Fear of recurrence, emotional well-being and quality of life among long-term advanced ovarian cancer survivors.

OBJECTIVE: Although advanced stage epithelial ovarian cancer is widely considered life-threatening, 17% of women with advanced disease will survive long-term. Little is known about the health-related quality of life (QOL) of long-term ovarian cancer survivors, or how fear of recurrence might affect QOL. METHODS: 58 long-term survivors with advanced disease participated in the study. Participants completed standardized questionnaires to capture cancer history, QOL, and fear of recurrent disease (FOR). Statistical analyses included multivariable linear models. RESULTS: Participants averaged 52.8 years at diagnosis and had survived >8 years (mean:13.5); 64% had recurrent disease. Mean FACT-G, FACT-O, and FACT-O-TOI (TOI) scores were 90.7 (SD:11.6), 128.6 (SD:14.8), and 85.9 (SD:10.2) respectively. Compared to the U.S. population using T-scores, QOL for participants exceeded that of healthy adults (T-score (FACT-G) = 55.9). Overall QOL was lower in women with recurrent vs. non-recurrent disease though differences did not reach statistical significance (FACT-O = 126.1 vs. 133.3, p = 0.082). Despite good QOL, high FOR was reported in 27%. FOR was inversely associated with emotional well-being (EWB) (p < 0.001), but not associated with other QOL subdomains. In multivariable analysis, FOR was a significant predictor of EWB after adjusting for QOL (TOI). A significant interaction was observed between recurrence and FOR (p = 0.034), supporting a larger impact of FOR in recurrent disease. CONCLUSION: QOL in long-term ovarian cancer survivors was better than the average for healthy U.S. women. Despite good QOL, high FOR contributed significantly to increased emotional distress, most notably for those with recurrence. Attention to FOR may be warranted in this survivor population.

Quality of Life and Adverse Events: Prognostic Relationships in Long-Term Ovarian Cancer Survival.

BACKGROUND: There is a critical need to identify patient characteristics associated with long-term ovarian cancer survival. METHODS: Quality of life (QOL), measured by the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-Ovarian-Trial Outcome Index (FACT-O-TOI), including physical, functional, and ovarian-specific subscales, was compared between long-term survivors (LTS) (8+ years) and short-term survivors (STS) (<5 years) of GOG 218 at baseline; before cycles 4, 7, 13, 21; and 6 months post-treatment using linear and longitudinal mixed models adjusted for covariates. Adverse events (AEs) were compared between survivor groups at each assessment using generalized linear models. All P values are 2-sided. RESULTS: QOL differed statistically significantly between STS (N = 1115) and LTS (N = 260) (P < .001). Baseline FACT-O-TOI and FACT-O-TOI change were independently associated with long-term survival (odds ratio = 1.05, 95% confidence interval = 1.03 to 1.06 and odds ratio = 1.06, 95% confidence interval = 1.05 to 1.07, respectively). A 7-point increase in baseline QOL was associated with a 38.0% increase in probability of LTS, and a 9-point increase in QOL change was associated with a 67.0% increase in odds for LTS. QOL decreased statistically significantly with increasing AE quartiles (cycle 4 quartiles: 0-5 vs 6-8 vs 9-11 vs ≥12 AEs, P = .01; cycle 21 quartiles: 0-2 vs 3 vs 4-5 vs ≥6 AEs, P = .001). Further, LTS reported statistically significantly better QOL compared with STS (P = .03 and P = .01, cycles 4 and 21, respectively), with similar findings across higher AE grades. CONCLUSIONS: Baseline and longitudinal QOL change scores distinguished LTS vs STS and are robust prognosticators for long-term survival. Results have trial design and supportive care implications, providing meaningful prognostic value in this understudied population.

Strategies to Maximize Patient Participation in Clinical Trials.

Despite considerable interest and success in oncology drug development, the minority of patients with cancer diagnoses enroll in clinical trials. Multiple obstacles account for this low enrollment rate. An improvement in patient participation in clinical trials could increase patient access to novel and potentially promising agents, provide faster trial results, and, with implementation of rational eligibility criteria, allow for a better understanding of the drug's safety and efficacy in a heterogeneous population. We present barriers and potential solutions to maximize patient participation, including a review of the ASCO and Friends of Cancer Research (FoCR) Modernizing Eligibility Criteria Project, U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) regulatory considerations, an industry perspective, and a patient perspective.

Perspective of an advocate: a case and framework for research advocacy in Africa.

In making an experience-based case for research advocacy in Africa and suggesting a framework for building it, this paper covers factors such as basic tenets of patient advocacy, key components and urgent needs in building strong research advocacy, concepts and approaches from which guidance might be taken, and the feasibility of its development and growth throughout the continent. Research advocacy is defined as the meaningful engagement of patient advocates and their representatives in the research system.As the clinical research system in Africa is developing and gaining strength, this is an opportune time for research advocacy to form and take root as an embedded component in the research structures on the continent. That is, the current state of development of the research system and the simultaneous interest in and rise of patient advocacy bode well for the likelihood of developing robust research advocacy, suggesting its feasibility. Even so, several developments are urgently needed to build, shore up, and sustain a framework receptive to maximizing the influence of an active network of patient advocates-many training in the subspecialty of research advocacy-and a research structure that supports and embeds advocate engagement.