leukemia who were already participating in routine monitoring at the hospital for use of the patient portal. Patients were introduced to the portal and asked to complete questionnaires prior to their next hospital visits. We used system access logs and 3 consecutive semistructured interviews to analyze patient use and evaluation of the portal. RESULTS: Between July 2017 and August 2020, we approached 122 patients for participation in the study, of whom 83.6% (102/122) consented to use the patient portal. Patients were on average 60 (SD 10.4) years old. Of patients providing data at all study time points, 37% (26/71) consistently used the portal prior to their hospital visits. The main reason for not completing PROMs was forgetting to do so in between visits (25/84, 29%). During an average session, patients viewed 5.3 different pages and spent 9.4 minutes logged on to the portal. Feedback from interviews was largely positive with no patients reporting difficulties navigating the survey and 50% of patients valuing the self-management tools provided in the portal. Regarding the portal content, patients were interested in reviewing their own results and reported high satisfaction with the dynamic self-management advice, also reflected in the high number of clicks on those pages. CONCLUSIONS: Patient portals can contribute to patient empowerment by offering sought-after information and self-management advice. In our study, the majority of our patients were open to using the portal. The low number of technical complaints and average time spent in the portal demonstrate the feasibility of our patient portal. While initial interest was high, long-term use was considerably lower and identified as the main area for improvement. In a next step, we will improve several aspects of the patient portal (eg, including a reminder to visit the portal before the next appointment and closer PROM symptom monitoring via an onconurse).

Health-Related Quality of Life Assessment in Patients with Myelodysplastic Syndromes: Evidence from Randomized Clinical Trials.

Myelodysplastic syndromes (MDS) are characterized by ineffective hematopoiesis and blood cytopenia with a variable risk of progression to acute myeloid leukemia. The main goal of therapy for the large majority of patients is to improve health-related quality of life (HRQoL). Its rigorous assessment is now recommended in international MDS guidelines. Our review provides an overview of HRQoL results from randomized controlled trials (RCTs) in MDS patients. The literature search undertaken in PubMed identified 10 RCTs with HRQoL endpoints (all secondary) published between August 2008 and September 2020. These RCTs have helped to better understand the impact of therapies from the patient perspective and have generated valuable information that can be used to further support clinical decisions. However, the number of RCTs in MDS patients, including HRQoL endpoints, is still low. Given the importance of symptom relief and HRQoL improvement in the treatment of MDS patients, the assessment of the patient perspective in future RCTs is highly recommended to keep expanding the knowledge of the impact of new MDS therapies.

Differences in Patient-Reported Outcomes That Are Most Frequently Detected in Randomized Controlled Trials in Patients With Solid Tumors: A Pooled Analysis of 229 Trials.

OBJECTIVES: Patient-reported outcome (PRO) measurements used in cancer research can assess a number of health domains. Our primary objective was to investigate which broad types of PRO domains (namely, functional health, symptoms, and global quality of life [QoL]) most frequently yielded significant differences between treatments in randomized controlled trials (RCTs). METHODS: A total of 229 RCTs published between January 2004 and February 2019, conducted on patients diagnosed with the most common solid malignancies and assessed using the European Organization for the Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) Quality of Life Questionnaire (QLQ)-C30, were considered. Studies were identified systematically using literature searches in key electronic databases. Unlike other PRO measurements typically used in RCTs, the scoring algorithm of the multidimensional EORTC QLQ-C30 allowed us to clearly distinguish the 3 broad types of PRO domains. RESULTS: In total, 134 RCTs (58.5%) reported statistically significant differences between treatment arms for at least 1 of the QLQ-C30 domains. Most frequently, differences were reported for 2 or all 3 broad types of PRO domains (78 of 134 trials; 58.2%). In particular, 35 trials (26.1%) found significant differences for symptoms, functional health, and global QoL, 24 trials (17.9%) for symptoms and functional health, 11 trials (8.2%) for functional health and global QoL, and 8 trials (6.0%) for symptoms and global QoL. The likelihood of finding a statistically significant difference between treatment arms was not associated with key study characteristics, such as study design (ie, open-label vs blinded trials) and industry support. CONCLUSIONS: Our findings emphasize the importance of a multidimensional PRO assessment to most comprehensively capture the overall burden of therapy from the patients' standpoint.

Normative data for the EORTC QLQ-C30 from the Austrian general population.

BACKGROUND: The European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) QLQ-C30 is a widely used cancer-specific questionnaire assessing 15 domains of health-related quality of life (HRQoL). Our aim was to facilitate the interpretation of scores on this questionnaire by providing Austrian normative data based on a general population sample. METHODS: The calculation of normative data was based on the EORTC QLQ-C30 data collected from an Austrian general population sample that was part of an international online panel study on the development of European normative data. Data reported herein were stratified and weighted by age and sex. Normative data were calculated for all 15 HRQoL domains of the EORTC QLQ-C30. For precise predictions of EORTC QLQ-C30 scores, a regression model based on sex, age and the presence of health conditions was built. RESULTS: The Austrian sample comprised 1002 Austrian participants (50.1% female, 51.4% when weighted by age and sex based on United Nation statistics). The mean age was 53.7 years (weighted: 47.7 years) and 53.6% (weighted: 47.4%) reported at least one health condition. Men reported better physical (Cohen's d = 0.17) and emotional (Cohen's d = 0.17) functioning as well as less fatigue (Cohen's d = 0.18) and insomnia (Cohen's d = 0.25) compared with women. Younger individuals (< 40 years) reported less dyspnea (Cohen's d = 0.61) and pain (Cohen's d = 0.51), whereas older individuals (≥60 years) reported better emotional functioning (Cohen's d = 0.55). CONCLUSIONS: We present Austrian normative data for the EORTC QLQ-C30. Differences by age and sex are mostly in line with the findings of other European normative studies. The Austrian population sample shows higher HRQoL and lower morbidity compared with other European countries. The normative data in this study will facilitate the interpretation of EORTC QLQ-C30 scores in oncological practice and research at a national and international level (including cross-cultural comparisons).

International validation of the EORTC CAT Core: a new adaptive instrument for measuring core quality of life domains in cancer.

BACKGROUND: The European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) Quality of Life Group (QLG) has developed computerised adaptive tests (CATs) for the 14 functional and symptom domains of the EORTC QLQ-C30 quality of life questionnaire. This is expected to optimise measurement precision, relevance to patients and flexibility. Here, we present the first international validation of the EORTC CAT Core. METHODS: A heterogeneous sample of 699 cancer patients scheduled for chemotherapy and/or radiotherapy was recruited across seven European countries. The EORTC CAT Core and all QLQ-C30 items were administered to participants before and after initiating treatment. Correlations between CAT and QLQ-C30 scores and floor/ceiling effects were calculated. Using several grouping variables, relative validity (cross-sectional known groups difference), responsiveness (changes over time) and relative sample size requirements of the CAT compared to the QLQ-C30 were estimated. RESULTS: Correlations of the CAT and QLQ-C30 ranged from 0.81 to 0.93 across domains. The mean relative reduction in floor and ceiling effects using the CAT was 42% (range 3-99%). Analyses of known groups validity and responsiveness indicated that, across domains, mean sample size requirements for the CAT were 72% and 70%, respectively, of those using the QLQ-C30. CONCLUSIONS: The EORTC CAT Core measures the same domains as the QLQ-C30 with reduced floor/ceiling effects. The CAT generally facilitated the use of smaller samples (about 30% smaller on average) without loss of power compared to the QLQ-C30. Based on this study, the EORTC QLG will release the EORTC CAT Core for general use.