Quality of life of early-stage breast-cancer patients diagnosed with COVID-19 in the first three waves of the epidemic treated in the Spanish region of Navarre.

OBJECTIVES: To describe the Quality of Life (QOL) of breast-cancer patients diagnosed with COVID-19 and analyse its evolution, compare the QOL of these patients according to the COVID-19 wave in which they were diagnosed, and examine the clinical and demographic determinants of QOL. METHODS: A total of 260 patients with breast cancer (90.8% I-III stages) and COVID-19 (85% light/moderate) were included (February-September 2021) in this study. Most patients were receiving anticancer treatment (mainly hormonotherapy). Patients were grouped according to the date of COVID-19 diagnosis: first wave (March-May 2020, 85 patients), second wave (June-December 2020, 107 patients) and third wave (January-September 2021, 68 patients). Quality of Life was assessed 10 months, 7 months, and 2 weeks after these dates, respectively. Patients completed QLQ-C30, QLQ-BR45, and Oslo COVID-19 QLQ-PW80 twice over four months. Patients ≥65 also completed QLQ-ELD14. The QOL of each group and changes in QOL for the whole sample were compared (non-parametric tests). Multivariate logistic regression identified patient characteristics related to (1) low global QOL and (2) changes in Global QOL between assessments. RESULTS: Moderate limitations (>30 points) appeared in the first assessment in Global QOL, sexual scales, three QLQ-ELD14 scales, and 13 symptoms and emotional COVID-19 areas. Differences between the COVID-19 groups appeared in two QLQ-C30 areas and four QLQ-BR45 areas. Quality of Life improvements between assessments appeared in six QLQ-C30, four QLQ-BR45 and 18 COVID-19 questionnaire areas. The best multivariate model to explain global QOL combined emotional functioning, fatigue, endocrine treatment, gastrointestinal symptoms, and targeted therapy (R2  = 0.393). The best model to explain changes in global QOL combined physical and emotional functioning, malaise, and sore eyes (R2  = 0.575). CONCLUSIONS: Patients with breast cancer and COVID-19 adapted well to illness. The few differences between wave-based groups (differences in follow-up notwithstanding) may have arisen because the second and third waves saw fewer COVID restrictions, more positive COVID information, and more vaccinated patients.

A multicenter international prospective study of the validity and reliability of a COVID-19-specific health-related quality of life questionnaire.

PURPOSE: To develop and validate a health-related quality of life (HRQoL) questionnaire for patients with current or previous coronavirus disease (COVID-19) in an international setting. METHODS: This multicenter international methodology study followed standardized guidelines for a four-phase questionnaire development. Here, we report on the pretesting and validation of our international questionnaire. Adults with current or previous COVID-19, in institutions or at home were eligible. In the pretesting, 54 participants completed the questionnaire followed by interviews to identify administration problems and evaluate content validity. Thereafter, 371 participants completed the revised questionnaire and a debriefing form to allow preliminary psychometric analysis. Validity and reliability were assessed (correlation-based methods, Cronbach's α, and intra-class correlation coefficient). RESULTS: Eleven countries within and outside Europe enrolled patients. From the pretesting, 71 of the 80 original items fulfilled the criteria for item-retention. Most participants (80%) completed the revised 71-item questionnaire within 15 min, on paper (n = 175) or digitally (n = 196). The final questionnaire included 61 items that fulfilled criteria for item retention or were important to subgroups. Item-scale correlations were > 0.7 for all but nine items. Internal consistency (range 0.68-0.92) and test-retest results (all but one scale > 0.7) were acceptable. The instrument consists of 15 multi-item scales and six single items. CONCLUSION: The Oslo COVID-19 QLQ-W61© is an international, stand-alone, multidimensional HRQoL questionnaire that can assess the symptoms, functioning, and overall quality of life in COVID-19 patients. It is available for use in research and clinical practice. Further psychometric validation in larger patient samples will be performed.

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.

Health-related quality of life issues, including symptoms, in patients with active COVID-19 or post COVID-19; a systematic literature review.

PURPOSE: This systematic review was performed to identify all relevant health-related quality of life (HRQoL) issues associated with COVID-19. METHODS: A systematic literature search was undertaken in April 2020. In four teams of three reviewers each, all abstracts were independently reviewed for inclusion by two reviewers. Using a pre-defined checklist of 93 criteria for each publication, data extraction was performed independently by two reviewers and subsequently compared and discussed. If necessary, a third reviewer resolved any discrepancies. The search was updated in February 2021 to retrieve new publications on HRQoL issues including issues related to the long-term consequences of COVID-19. RESULTS: The search in April 2020 identified 3342 potentially relevant publications, and 339 publications were selected for full-text review and data extraction. We identified 75 distinct symptoms and other HRQoL issues categorized into 12 thematic areas; from general symptoms such as fever, myalgia, and fatigue, to neurological and psychological issues. The updated search revealed three extra issues experienced during active disease and long-term problems with fatigue, psychological issues and impaired cognitive function. CONCLUSION: This first comprehensive systematic review provides a detailed overview of the wide range of HRQoL issues experienced by patients with COVID-19 throughout the course of the disease. It demonstrates the devastating impact of the disease and provides critically important information for clinicians, to enable them to better recognize the disease and to provide knowledge important for treatment and follow-up. The results provided the foundation for the international development of a COVID-19 specific patient-reported HRQoL questionnaire.

Sensitivity to change of the EORTC quality of life module measuring cancer-related fatigue (EORTC QlQ-Fa12): Results from the international psychometric validation.

OBJECTIVE: The European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Group (EORTC QLG) has developed a multidimensional instrument measuring cancer-related fatigue, the EORTC QLQ-FA12. The analysis of sensitivity to change is an essential part of psychometric validation. With this study, we investigated the EORTC QLQ-FA12's sensitivity to change. METHODS: The methodology follows the EORTC guidelines of EORTC QLG for phase IV validation of modules. We included cancer patients undergoing curative and palliative treatment at t1 and followed them up prospectively over the course of their treatment (t2) and 4 weeks after completion of treatment (t3). Data were collected prospectively at 17 sites in 11 countries. Sensitivity to change was investigated using analysis of variance. RESULTS: A total sample of 533 patients was enrolled with various tumour types, different stages of cancer, and receiving either curative treatment (n=311) or palliative treatment (n=222). Over time all fatigue scores were significantly higher in the palliative treatment group compared with the curative group (p < .001). Physical fatigue increased with medium effect size over the course of treatment in the curative group (standardized response mean [SRM] (t1,t2) = 0.44]. After treatment physical [SRM (t2,t3) = 0.39], emotional [SRM (t2,t3)= 0.28] and cognitive fatigue (SRM [t2,t3] = 0.22) declined significantly in the curative group. In the palliative group, emotional (SRM [t2,t3] = 0.18) as well as cognitive [SRM [t2,t3] = 0.26) fatigue increases significantly. CONCLUSIONS: The EORTC-QLQ-FA12 proved to identify clinically significant changes in fatigue in the course of curative and palliative cancer treatment.

Understanding the quality of life (QOL) issues in survivors of cancer: towards the development of an EORTC QOL cancer survivorship questionnaire.

BACKROUND: The number of cancer survivors is growing steadily and increasingly, clinical trials are being designed to include long-term follow-up to assess not only survival, but also late effects and health-related quality of life (HRQOL). Therefore it is is essential to develop patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) that capture the full range of issues relevant to disease-free cancer survivors. The objectives of this project are: 1) to develop a European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) questionnaire that captures the full range of physical, mental and social HRQOL issues relevant to disease-free cancer survivors; and 2) to determine at which minimal time since completion of treatment the questionnaire should be used. METHODS: We reviewed 134 publications on cancer survivorship and interviewed 117 disease-free cancer survivors with 11 different types of cancer across 14 countries in Europe to generate an exhaustive, provisional list of HRQOL issues relevant to cancer survivors. The resulting issue list, the EORTC core questionnaire (QLQ-C30), and site-specific questionnaire modules were completed by a second group of 458 survivors. RESULTS: We identified 116 generic survivorship issues. These issues covered body image, cognitive functioning, health behaviors, negative and positive outlook, health distress, mental health, fatigue, sleep problems, physical functioning, pain, several physical symptoms, social functioning, and sexual problems. Patients rated most of the acute symptoms of cancer and its treatment (e.g. nausea) as no longer relevant approximately one year after completion of treatment. CONCLUSIONS: Compared to existing cancer survivorship questionnaires, our findings underscore the relevance of assessing issues related to chronic physical side effects of treatment such as neuropathy and joint pain. We will further develop a core survivorship questionnaire and three site-specific modules for disease-free adult cancer survivors who are at least one year post-treatment.

EORTC QLQ-COMU26: a questionnaire for the assessment of communication between patients and professionals. Phase III of the module development in ten countries.

PURPOSE: Communication between patients and professionals is one major aspect of the support offered to cancer patients. The European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) Quality of Life Group (QLG) has developed a cancer-specific instrument for the measurement of different issues related to the communication between cancer patients and their health care professionals. METHODS: Questionnaire development followed the EORTC QLG Module Development Guidelines. A provisional questionnaire was pre-tested (phase III) in a multicenter study within ten countries from five cultural areas (Northern and South Europe, UK, Poland and Taiwan). Patients from seven subgroups (before, during and after treatment, for localized and advanced disease each, plus palliative patients) were recruited. Structured interviews were conducted. Qualitative and quantitative analyses have been performed. RESULTS: One hundred forty patients were interviewed. Nine items were deleted and one shortened. Patients' comments had a key role in item selection. No item was deleted due to just quantitative criteria. Consistency was observed in patients' answers across cultural areas. The revised version of the module EORTC QLQ-COMU26 has 26 items, organized in 6 scales and 4 individual items. CONCLUSIONS: The EORTC COMU26 questionnaire can be used in daily clinical practice and research, in various patient groups from different cultures. The next step will be an international field test with a large heterogeneous group of cancer patients.

An evaluation study of the determinants of future perspective and global Quality of Life in Spanish long-term premenopausal early-stage breast cancer survivors.

AIM OF THE STUDY: Quality of life (QL) is important in premenopausal long-term breast cancer survivors. In this study we assessed QL and factors associated with future perspective and global QL in premenopausal early-stage long-term breast cancer survivors from Spain. MATERIAL AND METHODS: 243 premenopausal stage I-IIIA relapse-free breast cancer patients who had received surgery 5-20 years previously completed EORTC QLQ-C30 and QLQ-BR23 questionnaires once during follow-up. Univariate and multivariate logistic regression analyses were performed. RESULTS: QL mean scores were high in most areas (> 80 in functioning; < 20 in symptoms). The main factors for future perspective were emotional and social functioning, fatigue, breast symptom, and body image. The main factors for global QL were fatigue, pain and physical functioning, and emotional and social functioning. The best logistic model to explain future perspective associated high emotional and social functioning and low breast symptoms with a lower risk of low future perspective (R(2) = 0.56). Higher scores in physical and emotional functioning and lower scores in fatigue were associated with a lower risk of low global QL (R(2) = 0.50). CONCLUSIONS: Psychological, social, and physical factors were found to be possible determinants of global QL and future perspective. QL in premenopausal early-stage long-term breast cancer survivors may benefit from multidisciplinary treatment.

The EORTC QLQ-C15-PAL questionnaire: validation study for Spanish bone metastases patients.

PURPOSE: Quality of life (QL) is a key outcome for advanced disease cancer patients. The European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) has developed the QLQ-C15-PAL questionnaire, a short version of the QLQ-C30 for palliative care. The aim of the present study is to validate the QLQ-C15-PAL for use with Spanish patients with bone metastasis. METHODS: For this study, we used a consecutive sample of stage IV cancer patients with bone metastases who started radiotherapy with palliative intention. Two assessments were proposed for each patient: one on the first day of treatment and one a month after the end of the radiotherapy sessions. Psychometric evaluation of the structure, reliability, and validity was undertaken. RESULTS: One hundred and sixteen patients completed the first questionnaire and seventy five completed the second. Multitrait scaling analysis showed that all items met the standards for convergent validity, and all except the fatigue scale met the standards for divergent validity. Cronbach's coefficient met the 0.7 alpha criterion on all scales except pain (second assessment). Most QLQ-C15-PAL areas had low-to-moderate correlations with the other areas. Significant differences appeared in the comparisons between groups with regard to: patients who died before the second assessment (six areas); patients receiving chemotherapy before starting radiotherapy in the two assessments (three and four areas, respectively); the performance status in the two assessments (nine and eight areas); and the number of RT sessions received (four). Quality of life was better in the second assessment in nine areas. CONCLUSION: The QLQ-C15-PAL is a reliable and valid instrument when applied to a sample of Spanish patients. These results are in line with those of other validation studies.

The impact of electronic versus paper-based data capture on data collection logistics and on missing scores in thyroid cancer patients.

PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to investigate the impact of the type of data capture on the time and help needed for collecting patient-reported outcomes as well as on the proportion of missing scores. METHODS: In a multinational prospective study, thyroid cancer patients from 17 countries completed a validated questionnaire measuring quality of life. Electronic data capture was compared to the paper-based approach using multivariate logistic regression. RESULTS: A total of 437 patients were included, of whom 13% used electronic data capture. The relation between data capture and time needed was modified by the emotional functioning of the patients. Those with clinical impairments in that respect needed more time to complete the questionnaire when they used electronic data capture compared to paper and pencil (ORadj 24.0; p = 0.006). This was not the case when patients had sub-threshold emotional problems (ORadj 1.9; p = 0.48). The odds of having the researcher reading the questions out (instead of the patient doing this themselves) (ORadj 0.1; p = 0.01) and of needing any help (ORadj 0.1; p = 0.01) were lower when electronic data capture was used. The proportion of missing scores was equivalent in both groups (ORadj 0.4, p = 0.42). CONCLUSIONS: The advantages of electronic data capture, such as real-time assessment and fewer data entry errors, may come at the price of more time required for data collection when the patients have mental health problems. As this is not uncommon in thyroid cancer, researchers need to choose the type of data capture wisely for their particular research question.

Cross-cultural differences in information disclosure evaluated through the EORTC questionnaires.

OBJECTIVE: Informational needs among cancer patients are similar, but the degree of information disclosure in different cultural areas varies. In this paper, we present the results of a cross-cultural study on information received. METHODS: The EORTC information questionnaire, EORTC QLQ-INFO25, was administered during the treatment process. This questionnaire evaluates the information that patients report they have received. Cross-cultural differences in information have been evaluated using statistical tests such as Kruskall-Wallis and multivariate models with covariates to account for differences in clinical and demographic characteristics across areas. RESULTS: Four hundred and fifty-one patients from three cultural areas, North-Middle Europe, South Europe, and Taiwan, were included in the study. Significant differences among the three cultural areas appeared in eight QLQ-INFO25 dimensions: information about the disease; medical tests; places of care; written information; information on CD/tape/video; satisfaction; wish for more information; and information helpfulness. North-Middle Europe patients received more written information (mean = 67.2 (North) and 33.8 (South)) and South Europe patients received more information on different places of care (mean = 24.7 (North) and 35.0 (South)). Patients from North-Middle Europe and South Europe received more information than patients from Taiwan about the disease (mean = 57.9, 60.6, and 47.1, respectively) and medical tests (70.9, 70.4, and 54.5), showed more satisfaction (64.8, 70.2, and 35.0), and considered the information more helpful (71.9, 73.9, and 50.4). These results were confirmed when adjusting for age, education, and disease stage. CONCLUSION: There are cross-cultural differences in information received. Some of these differences are based on the characteristics of each culture.

Development of an EORTC quality of life phase III module measuring cancer-related fatigue (EORTC QLQ-FA13).

BACKGROUND: European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) has developed a new multidimensional instrument measuring cancer-related fatigue that can be used in conjunction with the quality of life core questionnaire, EORTC QLQ-C30. The paper focuses on the development of the phase III module, collaborating with seven European countries, including a patient sample of 318 patients. METHODS: The methodology followed the EORTC guidelines for developing phase III modules. Patients were assessed by questionnaires (EORTC QLQ-C30 with the EORTC Fatigue Module FA15) followed by an interview, asking for their opinions on the difficulty in understanding, on annoyance and on intrusiveness. RESULTS: The phase II FA15 was revised on the basis of qualitative analyses (comments of the patients), quantitative results (descriptive statistics) as well as the multi-item response theory analyses. The three dimensions (physical, emotional and cognitive) of the scale could be confirmed. CONCLUSIONS: As a result, EORTC QLQ-FA13 is now available as a valid phase III module measuring cancer-related fatigue in clinical trials and will be psychometrically improved in the upcoming phase IV.

Determinants of patient satisfaction with care in a Spanish oncology day hospital and its relationship with quality of life.

OBJECTIVE: This study evaluates satisfaction with care (SC) in cancer patients treated at a Spanish day hospital to identify SC determinants and assess the relationship between SC and quality of life. METHODS: One hundred seventy-six patients with different tumour sites and disease stages completed the European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Questionnaire (EORTC QLQ-C30), the Cancer Outpatient Satisfaction with Care questionnaire for chemotherapy (OUT-PATSAT35 CT), the Oberst patients' perception of care quality and satisfaction scales, and an item on intention to recommend the hospital. Frequencies in the SC instruments, Spearman correlations between each scale of the OUT-PATSAT35 CT and overall satisfaction and between the subscales of OUT-PATSAT35 CT and of QLQ-C30 were calculated, and the determinants of patients' SC were calculated through multivariate regression models. RESULTS: Satisfaction with care was high: mean scores were >70 in all OUT-PATSAT35 CT areas except doctor availability and environment. These scores were in line with the other SC instruments. Correlation with overall satisfaction was high and statistically significant (p < 0.01) for all subscales, especially for the nurses domain, which also had higher SC scores. Correlations between the EORTC QLQ-C30 and the OUT-PATSAT35 CT were low (≤ 0.35). Younger patients and those with breast cancer showed significantly lower satisfaction in most subscales. Unmarried patients and patients that had undergone surgery reported lower satisfaction only in specific subscales. CONCLUSIONS: Satisfaction with care among cancer patients treated at the day hospital is high. Nurses play a key and successful role. Age and tumour location revealed stronger relationships with SC. Correlations between SC and quality of life indicate that these concepts are complementary.

Performance of the EORTC questionnaire for the assessment of quality of life in head and neck cancer patients EORTC QLQ-H&N35: a methodological review.

PURPOSE: The EORTC QLQ-H&N35 (H&N35) is widely used to measure quality of life in head and neck cancer patients. The aims of this study were to obtain insight into a) the languages in which the H&N35 has been used and the psychometric properties in those languages, b) the study designs, and c) its acceptance by patients and investigators. METHODS: A systematic literature review was performed searching for all original papers that had used at least one item of the H&N35. Identified papers were read and the information about methodological issues abstracted statistically analysed. RESULTS: A total of 136 papers were identified. The H&N35 was administered in 19 different languages in 27 countries. The study design was cross-sectional in the majority of studies (53 %), prospective cohort studies (31 %), phase-II-trials (7 %), phase-III-trials (6 %) and case-control studies (1 %). The scales with the highest percentages of missing values were Sexuality (11.5 %) and Speech (7 %). The median Cronbach's alpha of the multi-item scales ranged from 0.61 (Senses) to 0.93 (Sexuality). Construct validity was rarely investigated. On average, 12 scales (range 0-18) of the instrument were used by the investigators. The scale most often used was swallowing (in 85 % of studies) and least often used was Weight Gain (39 %). CONCLUSION: The H&N35 is widely used throughout the world, mainly in observational studies, and has demonstrated robust psychometric features in different languages. However, some methodological problems reported imply that the instrument can be improved in some areas.

Cross-cultural development of the EORTC QLQ-SWB36: a stand-alone measure of spiritual wellbeing for palliative care patients with cancer.

BACKGROUND: No existing stand-alone measures of spiritual wellbeing have been developed in cross-cultural and multiple linguistic contexts. AIM: Cross-cultural development of a stand-alone European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) measure of spiritual wellbeing for palliative care patients with cancer. DESIGN: Broadly following EORTC Quality of Life Group (QLG) guidelines for developing questionnaires, the study comprised three phases. Phase I identified relevant issues and obtained the views of palliative care patients and professionals about those issues. Phase II operationalised issues into items. Phase III pilot-tested those items with palliative care patients. Amendments to the guidelines included an intermediate Phase IIIa, and debriefing questions specific to the measure. SETTING/PARTICIPANTS: Phase III pilot-testing recruited 113 people with incurable cancer from hospitals and hospices in six European countries and Japan. RESULTS: A provisional 36-item measure ready for Phase IV field-testing, the EORTC QLQ-SWB36, has been developed. Careful attention to translation and simultaneous development in multiple languages means items are acceptable and consistent between different countries and languages. Phase III data from 113 patients in seven countries show that the items are comprehensible across languages and cultures. Phase III patient participants in several countries used the measure as a starting point for discussing the issues it addresses. CONCLUSION: The EORTC QLG's rigorous cross-cultural development process ensures that the EORTC QLQ-SWB36 identifies key issues for spiritual wellbeing in multiple cultural contexts, and that items are comprehensible and consistent across languages. Some cross-cultural differences were observed, but data were insufficient to enable generalisation. Phase IV field-testing will investigate these differences further.

Quality of life assessment by applying EORTC questionnaires to rectal cancer patients after surgery and neoadjuvant and adjuvant treatment.

BACKGROUND: Quality of Life (QoL) is a key element in rectal cancer (RC) patients. AIMS: this study assesses QoL in a sample of RC patients in their treatment follow-up period, and compares surgery modalities. PATIENTS AND METHODS: eighty four locally advanced RC patients who had received surgery and neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy were included in the study. Of these, 70 had adjuvant chemotherapy. All patients completed the EORTC QLQ-C30 and the QLQ-CR29 once at least one year after completion of their treatment. Low anterior resection (LAR) patients also completed a Functional Evaluation questionnaire. RESULTS: QoL scores in the EORTC questionnaires for the sample as a whole were high in most dimensions, in line with the general population´s QoL values, although moderate limitations (> 30 points)were observed in urinary frequency, flatulence, impotence and sexual function. The scores for the Functional Evaluation were adequate (mean combined bowel function score of 18.2). LAR patients had a higher stool frequency than those with abdominoperineal resection (APR; p < 0.001). No differences in body image were found amongst LAR and APR patients. LAR patients with a lower anastomosis had higher faecal incontinence (p = 0.02), whereas those with a reservoir had better emotional functioning (p = 0.04) and higher faecal incontinence (p = 0.03). CONCLUSIONS: QoL scores and functional evaluation indicated patients had adapted to their disease and treatment. The few differences in QoL found between surgery modalities are in line with other recent studies and in contrast with earlier ones that suggested a lower QoL in APR patients.

Quality of life in Spanish postmenopausal breast cancer patients with localized disease who finish endocrine treatment: a prospective study.

OBJECTIVE: In this article, the quality of life (QOL) of Spanish postmenopausal early-stage breast cancer patients who have finished endocrine therapy (ET), QOL changes after endocrine therapy cessation, and the differences between two endocrine therapy modalities (tamoxifen or aromatase inhibitor [AI]) are studied. More QOL information after endocrine therapy cessation is needed. METHODS: A prospective cohort study was performed. Participating in the study were 158 postmenopausal patients who had received tamoxifen or AI for 5 years. In some cases, endocrine therapy may have changed during those 5 years.Patients completed the European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer QLQ-C30 and QLQ-BR45 questionnaires at baseline, after 6 months, and after 1 year of follow-up. Patients older than 65 years also completed the QLQ-ELD14. Linear mixed-effect models were used to evaluate longitudinal changes in QOL and differences in QOL between endocrine therapy modalities. RESULTS: QOL scores for the whole sample throughout follow-up were high (>80/100 points) in most QOL areas. Moderate limitations (>30 points) occurred in the QLQ-BR45 in sexual functioning and sexual enjoyment, future perspective, and joint symptoms. Moderate limitations also occurred in the QLQ-ELD14 in worries about others, maintaining purpose, joint stiffness, future worries, and family support. In those who had finished endocrine therapy, pain was reduced in all three assessments conducted during the 1-year follow-up period in both groups. Tamoxifen patients showed better QOL in functioning (role functioning, global QOL, financial impact), symptoms (pain), and emotional areas (future perspective and worries about others) than AI patients but worse QOL in skin mucosis symptoms. CONCLUSIONS: The results of this study show that postmenopausal early-stage breast cancer patients adapted well to their disease and endocrine therapy treatment. QOL improvements in the 1-year follow-up period appeared in one key area: pain. Differences between endocrine therapy modalities suggested QOL was better in the tamoxifen group than in the AI group.

Phase III study of the European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life cancer survivorship core questionnaire.

PURPOSE: The purpose of this study is to develop a European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Group (EORTC QLG) questionnaire that captures the full range of physical, mental, and social health-related quality of life (HRQOL) issues relevant to disease-free cancer survivors. In this phase III study, we pretested the provisional core questionnaire (QLQ-SURV111) and aimed to identify essential and optional scales. METHODS: We pretested the QLQ-SURV111 in 492 cancer survivors from 17 countries with one of 11 cancer diagnoses. We applied the EORTC QLG decision rules and employed factor analysis and item response theory (IRT) analysis to assess and, where necessary, modify the hypothesized questionnaire scales. We calculated correlations between the survivorship scales and the QLQ-C30 summary score and carried out a Delphi survey among healthcare professionals, patient representatives, and cancer researchers to distinguish between essential and optional scales. RESULTS: Fifty-four percent of the sample was male, mean age was 60 years, and, on average, time since completion of treatment was 3.8 years. Eleven items were excluded, resulting in the QLQ-SURV100, with 12 functional and 9 symptom scales, a symptom checklist, 4 single items, and 10 conditional items. The essential survivorship scales consist of 73 items. CONCLUSIONS: The QLQ-SURV100 has been developed to assess comprehensively the HRQOL of disease-free cancer survivors. It includes essential and optional scales and will be validated further in an international phase IV study. IMPLICATIONS FOR CANCER SURVIVORS: The availability of this questionnaire will facilitate a standardized and robust assessment of the HRQOL of disease-free cancer survivors.