Obstacles to Biosimilar Acceptance and Uptake in Oncology: A Review.

Importance: Biosimilar drugs provide cost-effective yet clinically indistinguishable replications of target drugs. During initial development, this class of biologic medicines was expected to revolutionize pharmaceutical markets; however, following US Food and Drug Administration approval of the first biosimilar drug in 2015, the commercialization of biosimilars has been limited. The lack of biosimilar use may be especially salient in oncology, given that biosimilar distribution in this particularly high-cost area of medicine would bring savings on the order of many billions of dollars. Observations: While researchers have focused on salient economic barriers to biosimilar uptake in the US, the present review provides insight regarding noneconomic barriers. This review discusses psychological, attitudinal, and educational factors among both health care professionals and payers in the US that may play a role in slowing biosimilar uptake. More specifically, these factors include a lack of health care professional education, concerns of safety and efficacy, and overly complex product naming systems. Conclusions and Relevance: The pathway to biosimilar use has been obstructed by economic elements as well as attitudinal and psychological factors. For biosimilar drugs to achieve their potential in decreasing treatment costs and thus increasing patient access, it will be essential for both economic and noneconomic factors to be identified and systematically addressed.

A qualitative evaluation of factors influencing Tumor Treating fields (TTFields) therapy decision making among brain tumor patients and physicians.

BACKGROUND: Tumor Treating Fields (TTFields) Therapy is an FDA-approved therapy in the first line and recurrent setting for glioblastoma. Despite Phase 3 evidence showing improved survival with TTFields, it is not uniformly utilized. We aimed to examine patient and clinician views of TTFields and factors shaping utilization of TTFields through a unique research partnership with medical neuro oncology and medical social sciences. METHODS: Adult glioblastoma patients who were offered TTFields at a tertiary care academic hospital were invited to participate in a semi-structured interview about their decision to use or not use TTFields. Clinicians who prescribe TTFields were invited to participate in a semi-structured interview about TTFields. RESULTS: Interviews were completed with 40 patients with a mean age of 53 years; 92.5% were white and 60% were male. Participants who decided against TTFields stated that head shaving, appearing sick, and inconvenience of wearing/carrying the device most influenced their decision. The most influential factors for use of TTFields were the efficacy of the device and their clinician's opinion. Clinicians (N = 9) stated that TTFields was a good option for glioblastoma patients, but some noted that their patients should consider the burdens and benefits of TTFields as it may not be the desired choice for all patients. CONCLUSIONS: This is the first study to examine patient decision making for TTFields. Findings suggest that clinician support and efficacy data are among the key decision-making factors. Properly understanding the path to patients' decision making is crucial in optimizing the use of TTFields and other therapeutic decisions for glioblastoma patients.

Medical Oncologists' Knowledge and Perspectives on the Use of Biosimilars in the United States.

PURPOSE: Despite increasing availability of biosimilar cancer treatments, little is known about oncologists' knowledge and concerns regarding biosimilar use in the United States. We surveyed medical oncologists to examine their knowledge, attitudes, and experience with biosimilars. METHODS: Oncologists recruited via the ASCO Research Survey Pool completed a 29-question survey in 2020 designed with input from clinical and health care system experts and literature review. RESULTS: Of the 269 respondents, most treated patients with biosimilars (n = 236, 88%) and reported that biosimilars were required at their institution (n = 168, 63%). Approximately half (n = 140, 52%) of oncologists correctly responded that biosimilars were not the same as generic medicines. Commonly reported barriers to use of biosimilars included concerns regarding a perceived lack of relevant research (n = 85, 33% reporting quite a bit/very much), the potential for extrapolation (n = 83, 33%), and efficacy limitations (n = 77, 30%). More oncologists from university hospitals (n = 36, 22%) than from community/private hospitals (n = 28, 38%) or private practices (n = 13, 38%) were concerned about biosimilar efficacy. A high proportion of oncologists reported that information on safety (n = 259, 99%) and efficacy (n = 255, 99%) is important when considering whether to use biosimilars. Less than half reported that their institution provided education about biosimilars (n = 108, 40%). CONCLUSION: In this sample of medical oncologists, knowledge about basic features of biosimilars was limited and access to information about biosimilars was insufficient. The present study determined that educational programs on biosimilars for oncologists are needed and identified priorities for such efforts.

How do patients interpret and respond to a single-item global indicator of cancer treatment tolerability?

BACKGROUND: There is increasing interest in patient-reported measures of cancer treatment tolerability. A global measure of bother, the FACT GP5 item ("I am bothered by side effects of treatment") is potentially useful for regulatory, research, and clinical use. To understand this item's appropriateness for capturing treatment tolerability, we conducted cognitive interviews on this item with 3 samples of cancer patients. METHODS: Patients with ovarian cancer (Study 1: N = 21; on treatment), lymphoma (Study 2: N = 14; on treatment), and colorectal or lung cancer (Study 3: N = 16; treatment naïve) were interviewed about GP5's understandability and relevance to their treatment side effects. What patients think about when answering GP5 was also assessed. In all studies, the interview included both structured and open-ended questions. Qualitative data were coded to extract themes and responses to structured questions were tallied. RESULTS: Most patients on treatment (Studies 1 and 2) reported that the GP5 item wording is appropriate (88%) and its meaning is clear (97%). They were very confident or confident in their response (97%) and stated that GP5 was relevant to their cancer experience (97%). When answering GP5, patients considered their treatment and specific side effects. A large proportion (40%) of the treatment-naïve (Study 3) patients reported that GP5 was not relevant to their cancer treatment, and the largest proportion responded to GP5 thinking of negative side effect expectancies. CONCLUSION: This study provides assurance that GP5 is a useful indicator of treatment tolerability, and is meaningful to people with cancer, especially once they have started treatment.

Optimizing a Behavioral Sleep Intervention for Gynecologic Cancer Survivors: Study Design and Protocol.

Sleep difficulties, particularly symptoms of insomnia and circadian disruption, are among the primary complaints of gynecologic cancer survivors before, during, and after treatment. Moreover, difficulty sleeping has been linked to poorer health-related quality of life and elevated symptom burden in this population. Although leading behavioral sleep interventions have demonstrated efficacy among cancer survivors, up to 50% of survivors are non-adherent to these treatments, likely because these interventions require labor-intensive behavior and lifestyle changes. Therefore, there is a need for more effective and acceptable approaches to diminish sleep disturbance among cancer survivors. This manuscript describes the methodology of a two-part study guided by the Multiphase Optimization Strategy (MOST) framework to identify a streamlined behavioral sleep intervention for gynecologic cancer survivors. Three candidate intervention components previously shown to decrease sleep disturbance will be evaluated, including sleep restriction, stimulus control, and systematic bright light exposure. Participants will be adult women with a history of non-metastatic gynecologic cancer who have completed primary treatment and who report current poor sleep quality. Fifteen participants will be recruited for Part 1 of the study, which will utilize qualitative methods to identify barriers to and facilitators of intervention adherence. Results will inform changes to the delivery of the candidate intervention components to promote adherence in Part 2, where 80 participants will be recruited and randomized to one of eight conditions reflecting every possible combination of the three candidate intervention components in a full factorial design. Participants will complete assessments at baseline, post-intervention, and 3-months post-intervention. Part 2 results will identify the combination of candidate intervention components that yields the most efficacious yet efficient 6-week intervention for diminishing sleep disturbance. This is the first known study to apply the MOST framework to optimize a behavioral sleep intervention and will yield a resource-efficient treatment to diminish sleep disturbance, improve health-related quality of life, and decrease symptom burden among gynecologic cancer survivors. ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT05044975.

Development of the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-Carcinoid Syndrome Symptom Index.

OBJECTIVE: To develop a symptom-focused index to evaluate representative symptoms, treatment side effects, and emotional and functional well-being of patients with carcinoid syndrome (CS). METHODS: The development of the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-Carcinoid Syndrome Symptom Index (FACT-CSI) followed US Food and Drug Administration guidelines for the development of patient-reported outcome (PRO) measures and involved the following: (a) literature review; (b) interviews with 14 CS patients; (c) interviews with 9 clinicians; and (d) instrument development involving input from a range of PRO measure development and CS experts. The resulting draft instrument underwent cognitive interviews with 7 CS patients. RESULTS: Forty-six CS sources were reviewed. Analysis of patient interviews produced 23 patient-reported symptoms. The most frequently endorsed physical symptoms were flushing, diarrhea, abdominal pain, fatigue, and food sensitivity/triggers. Seven priority CS emotional and functional themes were also identified by patients. Expert interviews revealed 12 unique priority symptoms - the most common being diarrhea, flushing, wheezing, edema, abdominal pain/cramping, fatigue, and 8 emotional and functional concerns. Through an iterative process of team and clinical collaborator meetings, data review, item reduction and measure revision, 24 items were selected for the draft symptom index representing symptoms, emotional concerns, global assessment of treatment side effects, and functional well-being. Cognitive interview results demonstrated strong content validity, including positive endorsement of item clarity (>86% across items), symptom relevance (>70% for most items), and overall measure content (86%). CONCLUSIONS: The FACT-CSI is a content-relevant, symptom-focused index reflecting the highest priority and clinically relevant symptoms and concerns of people with CS.

Medical oncologist perspectives on palliative care reveal physician-centered barriers to early integration.

BACKGROUND: Early palliative care referral for patients with advanced cancer has demonstrable benefits but is underutilized. We sought to characterize medical oncologists' perceptions about palliative care referral in their clinical practices. METHODS: We conducted 4 focus groups with a national sample of medical oncologists to elicit perspectives about the optimal timing of and barriers to palliative care referral for patients with cancer. We used qualitative content analysis to uncover themes related to early integration of palliative care into standard oncologic practice. RESULTS: Study participants readily acknowledged the evidence supporting early palliative care referral. However, medical oncologists identified patient-centered and physician-centered barriers to widespread adoption of early palliative care. Patient-centered barriers included patients' and families' perceptions or misperceptions of the role of palliative care. Additionally, physicians themselves described acting as a barrier to palliative care referral because they were concerned that palliative care physicians may interfere with the plan of care, or offer options that were not endorsed by the medical oncologist. Medical oncologists depicted themselves having authority over the timing of palliative care referral, and as granting limited autonomy to other clinical team members in counseling patients about advanced care planning. CONCLUSIONS: Medical oncologists are hesitant to adopt the practice of early palliative care referral because they are concerned that other physicians may disrupt a patient's treatment plan. Physician-centered barriers may delay integration of palliative care, and future efforts to promote a collaborative approach to advanced care planning may improve patient-centered outcomes through access to early palliative care.

Neuropathy experienced by colorectal cancer patients receiving oxaliplatin: A qualitative study to validate the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy/Gynecologic Oncology Group-Neurotoxicity scale.

BACKGROUND: Although oxaliplatin is widely established as a standard treatment in colorectal cancer (CRC), oxaliplatin-induced neuropathy has emerged as a prominent dose-limiting side effect associated with quality of life decrements. Ongoing monitoring and management of neuropathy is important for CRC patient quality of life and adherence to treatment. Therefore, a validated self-reported measure of neuropathy would aid in the management and assessment of oxaliplatin-induced neuropathy in clinical practice and research. We sought to evaluate the content validity of the 13-item Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy/Gynecologic Oncology Group- Neurotoxicity subscale (FACT/GOG-Ntx) for CRC patients receiving oxaliplatin. AIM: To understand the neuropathy experiences of CRC patients and assess content validity of the FACT/GOG-Ntx. METHODS: Semi-structured concept elicitation and cognitive debriefing interviews were conducted with 31 CRC patients experiencing peripheral neuropathy from current or previous oxaliplatin treatment. Interview data were analyzed using a constant comparative approach, and data were mapped to the FACT/GOG-Ntx to assess content validity. RESULTS: Mean age of the sample was 54 (range 34-82). The sample was primarily Caucasian (84%) and consisted of nearly equal numbers of men and women. Participants described 28 unique neuropathy symptoms; hand tingling (experienced by 87% of respondents); feet tingling (81%); hand numbness (68%); and feet numbness (84%) were most frequently mentioned. Neuropathy symptoms occurring on the feet were most often identified as most bothersome by participants. Eleven of the 13 FACT/GOG-Ntx items exhibited moderate to strong evidence of content validity. Two items related to trouble hearing and ringing in the ears had weak support; however, these items represent severe neuropathy and could be useful for a patient reported outcome measure. CONCLUSION: The FACT/GOG-Ntx represents the key neuropathy experiences of CRC patients treated with oxaliplatin.

Methodological challenges in conducting instrumentation research in non-communicative palliative care patients.

Well-designed, rigorously implemented instrumentation studies are essential to develop valid, reliable pain assessment tools in non-communicative (non-self-reporting) palliative care patients. When conducting a pain instrumentation study, a research team identified methodologic challenges surrounding informed consent, eligibility criteria, acute pain operational definitions, patient recruitment, missing data, and study-related training during a run-in phase at the beginning of the project and during the conduct of the study. The team dealt with these challenges through identifying root causes, implementing remedial measures, and collecting data to demonstrate improvement or resolution. Effective strategies included obtaining Institutional Review Board (IRB) approval for a waiver of informed consent, modifying eligibility criteria, ensuring that operational definitions and study procedures were consistent with clinical practice, decreasing time from screening to data collection to improve recruitment, increasing study nurse staffing by re-budgeting grant funds, focusing time and resources on high accruing clinical units, revising processes to minimize missing data, and developing detailed training for users of the instrument. With these multi-pronged solutions, the team exceeded the patient accrual target by 25% within the funding period and reduced missing data. While pain instrumentation studies in non-communicative patients have similar challenges to other palliative care studies, some of the solutions may be unique and several are applicable to other palliative care studies, particularly instrumentation research. The team's experience may also be useful for funders and IRBs.

Radiation Oncologists' Role in End-of-Life Care: A Perspective From Medical Oncologists.

PURPOSE: Multidisciplinary communication and collaboration are key to planning and delivering end-of-life care for patients with advanced and metastatic cancer. We sought to characterize medical oncologists' perspectives on the role of radiation oncologists in end-of-life care. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A sample of US medical oncologists was recruited using snowball sampling methods. Audio recordings of 4 professionally moderated focus groups were transcribed. Investigators from diverse backgrounds (medical oncology, radiation oncology, critical care medicine, palliative care, and public health) independently reviewed each transcript. Qualitative content analysis was used to create consensus codes that were applied to subsequent focus group transcripts in an iterative process. RESULTS: Medical oncologists expressed complex views regarding the role of radiation oncologists in end-of-life care. Identified themes included the limited role of radiation oncologists, territorial concerns, capability, and desire of radiation oncologists in this realm, and the need for communication between providers. Radiation oncologists were compared with surgeons, whose interaction with patients ceased after their service had been performed. In this regard, control of palliative care referral or end-of-life care discussions was thought to be in the territory of medical oncologists who had longitudinal relationships with patients from diagnosis. Medical oncologists were concerned about the capability of radiation oncologists to accurately prognosticate, and stated radiation oncologists lacked knowledge of subsequent lines of systemic therapy available to patients. Radiation oncologists' fear of upsetting medical oncologists was thought to be justified if they engaged in end-of-life care planning without direct permission from the referring medical oncologist. CONCLUSIONS: Participation of radiation oncologists in end-of-life care planning was viewed with skepticism by medical oncologists. Radiation oncologists should focus on increasing open communication and teamwork with medical oncologists and demonstrate their ability to prognosticate and counsel patients regarding end-of-life care decisions.

What does risk of future cancer mean to breast cancer patients?

PURPOSE: Newly diagnosed breast cancer patients greatly overestimate their risk of developing contralateral breast cancer (CBC). Better understanding of patient conceptions of risk would facilitate doctor-patient communication and surgical decision making. In this mixed methods study, we prospectively examined breast cancer patients' perceived risk of future cancer and the reported factors that drove their risk perceptions. METHODS: Women age 21-60 diagnosed with breast cancer without a BRCA mutation or known distant metastases completed a study interview between surgical consult and surgical treatment. Participants completed a 12-item Perceived Risk Questionnaire, which assessed 10-year and lifetime risks of ipsilateral local recurrence, CBC, and distant recurrence. Patients provided qualitative explanations for their answers. RESULTS: Sixty-three patients completed study interviews (mean age 50.3). Participants were primarily White (85.7%) and 90.5% had attended college. Patients estimated their 10-year risk of CBC as 22.0%, nearly 4 times the established 10-year risk. Women attributed their risk perceptions to "gut feelings" about future cancer, even when women knew those feelings contradicted medically established risk. Perceptions of risk also reflected beliefs that cancer is random and that risk for local recurrence, CBC, and distant recurrence are the same. CONCLUSIONS: Our findings point to the need for novel ways of presenting factual information regarding both risk of recurrence and of new primary cancers, as well as the necessity of acknowledging cognitive and affective processes many patients use when conceptualizing risk. By differentiating women's intuitive feelings about risk from their knowledge of medically estimated risk, doctors can enhance informed decision making.

Pain Assessment in Noncommunicative Adult Palliative Care Patients.

Palliative care patients who have pain are often unable to self-report their pain, placing them at increased risk for underrecognized and undertreated pain. Use of appropriate pain assessment tools significantly enhances the likelihood of effective pain management and improved pain-related outcomes. This paper reviews selected tools and provides palliative care clinicians with a practical approach to selecting a pain assessment tool for noncommunicative adult patients.

Cancer experiences and health-related quality of life among racial and ethnic minority survivors of young adult cancer: a mixed methods study.

PURPOSE: Young adult (YA) racial and ethnic minority survivors of cancer (diagnosed ages 18-39) experience significant disparities in health outcomes and survivorship compared to non-minorities of the same age. However, little is known about the survivorship experiences of this population. The purpose of this study is to explore the cancer experiences and health-related quality of life (HRQOL) among YA racial/ethnic minorities in an urban US city. METHODS: Racial and ethnic minority YA cancer survivors (0 to 5 years posttreatment) were recruited from a comprehensive cancer center using a purposive sampling approach. Participants (n = 31) completed semi-structured interviews, the FACT-G (physical, emotional, social well-being) and the FACIT-Sp (spiritual well-being). Mixed methods data were evaluated using thematic analysis and analysis of covariance (ANCOVA). RESULTS: The majority of survivors were women (65 %), single (52 %), and Hispanic (42 %). Across interviews, the most common themes were the following: "changes in perspective," "emotional impacts," "received support," and "no psychosocial changes." Other themes varied by racial/ethnic subgroups, including "treatment effects" (Hispanics), "behavior changes" (Blacks), and "appreciation for life" (Asians). ANCOVAs (controlling for gender and ECOG performance status scores) revealed that race/ethnicity had a significant main effect on emotional (P = 0.05), but not physical, social, or spiritual HRQOL (P > 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: Our findings suggest that minority YA cancer survivors report complex positive and negative experiences. In spite of poor health outcomes, survivors report experiencing growth and positive change due to cancer. Variations in experiences and HRQOL highlight the importance of assessing cultural background to tailor survivorship care among YA racial and ethnic minorities.

Health-Related Quality of Life in Patients with Idiopathic Pulmonary Fibrosis.

PURPOSE: Idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis (IPF) produces symptoms and activity limitations that impair health-related quality of life (HRQOL). The Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System(®) (PROMIS(®)) includes measures of self-reported health and HRQOL for a range of conditions. This study evaluated the HRQOL of individuals with IPF using PROMIS measures and examined associations between HRQOL and key symptoms or supplemental oxygen need. METHODS: Individuals who reported being told by a doctor that they have IPF completed an online battery of measures at baseline and 7-10 days later (for test-retest reliability). Measures included a brief survey of demographic and health-related questions, the PROMIS-29 profile, the Modified Medical Research Council Dyspnea Scale (MMRC), PROMIS dyspnea severity short form, A Tool to Assess Quality of life in IPF (ATAQ-IPF) and one cough item from the Functional Assessment of Chronic Illness Therapy (FACIT). RESULTS: 220 individuals were included in the final sample. Except for sleep disturbance, all PROMIS domain scores significantly (p < .01) differed by MMRC level. Supplemental oxygen users were more impaired than non-users in fatigue, physical function, and social role participation (p < 0.01). The test-retest reliability was acceptable to excellent (>0.7) for all scales, but was lower for sleep disturbance (0.64). CONCLUSIONS: People with IPF report substantial deficits in HRQOL across a range of PROMIS domains, and deficits vary by dyspnea and cough severity. These deficits warrant monitoring in clinical practice and consideration when investigating new therapies. Further research is required to further evaluate the psychometric performance of the PROMIS-29 in IPF.

Awareness of preventive medication among women at high risk for breast cancer and their willingness to consider transdermal or oral tamoxifen: a focus group study.

BACKGROUND: Despite demonstrated efficacy, acceptance of selective estrogen receptor modulators (SERMs), such as tamoxifen, for breast cancer risk reduction remains low. Delivering SERMs via local transdermal therapy (LTT) could significantly reduce systemic effects and therefore may increase acceptance. We aim to assess women's knowledge of breast cancer prevention medications and views on LTT of SERMs. METHODS: Focus groups were conducted with healthy women identified through the comprehensive breast center of a large urban cancer institution. Group discussions covered risk perceptions, knowledge of and concerns about risk reducing medications. Participants reported their perceived risk for breast cancer (average, below/above average), preference for SERMs in a pill or gel form, risk factors, and prior physician recommendations regarding risk-reducing medicines. Participants' breast cancer risk was estimated using tools based on the Gail Model. Trained personnel examined all qualitative results systematically; risk perceptions and preferred method of medication delivery were tallied quantitatively. RESULTS: Four focus groups (N = 32) were conducted. Most participants had at least a college degree (78.2 %) and were of European (50 %) or African ancestry (31 %). The majority (72 %) were at elevated risk for breast cancer; approximately half of these women perceived themselves to be at elevated risk. Few participants had prior knowledge of preventive medications. The women noted a number of concerns about LTT, including dosage, impact on day-to-day life, and side effects; nonetheless, over 90 % of the women stated they would prefer LTT to a pill. CONCLUSION: Awareness of preventive medications was low even in a highly educated sample of high-risk women. If given a choice in the route of administration, most women preferred a gel to a pill, anticipating fewer side effects. Future work should focus on demonstrating equivalent efficacy and reduced toxicity of topical over oral medications and on raising awareness of chemopreventive options for breast cancer.

Implementation and Evaluation of a High-Dose Cytarabine Neurologic Assessment Tool.

Patients receiving high-dose cytarabine as part of their chemotherapy regimen have a chance of experiencing neurotoxicities. Prompt identification of signs and symptoms can greatly reduce the chance of patients sustaining permanent neurologic damage. This article describes the development and successful implementation of an evidence-based, standardized neurologic assessment and documentation tool that was evaluated using a clinical utility questionnaire and an adherence audit.

Development and validation of the functional assessment of cancer therapy-antiangiogenesis subscale.

The Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy (FACT)-Antiangiogenesis (AntiA) Subscale was developed and validated to enhance treatment decision-making and side effect management for patients receiving anti-angiogenesis therapies. Side effects related to anti-angiogenesis therapies were identified from the literature, clinician input, and patient input. Fifty-nine possible patient expressions of side effects were generated. Patient and clinician ratings of the importance of these expressions led us to develop a 24-item questionnaire with clinical and research potential. To assess the scale's reliability and validity, 167 patients completed the AntiA Subscale, the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-general (FACT-G), the FACT-Kidney Symptom Index (FKSI), the FACIT-Fatigue Subscale, the Global Rating of Change Scale (GRC), and the PROMIS Global Health Scale. Patient responses to the AntiA were analyzed for internal consistency, test-retest reliability, convergent and discriminant validity, and responsiveness to change in clinical status. All tested scales were found to have good internal consistency reliability (Cronbach's alpha 0.70-0.92). Test-retest reliability was also good (0.72-0.88) for total and subscale scores and lower for individual items. The total score, subscale scores, and all single items (except nosebleeds) significantly differentiated between groups defined by level of side effect bother. Evaluation of responsiveness to change in this study was not conclusive, suggesting an area for further research. The AntiA is a reliable and valid measure of side effects from anti-angiogenesis therapy.

Content validity of the NCCN-FACT ovarian symptom index-18 (NFOSI-18).

OBJECTIVE: This study examined the content validity of the NCCN-FACT Ovarian Symptom Index-18 (NFOSI-18), an advanced ovarian cancer symptom index comprised of symptoms perceived as most important by clinical experts and women with advanced ovarian cancer. METHODS: Eighteen women with advanced ovarian cancer completed the NFOSI-18 and participated in cognitive interviews to assess: (a) the understandability of the NFOSI-18; and (b) the things patients have in mind when responding to the item, "I am bothered by side effects of treatment;" and (c) the interpretation patients place on items relating to fatigue and lack of energy. Interviews were recorded and transcribed for qualitative analysis. RESULTS: All but 2 (89%) participants indicated that each item was clear and understandable and the same proportion (89%) stated they were "very confident" or "confident" about providing accurate answers to all but one item. When responding to the item, "I am bothered by side effects of treatment," fatigue, nausea, and neuropathy constituted the most frequently mentioned concerns. Among the participants who were asked, eight participants responded that "fatigue" and "lack of energy" were the same concept and nine responded they were different. Participants associated "fatigue" with tiredness and associated "lack of energy" with the inability to perform daily tasks and activities. CONCLUSIONS: The findings support the content validity of the NFOSI-18. Item revisions, deletions or additions do not appear warranted. Future research can address the reliability and validity of the NFOSI-18 in clinical research.

Psychometric properties of a brief, clinically relevant measure of pain in patients with hepatocellular carcinoma.

PURPOSE: Due to diagnosis at advanced stages, comorbidities, and the impact of treatment, patients with hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) may experience pain. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the psychometric properties of a brief, clinically relevant measure of pain in HCC. METHODS: We conducted a secondary data analysis from four longitudinal studies of patients with HCC (total n = 304). All patients completed the FACT-Hepatobiliary (FACT-Hep) questionnaire, and 49 patients completed the Brief Pain Inventory (BPI) Interference scale. We conducted confirmatory factor analysis (CFA), Rasch modeling, and correlational analysis to assess the psychometrics of the three items on the FACT-Hep that assess HCC-relevant pain scale. RESULTS: Patients had an average age of 63.5 (±12.2) and were mostly male (76 %). The mean three-item pain subscale score was 8.5 ± 3.0. Seventy-four (24.3 %) patients reported no pain (score = 12). Results of a one-factor CFA supported unidimensionality of the items, and all items fit the Rasch model. An item-person map demonstrated that the three items covered all patients with non-extreme scores. Pain scores were significantly associated with baseline general health-related quality of life (FACT-General, r = 0.60, p < 0.001) and pain interference (BPI, r = -0.63, p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: The three FACT-Hep pain items are unidimensional, cover the range of pain experienced by most patients with HCC, and demonstrate convergent validity. This pain subscale is, if future research demonstrates its sensitivity to change, potentially useful for HCC clinical trials.