Psychometrics of patient-reported bother from side effects of treatment single-items in industry-sponsored oncology trials.

BACKGROUND: Improvements in cancer treatment have increased the number of cancer survivors, but also increased the long-term and late effects from cancer therapy. Patient reported "side effect bother" could be used to measure the burden of treatment, and the risk for negative outcomes such as dose reduction, treatment delay or discontinuation. The current study addresses the psychometric properties of a single item, determines what represents a "meaningful change", and evaluates the correlation to safety endpoints and functioning. METHODS: Results from 5911 patients enrolled in 8 clinical trials representing 5 disease types in oncology and hematology who completed either the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy (FACT) GP5 item or a modified bother item (MBI) were assessed. RESULTS: Patients ranged in age from 18 to 93 years, with all cancer stages represented and approximately equal numbers of males and females. Test-retest reliability was acceptable, as were convergent and known groups validity. The GP5 and MBI effectively demonstrated sensitivity to change over time and established meaningful thresholds. CONCLUSIONS: The results indicate that these single-items are psychometrically sound, capable of distinguishing known groups, responsive to change and can identify meaningful change over time in terms of treatment-related symptoms. It extends the findings of recent scientific groups by providing analyses not included in prior studies, and further supports the FDA's recommendation to include a single item question in clinical trials.

Patient-Reported Outcomes version of the Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events: Methods for item selection in industry-sponsored oncology clinical trials.

As new cancer treatment regimens demonstrate increased potential to improve patients' survival, more focus is directed toward the quality of that extension of life and to obtaining additional information from patients regarding their experience with treatment. The utility of capturing patient-reported treatment-related symptoms to complement traditional clinician-rated symptomatic adverse event reporting is well-documented. The National Cancer Institute's Patient-Reported Outcomes version of the Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events is an item library aimed at capturing patient-reported symptoms to inform the patient perspective on a treatment's tolerability. The U.S. Food and Drug Administration has recommended using the Patient-Reported Outcomes version of the Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events in clinical trials. A practical guideline is needed to inform a priori selection of specific Patient-Reported Outcomes version of the Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events items for use in any given industry-sponsored oncology clinical trial. Standardizing this selection process will foster systematic and consistent data collection as part of drug development and enhance our knowledge on how to use patient-relevant information as part of a treatment's risk/benefit assessment. This article presents methods and consensus recommendations for selecting specific Patient-Reported Outcomes version of the Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events items to include in early-phase and late-phase oncology clinical trials.

Health-related quality of life and symptoms in patients with rituximab-refractory indolent non-Hodgkin lymphoma treated in the phase III GADOLIN study with obinutuzumab plus bendamustine versus bendamustine alone.

We present health-related quality of life (HRQoL) data from GADOLIN, comparing bendamustine (B) alone or combined with obinutuzumab (G-B) in rituximab-refractory indolent non-Hodgkin lymphoma patients. The Functional Assessment of Cancer Treatment-Lymphoma (FACT-Lym) questionnaire was administered on day 1 of cycles 1, 3, and 5 during treatment, at end of induction (EOI), bi-monthly for 2 years during maintenance/follow-up, and annually during extended follow-up until progression/death. Time to first ≥6-point worsening from baseline in the FACT-Lym trial outcome index (TOI) was estimated. Minimally important differences at individual subscale and total score level were used to define the proportion of patients reporting improvement on the FACT-Lym lymphoma-specific subscale (≥3 points), FACT-Lym TOI (≥6 points), and FACT-Lym total score (≥7 points). Overall, 396 patients were randomized. Analysis was conducted when 175 Independent Review Committee-assessed progression-free survival (PFS) events were observed. Questionnaire completion rates were generally balanced between arms at baseline, EOI, and final follow-up. Median time to ≥6-point worsening from baseline on the FACT-Lym TOI was 8.0 months in the G-B arm and 4.6 months in the B arm (HR 0.74; 95% CI 0.56-0.98). More G-B patients reported meaningful improvements on the FACT-Lym questionnaire subscales. Results were similar when follicular lymphoma patients were analyzed separately. The delayed time to worsening and greater proportion of patients reporting meaningful improvement in HRQoL in the G-B arm suggest that benefit in PFS is not at the expense of an increase in treatment-related toxicity that could lead to reduced HRQoL.

Randomized controlled trials in relapsed/refractory follicular lymphoma: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

This systematic literature review evaluated the clinical efficacy and safety of interventions used in relapsed/refractory follicular lymphoma. Primary efficacy outcomes were objective response rate, progression-free survival and overall survival. Safety endpoints were grade 3/4 toxicities, serious adverse events and withdrawals or deaths due to toxicity. Studies were selected if they were randomized controlled trials reporting on the efficacy or safety of treatments for relapsed or refractory follicular lymphoma, and if outcomes were reported separately from trials that included other lymphoid neoplasms. We used the Bucher method for conducting adjusted indirect comparisons within a meta-analysis. We identified 10 randomized controlled trials of treatments for relapsed/refractory follicular lymphoma. The most prominent drug investigated (alone or in combination) was rituximab. Most trials did not report median overall survival. Two trials reported median event-free survival (range, 1.2-23.2 months). Six of ten trials reported objective response rate (range, 9-93%). Meta-analysis showed only one statistically significant result: rituximab + bortezomib yielded a significantly higher objective response rate than rituximab monotherapy (relative risk, 1.28; 95% confidence interval, 1.11-1.47). Otherwise, there were no discernable differences in overall survival or progression-free survival, partly due to insufficient reporting of results in the clinical trials. The relatively small number of randomized controlled trials, few overlapping treatment arms, and variability in the randomized controlled trial features and in the endpoints studied complicate the formal comparison of therapies for relapsed/refractory follicular lymphoma. Additional well-designed randomized controlled trials are needed to fully understand the relative outcomes of older and more recently developed therapies.

Are changes in patient-reported outcomes prognostic for diffuse large B-Cell lymphoma survival? Results from the GOYA trial.

In this hypothesis-generating analysis, we examined whether longitudinal changes in patient-reported outcomes (PROs), such as symptoms, over time would be prognostic for progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) in patients with diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL) who were newly treated with obinutuzumab (G) in combination with CHOP (G-CHOP) or rituximab (R) with CHOP (R-CHOP), in the GOYA Phase 3 trial (NCT01287741). Our results show that from the study baseline to cycle 3 day 1, every 1-point increase (worsening) in fever symptoms was associated with a 41% higher risk of death (hazard ratio [HR], 1.41; P = 0.01). Every 1-point increase (worsening) in lumps or swelling symptoms was associated with a 27% higher risk of disease progression or death (PFS events) (HR, 1.27; P = 0.01) and a 29% higher risk of death (OS events) (HR, 1.29; P = 0.02). No significant associations were observed between survival and changes in other symptoms, such as itching. Our study suggests that changes in some PROs are related to survival in DLBCL patients.

Randomized clinical trial of a brief and extensive dyadic intervention for advanced cancer patients and their family caregivers.

BACKGROUND: Few intervention programs assist patients and their family caregivers to manage advanced cancer and maintain their quality of life (QOL). This study examined (i) whether patient-caregiver dyads (i.e., pairs) randomly assigned to a brief or extensive dyadic intervention (the FOCUS Program) had better outcomes than dyads randomly assigned to usual care and (ii) whether patients' risk for distress and other factors moderated the effect of the brief or extensive program on outcomes. METHODS: Advanced cancer patients and their caregivers (N = 484 dyads) were stratified by patients' baseline risk for distress (high versus low), cancer type (lung, colorectal, breast, or prostate), and research site and then randomly assigned to a brief (three-session) or extensive (six-session) intervention or control. The interventions offered dyads information and support. Intermediary outcomes were appraisals (i.e., appraisal of illness/caregiving, uncertainty, and hopelessness) and resources (i.e., coping, interpersonal relationships, and self-efficacy). The primary outcome was QOL. Data were collected prior to intervention and post-intervention (3 and 6 months from baseline). The final sample was 302 dyads. Repeated measures MANCOVA was used to evaluate outcomes. RESULTS: Significant group by time interactions showed that there was an improvement in dyads' coping (p < 0.05), self-efficacy (p < 0.05), and social QOL (p < 0.01) and in caregivers' emotional QOL (p < 0.05). Effects varied by intervention dose. Most effects were found at 3 months only. Risk for distress accounted for very few moderation effects. CONCLUSIONS: Both brief and extensive programs had positive outcomes for patient-caregiver dyads, but few sustained effects. Patient-caregiver dyads benefit when viewed as the 'unit of care'.

Axitinib plus gemcitabine versus placebo plus gemcitabine in patients with advanced pancreatic adenocarcinoma: a double-blind randomised phase 3 study.

BACKGROUND: Axitinib is a potent, selective inhibitor of vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) receptors 1, 2, and 3. A randomised phase 2 trial of gemcitabine with or without axitinib in advanced pancreatic cancer suggested increased overall survival in axitinib-treated patients. On the basis of these results, we aimed to assess the effect of treatment with gemcitabine plus axitinib on overall survival in a phase 3 trial. METHODS: In this double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase 3 study, eligible patients had metastatic or locally advanced pancreatic adenocarcinoma, no uncontrolled hypertension or venous thrombosis, and Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status 0 or 1. Patients, stratified by disease extent (metastatic vs locally advanced), were randomly assigned (1:1) to receive gemcitabine 1000 mg/m(2) intravenously on days 1, 8, and 15 every 28 days plus either axitinib or placebo. Axitinib or placebo were administered orally with food at a starting dose of 5 mg twice a day, which could be dose-titrated up to 10 mg twice daily if well tolerated. A centralised randomisation procedure was used to assign patients to each treatment group, with randomised permuted blocks within strata. Patients, investigators, and the trial sponsor were masked to treatment assignments. The primary endpoint was overall survival. All efficacy analyses were done in all patients assigned to treatment groups for whom data were available; safety and treatment administration and compliance assessments were based on treatment received. This study is registered at ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT00471146. FINDINGS: Between July 27, 2007, and Oct 31, 2008, 632 patients were enrolled and assigned to treatment groups (316 axitinib, 316 placebo). At an interim analysis in January, 2009, the independent data monitoring committee concluded that the futility boundary had been crossed. Median overall survival was 8·5 months (95% CI 6·9-9·5) for gemcitabine plus axitinib (n=314, data missing for two patients) and 8·3 months (6·9-10·3) for gemcitabine plus placebo (n=316; hazard ratio 1·014, 95% CI 0·786-1·309; one-sided p=0·5436). The most common grade 3 or higher adverse events for gemcitabine plus axitinib and gemcitabine plus placebo were hypertension (20 [7%] and 5 [2%] events, respectively), abdominal pain (20 [7%] and 17 [6%]), fatigue (27 [9%] and 21 [7%]), and anorexia (19 [6%] and 11 [4%]). INTERPRETATION: The addition of axitinib to gemcitabine does not improve overall survival in advanced pancreatic cancer. These results add to increasing evidence that targeting of VEGF signalling is an ineffective strategy in this disease. FUNDING: Pfizer.

Patient-reported outcomes provide prognostic information for survival in patients with diffuse large B-cell lymphoma: Analysis of 1239 patients from the GOYA study.

PURPOSE: We investigated the prognostic value of pretreatment patient-reported outcomes (PROs) in patients with diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL) receiving obinutuzumab/rituximab plus chemotherapy in the GOYA phase III study. METHODS: Patients completed the European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life (EORTC QLQ-C30) and the Functional assessment of chronic illness therapy-Lymphoma (FACT-Lym) lymphoma subscale (LYMS) during the study. PRO scales with high prognostic value were identified through Cox regression analyses of overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS). These scales were evaluated in terms of their additional prognostic value beyond the International Prognostic Index (IPI). A preliminary assessment was performed to evaluate whether the scales provided improved patient-risk stratification beyond IPI. RESULTS: One thousand two hundred and fifty-nine patients with valid pretreatment PRO scales were included in the analyses, and complete pretreatment data were available for 1239/1414 patients (87.6%). Four PRO scales with high prognostic value were identified: FACT-Lym LYMS and EORTC QLQ-C30 physical functioning, global health status/quality of life (QoL), and fatigue. All four scales retained significant prognostic value for OS and PFS after IPI adjustment (all p < 0.05). After adjusting for multiple clinical variables (IPI, cell of origin, BCL2 status, and total metabolic tumor volume), all four scales retained significant prognostic value (all p < 0.05) for OS. Only the EORTC QLQ-C30 physical functioning scale was significant (p < 0.05) for PFS after adjustment for multiple clinical variables. CONCLUSIONS: In this large population of patients with DLBCL, pretreatment PROs provided prognostic information for OS and PFS beyond the well-established IPI.

Improvements in Health-related Quality of Life and Symptoms in Patients With Previously Untreated Chronic Lymphocytic Leukemia: Final Results From the Phase II GIBB Study of the Combination of Obinutuzumab and Bendamustine.

BACKGROUND: We evaluated health-related quality of life (HRQoL) in patients with chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL) receiving first-line chemoimmunotherapy in the GIBB single-arm, Phase II study of obinutuzumab plus bendamustine (BG). MATERIALS AND METHODS: Patients received six 28-day cycles of BG and were followed for up to 27 months. HRQoL was assessed using the European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Core 30 (EORTC QLQ-C30) and EORTC QLQ Chronic Lymphocytic Leukemia 16 (QLQ-CLL16) questionnaires. Scores were linear-transformed to a 100-point scale, with clinically meaningful responses defined as a ≥ 10-point change from baseline. RESULTS: The patient-reported outcome (PRO) population comprised 98 patients (68.4% male; median age 61 years). EORTC QLQ-C30 global health status improvements were noted at all follow-up visits and were clinically meaningful 2 to 3 months after induction and at 3- and 27-months' follow-up. Clinically meaningful improvements were also observed for the EORTC QLQ-C30 role functioning, emotional functioning, fatigue and insomnia scales and the EORTC QLQ-CLL16 fatigue, disease symptoms and future health worries scales. Global health status was maintained throughout follow-up, and no clinically relevant deterioration in other HRQoL parameters was observed. CONCLUSION: PRO data from the GIBB study show improved overall HRQoL in patients with CLL who received first-line chemoimmunotherapy with BG.

Psychological distress in patients with pancreatic cancer--an understudied group.

BACKGROUND: Pancreatic cancer is the fourth leading cause of cancer-related death in the United States, unsuccessful in significantly improving 5-year survival. A diagnosis of pancreatic cancer may be associated with increased psychological distress, yet remarkably little is known about the degree of psychological distress experienced by these patients at the time of diagnosis and treatment. METHOD: In a cross-sectional study, 304 patients with pancreatic cancer and 7749 patients with other cancer diagnoses completed the Brief Symptom Inventory (BSI) or the Brief Symptom Inventory-Shortened Version (BSI-18) and the Problem Common Checklist (PCL) during outpatient registration. Sociodemographic characteristics were collected from patients' clinical files. RESULTS: A higher percentage of pancreatic cancer patients reported elevated distress across each subscale of the BSI and BSI-18 when compared with those diagnosed with other cancer diagnoses as a group. The most notable difference was established on the depression subscale, with 28.8% of pancreatic patients reporting elevated depression compared with 18.5% of other cancer diagnoses. In pancreatic patients, a significant difference was also found in the percentage of males endorsing high depression levels when compared with females (34.0 vs 22.6%, p<0.05). CONCLUSIONS: Pancreatic cancer patients demonstrate elevated levels of psychological distress. This should alert providers to be vigilant in evaluating patients for distress and to provide appropriate referrals. The endorsement of fatigue and pain, along with the observed gender differences, suggest that early distress management interventions may need to include components targeted to these issues.

Development and initial validation of the thyroid cancer module of the M. D. Anderson Symptom Inventory.

OBJECTIVE: The M. D. Anderson Symptom Inventory (MDASI) and its modules measure common symptoms related to cancer and its treatment. We report the development and initial validation of the MDASI-Thyroid Cancer module (MDASI-THY). METHODS: A list of thyroid-cancer-specific symptoms was generated through focus groups and interviews with thyroid cancer patients, clinicians and researchers. These MDASI-THY items were added to the original MDASI and administered to 60 patients with thyroid cancer. Symptom prevalence and severity were evaluated, along with the reliability and content, construct and known-group validity of the MDASI-THY. RESULTS: Cognitive debriefing performed on a subset of patients indicated that the MDASI-THY items were clear, concise, relevant and easy to understand. Fatigue, drowsiness, sleep disturbance, distress and difficulty remembering were the 5 most prevalent and severe symptoms. Twenty-eight percent of patients had moderate to severe fatigue (>or=5 on a 0-10 scale). Average severity was 1.28 and 1.29 for the symptom and interference subscales, respectively. MDASI-THY symptoms were severer for patients with poorer performance status. Cronbach alpha-values were 0.76, 0.85 and 0.92 for the thyroid-specific symptom items, core symptom subscale and interference subscale, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: This study demonstrates preliminary evidence for the validity and reliability of the MDASI-THY.

A patient-based utility measure of health for clinical trials of cancer therapy based on the European Organization for the Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Questionnaire.

BACKGROUND: The European Organization for the Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Questionnaire (QLQ-C30) is a widely used quality-of-life measure in oncology. The ability to translate QLQ-C30 responses into utility scores would further expand its use in medical decision-making. The aims of this study were to: 1) map QLQ-C30 responses onto patient time trade-off utility scores; and 2) compare a multiattribute approach to a global evaluation approach to modeling utility scores. METHODS: Two distinct approaches were applied to data from 1432 cancer patients. The multiattribute approach used psychometric analysis and expert input to select a subset of functioning and symptom scale items for modeling. The second approach focused on global health and quality-of-life items based on a conceptual model. Model selection criteria included parsimony, statistical significance and logical consistency of parameter estimates, predictive accuracy, number of states described, and scale range. RESULTS: The optimal multiattribute model included nine variables for five items from different scales, described 144 unique states, predicted values ranging from 0.63 to 1.00, but it had poor predictive accuracy (cross-validation pseudo-R(2) = 0.056). The best-fitting global approach-based model described 24 unique states using eight indicators for two items from one scale (plus a constant) and predicted values ranging from 0.17 to 1.00 (cross-validation pseudo-R(2) = 0.127). CONCLUSIONS: Multiattribute models produced a greater number of unique predicted values, while global models exhibited more desirable statistical properties and a wider range of values. The recommended models will enable users to predict cancer patients' utilities from existing and future QLQ-C30 data sets.

Psychometric validation of the cancer therapy satisfaction questionnaire.

PURPOSE: To assess the domain structure and to evaluate the psychometric properties of the Cancer Therapy Satisfaction Questionnaire (CTSQ) and the relation between the CTSQ and health-related quality of life (HRQOL). METHODS: Three hundred sixty-one individuals with breast, colorectal, lung cancer, or melanoma who had received in the last 6 months or were currently receiving more than one cycle of chemo, biological, or hormonal therapy completed the 21-item CTSQ, with a random subsample of 88 patients completing it again 1 week later. Participants also completed quality of life, treatment satisfaction, and other self-reported questions on each occasion. Demographics, ECOG performance status, and clinical information were collected. CTSQ responses were submitted to multitrait analyses and exploratory factor analysis. Psychometric properties and the correlations between the CTSQ and the Quality of Life Questionnaire -- Core 30 (QLQ-C30) were evaluated. RESULTS: Analyses revealed three domains with good psychometric properties: Feelings about Side Effects, Satisfaction with Therapy, and Expectations of Therapy. Correlations with the QLQ-C30 domains were low to moderate. CONCLUSION: The CTSQ is a newly developed 16-item patient-reported measure with strong psychometric properties and constructs not captured by the QLQ-C30. It can be used to evaluate cancer patients' experiences with intravenous and/or oral chemo, biological, and hormonal therapies.

Health-related quality of life during treatment for renal cell carcinoma: results from a phase II study of axitinib.

INTRODUCTION: Patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma (RCC) are often treated with cytokine therapy, although the effect is modest and second-line therapy is often warranted. Relatively little is known regarding the impact on health-related quality of life (HRQOL) in cytokine-refractory patients. This study examined the HRQOL of patients with metastatic RCC treated with axitinib, a new targeted therapy that affects the vessels supplying blood to the tumor. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Patients with metastatic RCC and progression following first-line cytokine therapy were enrolled into a single-arm, open-label multicenter phase II trial. Axitinib was administered orally twice daily until disease progression or intolerance. The primary endpoint was objective response rate, with secondary endpoints being time to progression, overall survival, safety and HRQOL. The longitudinal analyses of the HRQOL data through 144 weeks of treatment, as measured by the European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Questionnaire-Core 30, are presented here. RESULTS: Fifty-two patients completed baseline HRQOL assessments. Statistically significant baseline-post-treatment changes were observed on the role, cognitive and social functioning scales as well as on the nausea and vomiting, pain and diarrhea symptoms. All of the changes were less than one-quarter of the category, with diarrhea being the exception at less than half a category, suggesting that the changes as reported by patients were not meaningful. DISCUSSION: Treatment of metastatic RCC with axitinib demonstrated acceptable disruption in HRQOL functioning and symptoms when compared to baseline levels. From a patient-reported perspective, treatment with axitinib appears to be well tolerated.

Axitinib treatment in patients with cytokine-refractory metastatic renal-cell cancer: a phase II study.

BACKGROUND: Axitinib (AG-013736) is an oral, potent, and selective inhibitor of vascular endothelial growth factor receptors 1, 2, and 3. We aimed to assess the activity and safety of axitinib in patients with metastatic renal-cell cancer who had failed on previous cytokine-based treatment. METHODS: Between Oct 3, 2003, and April 7, 2004, 52 patients were enrolled. All patients who had at least one measurable target lesion received axitinib orally (starting dose 5 mg twice daily). The primary endpoint was objective response (ie, percentage of patients with confirmed complete response or partial response by use of Response Evaluation Criteria In Solid Tumors [RECIST] criteria. Secondary endpoints were duration of response, time to progression, overall survival, safety, pharmacokinetics, and patient-reported health-related quality of life. This trial is registered on the clinical trials site of the US National Cancer Institute website http://www.clinicaltrials.gov/ct/show/NCT00076011. FINDINGS: In an intention-to-treat analysis, two complete and 21 partial responses were noted, for an objective response rate of 44.2% (95% CI 30.5-58.7). Median response duration was 23.0 months (20.9-not estimable; range 4.2-29.8). However, 12 of 23 initial responders progressed with response duration ranging from 4.2 months to 26.5 months. Additionally, 22 patients showed stable disease for longer than 8 weeks, including 13 patients with stable disease for 24 weeks or longer. Four patients had early disease progression. Three patients had missing response data. Median time to progression was 15.7 months (8.4-23.4, range 0.03-31.5) and median overall survival was 29.9 months (20.3-not estimable; range 2.4-35.8). Treatment-related adverse events included diarrhoea, hypertension, fatigue, nausea, and hoarseness. Treatment-related hypertension occurred in 30 patients and resolved with antihypertensive treatment in all but eight patients, of whom seven patients had a history of hypertension at baseline. INTERPRETATION: Axitinib shows clinical activity in patients with cytokine-refractory metastatic renal-cell cancer. Although 28 patients had grade 3 or grade 4 treatment-related adverse events, these adverse events were generally manageable and controlled by dose modification or supportive care, or both. Further studies are needed to confirm these findings.

Effect of personal cancer history and family cancer history on levels of psychological distress.

This study examined the impact of personal and family cancer history on psychological distress. Regression analyses were conducted on a nationally representative sample of adult individuals who participated in the 2000 National Health Interview Survey, USA. Effects on distress of a personal cancer history, any family cancer history, or mother, father, sister or brother with a cancer history were examined. The interaction of personal and family cancer histories and three-way interactions with gender were also assessed. Analyses indicate that having either a personal or family cancer history is linked with significantly greater psychological distress and there is evidence of an interaction. Three-way interactions with gender were not found. Consistent with prior research, results demonstrated that cancer survivors are more distressed than the general population. Results extend prior research by indicating that having a first-degree relative with cancer increases risk for distress, and having personal and family cancer histories may exert a synergistic effect on distress.

Transitions of care and changes in distressing pain.

This study employed a 22-state mortality follow-back survey to examine bereaved family members' perception of the level and pattern of distressing pain in decedents with cancer at the last two sites of care. Of the 1,578 individuals interviewed, 423 of their family members had cancer listed as the leading cause of death on the decedent's death certificate. Decedents were treated at home, hospitals, hospices, or nursing homes, with more than half of the respondents (n = 216) reporting that the decedent was at more than one site of care in the last month. Forty-two percent of decedents had distressing pain (defined as "quite a bit" or "very much") at their second to last place of care, with 40% having distressing pain at the last place. There was some variation in the degree of change depending on the transition between the second to last and last places of care. For many individuals, however, the transition to another place of care did not result in an improvement in the level of distressing pain. No significant differences were found in the change in distressing pain by transition of care. Increased attention is needed not only on how to adequately manage pain and pain-related distress but also on how to improve pain reduction measures in transitions between health care settings at the end of life.

Cancer screening practices among cancer survivors.

BACKGROUND: Cancer survivors are more vulnerable to future cancers than individuals without cancer. As such, it is important to understand whether survivors are engaging in cancer screenings. METHODS: The screening practices reported in response to the 2000 Health Interview Survey of 2151 individuals with cancer were examined and compared to those of 30,195 individuals without cancer. RESULTS: The proportion of cancer survivors obtaining screenings ranged from 21% to 77%. Compared to individuals without cancer, women with cancer were more likely to have had a mammogram (odds ratio [OR]=1.8, 95% CI=1.5-2.1), a clinical breast exam (OR=2.2, 95% CI=1.9-2.5), and/or a Papanicolaou test (OR=1.3, 95% CI=1.1-1.5) in the recommended timeframe. Similarly, men with cancer were more likely than men without cancer to have had a prostate-specific antigen test performed (OR=2.5, 95% CI=2.0-3.0). All cancer survivors were more likely than individuals without a cancer diagnosis to have had a total body skin exam (OR=4.0, 95% CI=3.5-4.6), a fecal occult blood test (OR=1.4, 95% CI=1.2-1.6), and/or a colorectal exam (OR=2.2, 95% CI=1.9-2.5). Similar results were obtained when individuals diagnosed with the cancer for which the screen was designed to detect were excluded. CONCLUSIONS: The results demonstrate that cancer survivors have higher screening rates than individuals without a cancer diagnosis. Despite this, the proportion of survivors obtaining screenings varies considerably by the type of screen. An understanding of the impact of cancer screening in cancer survivors, as well as the reasons for and against obtaining cancer screenings, is necessary.

The effects of a professionally produced videotape on education and anxiety/distress levels for patients with newly diagnosed melanoma: a randomized, prospective clinical trial.

OBJECTIVE: Little is known about the effects of videotape-based education on knowledge and anxiety levels among patients with melanoma. We sought to evaluate effects of a professionally produced videotape on the knowledge and distress levels among patients with newly diagnosed melanoma. Secondarily, we sought to compare these effects with those of a traditional clinic visit. METHODS: We conducted a randomized controlled trial involving 217 patients. An intervention group underwent questionnaire-based testing of melanoma knowledge and anxiety/distress levels before and after viewing an educational videotape. A control group underwent similar testing before and after a clinic visit. RESULTS: The videotape and clinical encounter significantly increased knowledge and decreased anxiety. Improvement in knowledge levels was significantly greater after viewing the videotape compared with the clinic visit, whereas anxiety levels decreased to a greater degree after the clinical encounter. Whether or not a synergistic relationship may exist between exposure to an educational videotape and a physician visit was not specifically evaluated in this study. CONCLUSION: Videotape-based education may be more effective than that provided by a clinic visit, whereas the clinical encounter appears to be more effective in alleviating patient anxiety/distress.