Clinical outcome assessment in patients with epilepsy: The value of health-related quality of life measurements.

This narrative review provides an overview of the current knowledge on health-related quality of life (HRQOL), a relevant clinical outcome in patients with epilepsy. It shows that the most important factor determining HRQOL in this patient group is seizure frequency. In particular, seizure-freedom is associated with better HRQOL scores. Many other factors may impact perceived HRQOL aspects, but their interrelation is complex and requires further research. Novel analytical approaches, such as hierarchical cluster and symptom network analyses might shed further light on this, and may result in recommendations for interventions on the most 'central' factors influencing different aspects of HRQOL in patients with epilepsy. Next, an overview of the HRQOL tools and analytical methods currently used in epilepsy care, with a focus on clinical trials, is provided. The QOLIE-31 is the most frequently applied and best validated tool. Several other questionnaires focusing on specific aspects of HRQOL (e.g., mood, social impact) are less frequently used. We show some pitfalls that should be taken into account when designing study protocols including HRQOL endpoints. This includes standardized statistical analysis approaches and predefined reporting methods for HRQOL in epilepsy populations. It has been shown in other patient groups that the lack of such standardisation negatively impacts the quality and comparability of results. We conclude with a number of recommendations for future research.

Systematic review on the use of patient-reported outcome measures in brain tumor studies: part of the Response Assessment in Neuro-Oncology Patient-Reported Outcome (RANO-PRO) initiative.

BACKGROUND: The Response Assessment in Neuro-Oncology Patient-Reported Outcome (RANO-PRO) working group aims to provide guidance on the use of PROs in brain tumor patients. PRO measures should be of high quality, both in terms of relevance and other measurement properties. This systematic review aimed to identify PRO measures that have been used in brain tumor studies to date. METHODS: A systematic literature search for articles published up to June 25, 2020 was conducted in several electronic databases. Pre-specified inclusion criteria were used to identify studies using PRO measures assessing symptoms, (instrumental) activities of daily living [(I)ADL] or health-related quality of life (HRQoL) in adult patients with glioma, meningioma, primary central nervous system lymphoma, or brain metastasis. RESULTS: A total of 215 different PRO measures were identified in 571 published and 194 unpublished studies. The identified PRO measures include brain tumor-specific, cancer-specific, and generic instruments, as well as instruments designed for other indications or multi- or single-item study-specific questionnaires. The most frequently used instruments were the EORTC QLQ-C30 and QLQ-BN20 (n = 286 and n = 247), and the FACT-Br (n = 167), however, the majority of the instruments were used only once or twice (150/215). CONCLUSION: Many different PRO measures assessing symptoms, (I)ADL or HRQoL have been used in brain tumor studies to date. Future research should clarify whether these instruments or their scales/items exhibit good content validity and other measurement properties for use in brain tumor patients.

Long-Term Disease Burden and Survivorship Issues After Surgery and Radiotherapy of Intracranial Meningioma Patients.

BACKGROUND: Many intracranial meningioma patients have an impaired health-related quality of life (HRQoL) and neurocognitive functioning up to 4 yr after intervention. OBJECTIVE: To assess the long-term (≥5 yr) disease burden of meningioma patients. METHODS: In this multicenter cross-sectional study, patients ≥5 yr after intervention (including active magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) surveillance) were included and assessed for HRQoL (Short-Form Health Survey 36), neurocognitive functioning (neuropsychological assessment), anxiety and depression (Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale), and work productivity (Short Form-Health and Labour Questionnaire). Multivariable and propensity score regression analyses were used to compare patients and controls, and different treatment strategies corrected for possible confounders. Clinically relevant differences were reported. RESULTS: At a median of 9 yr follow-up after intervention, meningioma patients (n = 190) reported more limitations due to physical (difference 12.5 points, P = .008) and emotional (13.3 points, P = .002) health problems compared with controls. Patients also had an increased risk to suffer from anxiety (odds ratio [OR]: 2.6, 95% CI: 1.2-5.7) and depression (OR: 3.7, 95% CI: 1.3-10.5). Neurocognitive deficits were found in 43% of patients. Although postoperative complications, radiotherapy, and reresection were associated with worse verbal memory, attention, and executive functioning when compared to patients resected once, the only clinically relevant association was between reresection and worse attention (-2.11, 95% CI: -3.52 to -0.07). Patients of working age less often had a paid job (48%) compared with the working-age Dutch population (72%) and reported more obstacles at work compared with controls. CONCLUSION: In the long term, a large proportion of meningioma patients have impaired HRQoL, neurocognitive deficits, and high levels of anxiety or depression. Patients treated with 1 resection have the best neurocognitive functioning.

Unmet needs and recommendations to improve meningioma care through patient, partner, and health care provider input: a mixed-method study.

BACKGROUND: It has been suggested that lack of ongoing registration of patient-centered outcomes has resulted in existing care trajectories that have not been optimized for sequelae experienced by meningioma patients. This study aimed to evaluate the structure of current meningioma care and identify issues and potential high-impact improvement initiatives. METHODS: Using the grounded theory approach, a thematic framework was constructed based on the Dutch Comprehensive Cancer Organisation survey about issues in meningioma care trajectories. This framework was used during 3 semistructured interviews and 2 focus groups with patient-partner dyads (n = 16 participants), and 2 focus groups with health care providers (n = 11 participants) to assess issues in current meningioma care trajectories and possible solutions, including barriers to and facilitators for implementation. RESULTS: Identified issues (n = 18 issues) were categorized into 3 themes: availability and provision of information, care and support, and screening for (neurocognitive) rehabilitation. A lack of information about the intervention and possible outcomes or complications, lack of support after treatment focusing on bodily and psychological functions, and reintegration into society were considered most important. Sixteen solutions were suggested, such as appointment of case managers (solution for 11/18 issues, 61%), assessment and treatment by physiatrists (22%), and routine use of patient-reported outcome measures for patient monitoring (17%). Barriers for these solutions were lack of budget, capacity, technology infrastructure, and qualified personnel with knowledge about issues experienced by meningioma patients. CONCLUSIONS: This study identified issues in current multidisciplinary meningioma care that are considered unmet needs by patients, partners, and health care providers and could guide innovation of care.

Glioma patient-reported outcome assessment in clinical care and research: a Response Assessment in Neuro-Oncology collaborative report.

Clinical trials of treatments for high-grade gliomas have traditionally relied on measures of response or time-dependent metrics; however, these endpoints have limitations because they do not characterise the functional or symptomatic effect of the condition on the person. Including clinical outcome assessments, such as patient- reported outcomes (PROs), to determine net clinical benefit of a treatment strategy is needed because of the substantial burden of symptoms and impaired functioning in this patient population. The US National Cancer Institute convened a meeting to review previous recommendations and existing PRO measures of symptoms and function that can be applied to current trials and clinical practice for high-grade gliomas. Measures were assessed for relevance, relationship to disease and therapy, sensitivity to change, psychometric properties, response format, patient acceptability, and use of self-report. The group also relied on patient input including the results of an online survey, a literature review on available clinical outcomes, expert opinion, and alignment with work done by other organisations. A core set of priority constructs was proposed that allows more comprehensive evaluation of therapies and comparison of outcomes among studies, and enhances efforts to improve the measurement of these core clinical outcomes. The proposed set of constructs was then presented to the Society for Neuro-Oncology Response Assessment in Neuro-Oncology Working Group and feedback was solicited.

The added value of health-related quality of life as a prognostic indicator of overall survival and progression-free survival in glioma patients: a meta-analysis based on individual patient data from randomised controlled trials.

OBJECTIVE: Prognostic value of health-related quality of life (HRQoL) data may be important to inform patients in clinical practice and to guide clinical decision-making. Our study investigated the added prognostic value of HRQoL for overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS) in a large heterogeneous sample of glioma patients, besides known prognostic factors. METHODS: We included individual baseline data from previously published randomised controlled trials (RCTs) in glioma patients in which HRQoL was assessed through the European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer QLQ-C30 and QLQ-BN20 questionnaires. Multivariable Cox regression models (stratified for newly diagnosed versus recurrent disease) were constructed, first with clinical variables (age, sex, tumour type, performance status, allocated treatment and extent of resection) only and subsequently with HRQoL variables added, separately for OS and PFS. The added prognostic value of HRQoL was calculated using C-indices. RESULTS: Baseline HRQoL and clinical data from 15 RCTs were included, comprising 5217 patients. In the model including both clinical and HRQoL variables, better cognitive and role functioning and less motor dysfunction were independently associated with longer OS, whereas better role and cognitive functioning, less nausea and vomiting and more appetite loss were independently associated with prolonged PFS. However, C-indices indicated only a small prognostic improvement of the models for OS and PFS when adding HRQoL to the clinical prognostic variables (+1.1% for OS and +.7% for PFS). CONCLUSION: Our findings demonstrate that several baseline HRQoL variables are independently prognostic for OS and PFS, yet the added value of HRQoL to the known clinical prognostic variables was small.

The EORTC CAT Core-The computer adaptive version of the EORTC QLQ-C30 questionnaire.

BACKGROUND: To optimise measurement precision, relevance to patients and flexibility, patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) should ideally be adapted to the individual patient/study while retaining direct comparability of scores across patients/studies. This is achievable using item banks and computerised adaptive tests (CATs). The European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) Quality of Life Questionnaire Core 30 (QLQ-C30) is one of the most widely used PROMs in cancer research and clinical practice. Here we provide an overview of the research program to develop CAT versions of the QLQ-C30's 14 functional and symptom domains. METHODS: The EORTC Quality of Life Group's strategy for developing CAT item banks consists of: literature search to identify potential candidate items; formulation of new items compatible with the QLQ-C30 item style; expert evaluations and patient interviews; field-testing and psychometric analyses, including factor analysis, item response theory calibration and simulation of measurement properties. In addition, software for setting up, running and scoring CAT has been developed. RESULTS: Across eight rounds of data collections, 9782 patients were recruited from 12 countries for the field-testing. The four phases of development resulted in a total of 260 unique items across the 14 domains. Each item bank consists of 7-34 items. Psychometric evaluations indicated higher measurement precision and increased statistical power of the CAT measures compared to the QLQ-C30 scales. Using CAT, sample size requirements may be reduced by approximately 20-35% on average without loss of power. CONCLUSIONS: The EORTC CAT Core represents a more precise, powerful and flexible measurement system than the QLQ-C30. It is currently being validated in a large independent, international sample of cancer patients.

Working plan for the use of patient-reported outcome measures in adults with brain tumours: a Response Assessment in Neuro-Oncology (RANO) initiative.

The Response Assessment in Neuro-Oncology-Patient-Reported Outcome (RANO-PRO) working group is an international multidisciplinary collaboration that provides guidance on the use of patient-reported outcome (PRO) measures in clinical trials and practice for adult patients with brain tumours. Findings from both PROs and traditional outcome measures, such as survival, and clinical or radiological response, are essential to inform the research community, policy makers, physicians, and patients in the treatment decision-making process. Previous initiatives in oncology have focused on guidelines concerning the collection, analysis, interpretation, and reporting of PRO data. However, we recommend the application of appropriate PRO instruments, with respect to its content and measurement properties (ie, research question, content validity, and other measurement properties), in brain tumour research. PROs should be well defined and reliable to generate high-quality evidence, and our recommendations on the use of specific PRO measures could help to improve the quality of PRO evidence derived from neuro-oncological studies, and might add a new dimension in how the value of therapeutics is assessed in patients with brain tumours. In this Policy Review, we present the RANO-PRO working plan for the use of PROs in adults with brain tumours.

Quality of reporting and assessment of patient-reported health-related quality of life in patients with brain metastases: a systematic review.

Brain metastases (BMs) have become increasingly prevalent and present unique considerations for patients, including neurocognitive sequelae and advanced disease burden. Therefore, assessing health-related quality of life (HRQoL) via patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) is an important element of managing these patients. A systematic review of the literature was conducted with the aims of (1) assessing how PROMS used in BM patients were validated, (2) assessing PROM content, and (3) evaluating quality of PROM-results reporting. PROM validation and quality of reporting were assessed using the COnsensus-based Standards for the selection of health Measurement INstruments (COSMIN) grading criteria and International Society of Quality of Life (ISOQOL)-recommended PROM-reporting standards, respectively. Forty-seven studies reporting on 5178 patients with a range of primacy cancer types were included. Eight different PROMs were applied, ranging from general to brain-specific questionnaires. Weaknesses in the validation of these PROMs were assessed by the COSMIN criteria. Many of these PROMs were not developed for BM patients and contained little information on cognitive symptoms. The overall quality of PROM reporting was insufficient based on the ISOQOL scale. Given the unique clinical considerations in BM patients, our results indicate the need for a standardized, validated questionnaire to assess HRQoL in this population. Additionally, there is room for quality improvement with regard to reporting of PROM-related results.

The Added Value of Analyzing Pooled Health-Related Quality of Life Data: A Review of the EORTC PROBE Initiative.

BACKGROUND: The European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) Patient-Reported Outcomes and Behavioural Evidence (PROBE) initiative was established to investigate critical topics to better understand health-related quality of life (HRQOL) of cancer patients and to educate clinicians, policy makers, and healthcare providers. METHODS: The aim of this paper is to review the major research outcomes of the pooled analysis of HRQOL data along with the clinical data. We identified 30 pooled EORTC randomized controlled trials (RCTs), 18 NCIC-Clinical Trials Group RCTs, and two German Ovarian Cancer Study Group RCTs, all using the EORTC QLQ-C30. All statistical tests were two-sided. RESULTS: Evidence was found that HRQOL data can offer prognostic information beyond clinical measures and improve prognostic accuracy in cancer RCTs (by 5.9%-8.3%). Moreover, models that considered both patient- and clinician-reported scores gained more prognostic overall survival accuracy for fatigue (P < .001), vomiting (P = .01), nausea (P < .001), and constipation (P = .01). Greater understanding of the association between symptom and/or functioning scales was developed by identifying physical, psychological, and gastrointestinal clusters. Additionally, minimally important differences in interpreting HRQOL changes for improvement and deterioration were found to vary across different patient populations and disease stages. Finally, HRQOL scores are statistically significantly affected by deviations from the intended time point at which the questionnaire is completed. CONCLUSIONS: The use of existing pooled data shows that it is possible to learn about general aspects of cancer HRQOL and methodology. Our work shows that setting up international pooled datasets holds great promise for understanding patients' unmet psychosocial needs and calls for additional empirical investigation to improve clinical care and understand cancer through retrospective HRQOL analyses.

Prognostic value of health-related quality-of-life data in predicting survival in patients with anaplastic oligodendrogliomas, from a phase III EORTC brain cancer group study.

PURPOSE: This is one of a few studies that have explored the value of baseline symptoms and health-related quality of life (HRQOL) in predicting survival in patients with brain cancer. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Baseline HRQOL scores (from the European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer [EORTC] Quality of Life Questionnaire C30 and the EORTC Brain Cancer Module) were examined in 247 patients with anaplastic oligodendrogliomas to determine the relationship with overall survival by using Cox proportional hazards regression models. Refined techniques as the bootstrap resampling procedure and the computation of C indexes and R2 coefficients were used to explore the stability of the models as well as better assess the potential benefit of using HRQOL to predict survival in clinical practice and research. RESULTS: Classical analysis controlled for major clinical prognostic factors selected emotional functioning (P = .0016), communication deficit (P = .0261), future uncertainty (P = .0481), and weakness of legs (P = .0001) as statistically significant prognostic factors of survival. However, several issues question the validity of these findings and no single model was found to be preferable over all others. C indexes, which estimate the probability of a model to correctly predict which patient among a randomly chosen pair of patients will survive longer, and R2 coefficients, which measure the proportion of variability explained by the model, did not exhibit major improvement when adding selected or all HRQOL scores to clinical factors. CONCLUSION: While classical techniques lead to positive results, more refined analyses suggest that baseline HRQOL scores add relatively little to clinical factors to predict survival. These results may have implications for future use of HRQOL as a prognostic factor for patients with cancer.