International development of a patient-centered core outcome set for assessing health-related quality of life in metastatic breast cancer patients.

PURPOSE: For patients living with metastatic breast cancer (MBC), achieving best possible health-related quality of life, along with maximizing survival, is vital. Yet, we have no systemic way to determine if we achieve these goals. A Core Outcome Set (COS) that allows standardized measurement of outcomes important to patients, but also promotes discussing these outcomes during clinical encounters, is long overdue. METHODS: An international expert group (EG) of patient advocates, researchers, medical specialists, nurse specialists, and pharmaceutical industry representatives (n = 17) reviewed a list of relevant outcomes retrieved from the literature. A broader group (n = 141: patients/patient advocates (n = 45), health care professionals/researchers (n = 64), pharmaceutical industry representatives (n = 28), and health authority representatives (n = 4)) participated in a modified Delphi procedure, scoring the relevance of outcomes in two survey rounds. The EG finalized the COS in a consensus meeting. RESULTS: The final MBC COS includes 101 variables about: (1) health-related quality of life (HRQoL, n = 26) and adverse events (n = 24); (2) baseline patient characteristics (n = 9); and (3) clinical variables (n = 42). Many outcome that cover aspects of HRQoL relevant to MBC patients are included, e.g. daily functioning (including ability to work), psychosocial/emotional functioning, sexual functioning, and relationship with the medical team. CONCLUSION: The COS developed in this study contains important administrative data, clinical records, and clinician-reported measures that captures the impact of cancer. The COS is important for standardization of clinical research and implementation in daily practice and has received accreditation by the International Consortium for Health Outcomes Measurement (ICHOM).

Patient experiences of an electronic PRO tailored feedback system for symptom management following upper gastrointestinal cancer surgery.

PURPOSE: Complications following upper gastrointestinal (UGI) surgery are common. Symptom-monitoring following discharge is not standardized. An electronic patient-reported outcome (ePRO) system providing feedback to patients and clinicians could support patients and improve outcomes. Little is known about patients' experiences of using such systems. This qualitative sub-study explored patients' perspectives of the benefits of using a novel ePRO system, developed as part of the mixed methods eRAPID pilot study, to support recovery following discharge after UGI surgery. METHODS: Patients completed the online ePRO symptom-report system post-discharge. Weekly interviews explored patients' experiences of using ePRO, the acceptability of feedback generated and its value for supporting their recovery. Interviews were audio-recorded and targeted transcriptions were thematically analysed. RESULTS: Thirty-five interviews with 16 participants (11 men, mean age 63 years) were analysed. Two main themes were identified: (1) reassurance and (2) empowerment. Feelings of isolation were common; many patients felt uninformed regarding their expectations of recovery and whether their symptoms warranted clinical investigation. Participants were reassured by tailored feedback advising them to contact their care team, alleviating their anxiety. Patients reported feeling empowered by the ePRO system and in control of their symptoms and recovery. CONCLUSION: Patients recovering at home following major cancer surgery regarded electronic symptom-monitoring and feedback as acceptable and beneficial. Patients perceived that the system enhanced information provision and provided a direct link to their care team. Patients felt that the system provided reassurance at a time of uncertainty and isolation, enabling them to feel in control of their symptoms and recovery.

An international update of the EORTC questionnaire for assessing quality of life in breast cancer patients: EORTC QLQ-BR45.

BACKGROUND: The European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) QLQ-BR23 was one of the first disease-specific questionnaires developed in 1996 to assess quality of life (QoL) in patients with breast cancer (BC). However, since 1996 major changes in BC treatment have occurred, requiring an update of the EORTC BC module. This study presents the results of the phase I-III update of the QLQ-BR23 questionnaire. PATIENTS AND METHODS: The update of the EORTC QLQ-BR23 module followed standard EORTC guidelines. A systematic literature review revealed 83 potential relevant QoL issues during phases I and II. After shortening the issues list and following interviews with patients and health care providers, 15 relevant issues were transformed into 27 items. The preliminary module was pretested in an international, multicentre phase III study to identify and solve potential problems with wording comprehensibility and acceptability of the items. Descriptive statistics are provided. Analyses were qualitative and quantitative. We provide a psychometric structure of the items. RESULTS: The phase I and II results indicated the need to supplement the original QLQ-BR23 with additional items related to newer therapeutic options. The phase III study recruited a total of 250 patients (from 12 countries). The final updated phase III module contains a total of 45 items: 23 items from the QLQ-BR23 and 22 new items. The new items contain two multi-item scales: a target symptom scale and a satisfaction scale. The target symptom scale can be divided into three subscales: endocrine therapy, endocrine sexual and skin/mucosa scale. CONCLUSION: Our work has led to the development of a new EORTC QLQ-BR45 module that provides a more accurate and comprehensive assessment of the impact of new and scalable treatments on patients' QoL. The final version of the EORTC QLQ-BR45 is currently available for use in clinical practice. The final phase IV study is underway to confirm psychometric properties of the module.

A real-time electronic symptom monitoring system for patients after discharge following surgery: a pilot study in cancer-related surgery.

BACKGROUND: Advances in peri-operative care of surgical oncology patients result in shorter hospital stays. Earlier discharge may bring benefits, but complications can occur while patients are recovering at home. Electronic patient-reported outcome (ePRO) systems may enhance remote, real-time symptom monitoring and detection of complications after hospital discharge, thereby improving patient safety and outcomes. Evidence of the effectiveness of ePRO systems in surgical oncology is lacking. This pilot study evaluated the feasibility of a real-time electronic symptom monitoring system for patients after discharge following cancer-related upper gastrointestinal surgery. METHODS: A pilot study in two UK hospitals included patients who had undergone cancer-related upper gastrointestinal surgery. Participants completed the ePRO symptom-report at discharge, twice in the first week and weekly post-discharge. Symptom-report completeness, system actions, barriers to using the ePRO system and technical performance were examined. The ePRO surgery system is an online symptom-report that allows clinicians to view patient symptom-reports within hospital electronic health records and was developed as part of the eRAPID project. Clinically derived algorithms provide patients with tailored self-management advice, prompts to contact a clinician or automated clinician alerts depending on symptom severity. Interviews with participants and clinicians determined the acceptability of the ePRO system to support patients and their clinical management during recovery. RESULTS: Ninety-one patients were approached, of which 40 consented to participate (27 male, mean age 64 years). Symptom-report response rates were high (range 63-100%). Of 197 ePRO completions analysed, 76 (39%) triggered self-management advice, 72 (36%) trigged advice to contact a clinician, 9 (5%) triggered a clinician alert and 40 (20%) did not require advice. Participants found the ePRO system reassuring, providing timely information and advice relevant to supporting their recovery. Clinicians regarded the system as a useful adjunct to usual care, by signposting patients to seek appropriate help and enhancing their understanding of patients' experiences during recovery. CONCLUSION: Use of the ePRO system for the real-time, remote monitoring of symptoms in patients recovering from cancer-related upper gastrointestinal surgery is feasible and acceptable. A definitive randomised controlled trial is needed to evaluate the impact of the system on patients' wellbeing after hospital discharge.

Minimally important differences for interpreting the EORTC QLQ-C30 in patients with advanced colorectal cancer treated with chemotherapy.

AIM: The European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Questionnaire Core 30 (EORTC QLQ-C30) assesses the health-related quality of life of patients in cancer trials. There are currently no minimally important difference (MID) guidelines for the EORTC QLQ-C30 for colorectal cancer (CRC). This study aims to estimate MIDs for the EORTC QLQ-C30 scales in patients with advanced CRC treated with chemotherapy and enrolled in clinical trials. METHOD: The data were obtained from three published EORTC trials that treated CRC patients using chemotherapy. Potential anchors were selected from clinical variables based on their correlation with EORTC QLQ-C30 scales. Anchor-based MIDs for within-group change and between-group change were estimated via the mean change method and linear regression, respectively, and summarized using weighted correlation. Distribution-based MIDs were also examined. RESULTS: Anchor-based MIDs were determined for deterioration in 8 of the 14 EORTC QLQ-C30 scales and in 9 scales for improvement, and varied by scale, direction of change and anchor. MIDs for improvement (deterioration) ranged from 6 to 18 (-11 to -5) points for within-group change and 5 to 15 (-10 to -4) for between-group change. Summarized MIDs (in absolute values) per scale mostly ranged from 5 to 10 points. CONCLUSIONS: These findings have clinical relevance for the interpretation of treatment efficacy and the design of clinical trials by informing sample size requirements.

A randomised phase II trial and feasibility study of palliative chemotherapy in frail or elderly patients with advanced gastroesophageal cancer (321GO).

BACKGROUND: Elderly patients are commonly under-represented in cancer clinical trials. The 321GO was undertaken in preparation for a definitive phase three trial assessing different chemotherapy regimens in a frail and/or elderly population with advanced gastroesophageal (GO) cancer. METHODS: Patients with advanced GO cancer considered unfit for conventional dose chemotherapy were randomly assigned in a 1 : 1 : 1 ratio to: epirubicin, oxaliplatin and capecitabine (EOX); oxaliplatin and capecitabine (OX); and capecitabine alone (X) (all 80% of full dose and unblinded). The primary end point was patient recruitment over an 18-month period. A registration study recorded treatment choice for all patients with advanced GO cancer at trial centres. RESULTS: A total of 313 patients were considered for palliative chemotherapy for GO cancer over the 18-month period: 115 received full dose treatment, 89 less than standard treatment or entered 321GO and 111 no treatment. Within 321GO, 55 patients were randomly assigned (19 to OX and X; 17 to EOX). Progression-free survival (PFS) for all patients was 4.4 months and by arm 5.4, 5.6 and 3.0 months for EOX, OX and X, respectively. The number of patients with a good overall treatment utility (OTU), a novel patient-centred endpoint, at 12 weeks was 3 (18%), 6 (32%) and 1 (6%) for EOX, OX and X, respectively. At 6 weeks, 22 patients (41%) had experienced a non-haematologic toxicity ⩾grade 3, most commonly lethargy or diarrhoea. The OTU was prognostic for overall survival in patients alive at week 12 (logrank test P=0.0001). CONCLUSIONS: It is feasible to recruit elderly and/or frail patients with advanced GO cancer to a randomised clinical trial. The OX is the preferred regimen for further study. Overall treatment utility shows promise as a comparator between treatment regimens for feasibility and randomised trials in the elderly and/or frail GO cancer population.

Development of an integrated electronic platform for patient self-report and management of adverse events during cancer treatment.

BACKGROUND: Significant adverse events (AE) during cancer therapy disrupt treatment and escalate to emergency admissions. Approaches to improve the timeliness and accuracy of AE reporting may improve safety and reduce health service costs. Reporting AE via patient reported outcomes (PROs), can improve clinician-patient communication and making data available to clinicians in 'real-time' using electronic PROs (ePROs) could potentially transform clinical practice by providing easily accessible records to guide treatment decisions. This manuscript describes the development of eRAPID (electronic patient self-Reporting of Adverse-events: Patient Information and aDvice) is a National Institute for Health Research-funded programme, a system for patients to self-report and manage AE online during and after cancer treatment. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A multidisciplinary team of IT experts, staff and patients developed using agile principles a secure web application interface (QStore) between an existing online questionnaire builder (QTool) displaying real-time ePRO data to clinicians in the electronic patient record at Leeds Teaching Hospitals NHS Trust. Hierarchical algorithms were developed corresponding to Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events grading using the QTool question dependency function. Patient advocates (N = 9), patients (N = 13), and staff (N = 19) usability tested the system reporting combinations of AE. RESULTS: The eRAPID system allows patients to report AE from home on PC, tablet or any web enabled device securely during treatment. The system generates immediate self-management advice for low or moderate AE and for severe AE advice to contact the hospital immediately. Clinicians can view patient AE data in the electronic patient record and receive email notifications when patients report severe AE. CONCLUSIONS: Evaluation of the system in a randomised controlled trial in breast, gynaecological and colorectal cancer patients undergoing systemic therapy is currently underway. To adapt eRAPID for different treatment groups, pilot studies are being undertaken with patients receiving pelvic radiotherapy and upper gastrointestinal surgery. ISRCTN88520246.

Using a discrete choice experiment to value the QLU-C10D: feasibility and sensitivity to presentation format.

PURPOSE: To assess the feasibility of using a discrete choice experiment (DCE) to value health states within the QLU-C10D, a utility instrument derived from the QLQ-C30, and to assess clarity, difficulty, and respondent preference between two presentation formats. METHODS: We ran a DCE valuation task in an online panel (N = 430). Respondents answered 16 choice pairs; in half of these, differences between dimensions were highlighted, and in the remainder, common dimensions were described in text and differing attributes were tabulated. To simplify the cognitive task, only four of the QLU-C10D's ten dimensions differed per choice set. We assessed difficulty and clarity of the valuation task with Likert-type scales, and respondents were asked which format they preferred. We analysed the DCE data by format with a conditional logit model and used Chi-squared tests to compare other responses by format. Semi-structured telephone interviews (N = 8) explored respondents' cognitive approaches to the valuation task. RESULTS: Four hundred and forty-nine individuals were recruited, 430 completed at least one choice set, and 422/449 (94 %) completed all 16 choice sets. Interviews revealed that respondents found ten domains difficult but manageable, many adopting simplifying heuristics. Results for clarity and difficulty were identical between formats, but the "highlight" format was preferred by 68 % of respondents. Conditional logit parameter estimates were monotonic within domains, suggesting respondents were able to complete the DCE sensibly, yielding valid results. CONCLUSION: A DCE valuation task in which only four of the QLU-C10D's ten dimensions differed in any choice set is feasible for deriving utility weights for the QLU-C10D.

QLU-C10D: a health state classification system for a multi-attribute utility measure based on the EORTC QLQ-C30.

PURPOSE: To derive a health state classification system (HSCS) from the cancer-specific quality of life questionnaire, the EORTC QLQ-C30, as the basis for a multi-attribute utility instrument. METHODS: The conceptual model for the HSCS was based on the established domain structure of the QLQ-C30. Several criteria were considered to select a subset of dimensions and items for the HSCS. Expert opinion and patient input informed a priori selection of key dimensions. Psychometric criteria were assessed via secondary analysis of a pooled dataset comprising HRQOL and clinical data from 2616 patients from eight countries and a range of primary cancer sites, disease stages, and treatments. We used confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) to assess the conceptual model's robustness and generalisability. We assessed item floor effects (>75 % observations at lowest score), disordered item response thresholds, coverage of the latent variable and differential item function using Rasch analysis. We calculated effect sizes for known group comparisons based on disease stage and responsiveness to change. Seventy-nine cancer patients assessed the relative importance of items within dimensions. RESULTS: CFA supported the conceptual model and its generalisability across primary cancer sites. After considering all criteria, 12 items were selected representing 10 dimensions: physical functioning (mobility), role functioning, social functioning, emotional functioning, pain, fatigue, sleep, appetite, nausea, bowel problems. CONCLUSIONS: The HSCS created from QLQ-C30 items is known as the EORTC Quality of Life Utility Measure-Core 10 dimensions (QLU-C10D). The next phase of the QLU-C10D's development involves valuation studies, currently planned or being conducted across the globe.

Development and evaluation of a specifically designed website for haematopoietic stem cell transplant patients in Leeds.

The purpose of this project was to develop and evaluate a specifically designed website (ALLograft INformation EXchange - ALLINEX) for adult allogeneic haematopoietic stem cell transplant (allo-HSCT) patients in Leeds. Specifications included information on the transplant journey and supportive care services, discussion forum and patient-clinical team electronic messaging service. The method followed a participatory action research approach in a five-phase project involving stakeholders. Phase 1 involved information gathering; Phase 2 development of content; Phase 3 building of website and usability testing; Phase 4 preliminary evaluation; and Phase 5 clinical implementation. Results concluded that Phase 1 patients were unaware of all services and reported unmet needs; gaps in support services were identified from a service evaluation; Phase 2 content was collected from experts, collated and synthesised; Phase 3 patient and staff feedback was positive and constructive resulting in more than 50 changes; Phase 4 ALLINEX evaluation demonstrated acceptable usability with good layout, content and aesthetics reported; Phase 5, over 15 weeks, ALLINEX had 6630 page hits, 9 new forum topics posted and received 3 clinical messages. The clinical team embraced responsibility for reviewing and monitoring ALLINEX. Financial and indemnity cover was secured for 3 years. ALLINEX, adopted locally, is sustainable and has functionality to roll-out to other UK allo-HSCT centres.

Costs of cancer care for use in economic evaluation: a UK analysis of patient-level routine health system data.

BACKGROUND: The rising financial burden of cancer on health-care systems worldwide has led to the increased demand for evidence-based research on which to base reimbursement decisions. Economic evaluations are an integral component of this necessary research. Ascertainment of reliable health-care cost and quality-of-life estimates to inform such studies has historically been challenging, but recent advances in informatics in the United Kingdom provide new opportunities. METHODS: The costs of hospital care for breast, colorectal and prostate cancer disease-free survivors were calculated over 15 months from initial diagnosis of cancer using routinely collected data within a UK National Health Service (NHS) Hospital Trust. Costs were linked at patient level to patient-reported outcomes and registry-derived sociodemographic factors. Predictors of cost and the relationship between costs and patient-reported utility were examined. RESULTS: The study population included 223 breast cancer patients, 145 colorectal and 104 prostate cancer patients. The mean 15-month cumulative health-care costs were £12 595 (95% CI £11 517-£13 722), £12 643 (£11 282-£14 102) and £3722 (£3263-£4208), per-patient respectively. The majority of costs occurred within the first 6 months from diagnosis. Clinical stage was the most important predictor of costs for all cancer types. EQ-5D score was predictive of costs in colorectal cancer but not in breast or prostate cancer. CONCLUSION: It is now possible to evaluate health-care cost using routine NHS data sets. Such methods can be utilised in future retrospective and prospective studies to efficiently collect economic data.

Development of a conceptual framework of health-related quality of life in locally recurrent rectal cancer.

AIM: The surgical management of locally recurrent rectal cancer (LRRC) has become widely accepted to afford cure and improve quality of life in this subset of patients. Thus far, traditional surgical and oncological markers have been used to highlight the success of surgical intervention. The use of patient-reported outcomes, specifically health-related quality of life (HRQoL), is sparse in these patients. This may be in part due to the lack of well-designed, validated instruments. This study identifies HRQoL issues relevant to patients undergoing surgery for LRRC, with the aim of developing a conceptual framework of HRQoL specific to LRRC to enable measurement of patient-reported outcomes in this cohort of patients. METHOD: Qualitative focus groups were undertaken at two institutions to identify relevant HRQoL themes. The principles of thematic content analysis were used to analysis data. NViVo10 was used to analyse data. RESULTS: Twenty-one patients participated in six consecutive focus groups. Two patterns of themes emerged related to HRQoL and healthcare service delivery and utilization. Identified themes related to HRQoL included symptoms, sexual function, psychological impact, role and social functioning and future perspective. Under healthcare service and delivery and utilization the subdomain of disease management, treatment expectations and healthcare professionals were identified. CONCLUSION: This is the first qualitative study undertaken exclusively in patients with LRRC to ascertain relevant HRQoL outcomes. The impact of LRRC on patients is wide-ranging and extends beyond traditional HRQoL outcomes. The study operationalizes the identified outcomes into a conceptual framework, which will provide the basis for the development of a LRRC-specific patient-reported outcome measure.

Beyond lip service and box ticking: how effective patient engagement is integral to the development and delivery of patient-reported outcomes.

BACKGROUND: In the UK, demonstration of patient and public involvement (PPI) is now a funding requirement. Despite advice being available to researchers regarding PPI, levels of engagement are variable. Patient involvement has been at the core of the Leeds Psychosocial Oncology and Clinical Practice Research Group since 2007 when a local Research Advisory Group (RAG) was established. In addition, we work with experienced patient advocates from national groups. METHODS: The RAG is led by designated researchers who manage and communicate with members. The RAG is invited to twice yearly meetings with the full research team when study findings are disseminated and advice sought. The meetings are also an opportunity to socialise and thank members. Effective partnerships and engagement require good communication, building relationships over time and tailoring involvement to individuals' skills and experience. RESULTS: Patients have been involved in design, planning new projects and assisting with grant proposals; development, pilot testing of interview strategies and question generation, project steering groups and management teams, development of self-management advice for online patient portals; implementation, extensive beta testing of new questionnaire builder software to enable collection of online patient-reported outcomes (PRO) and study websites, cognitive interviews to develop PRO items; dissemination, co-authorship of papers and presentations, attendance/representation of the group at conferences. CONCLUSION: The involvement of patient advocates is integral to ensuring PRO development remains patient-centred. Having a co-operative, well-established local PPI group and nationally active patient collaborators has had a rewarding and significant impact on our research programmes.

Testing the measurement invariance of the EORTC QLQ-C30 across primary cancer sites using multi-group confirmatory factor analysis.

PURPOSE: The EORTC Quality of Life Questionnaire is a widely used cancer-specific quality of life instrument comprising a core set of 30 items (QLQ-C30) supplemented by cancer site-specific modules. The purpose of this paper was to examine the extent to which the conventional multi-item domain structure of the QLQ-C30 holds across patients with seven different primary cancer sites. METHODS: Multi-group confirmatory factor analysis was used to test whether a measurement model of the QLQ-C30 was invariant across cancer sites. Configural (same patterns of factor loadings), metric (equivalence of factor loadings) and scalar (equivalence of thresholds) invariance amongst the cancer site groups were assessed (N = 1,906) by comparing the fit of a model with these parameters freely estimated to a model where estimates were constrained to be equal for the corresponding items in each group. RESULTS: All groups exhibited good model fit except for the prostate group, which was excluded. Only 1 of 576 parameters was found to differ between primary sites: specifically, the first threshold of Item 1 in the breast cancer group exhibited non-invariance. In a post hoc analysis, several instances of non-invariance by treatment status (baseline, on-treatment, off-treatment) were observed. CONCLUSIONS: Given only one instance of non-invariance between cancer sites, there is a reason to be confident in the validity of conclusions drawn when comparing QLQ-C30 domain scores between different sites and when interpreting the scores of heterogeneous samples, although future research should assess the potential impact of confounding variables such as treatment and gender.

Psychosocial supportive care services for haematopoietic stem cell transplant patients; a service evaluation of three UK transplant centres.

Following haematopoietic stem cell transplant (HSCT) some patients experience long-term physical and psychosocial problems which impact on everyday life. The aim of this service evaluation was to investigate the psychosocial supportive care available for HSCT patients in three UK centres, particularly related to five identified areas of concern: fatigue; psychological distress; vocational and financial issues; sexuality, and fertility. HSCT health professionals were invited to audio-recorded semi-structured interviews. Enquiry was made into supportive care provided routinely (proactive), provided in response to a need (reactive) and missing (gaps in service) from pre-transplant to 18 months post transplant. Information gathered was transcribed and subjected to framework analysis. Interviews were conducted with 84 staff including nurses, doctors, psychologists, social workers, physiotherapists, dieticians and occupational therapists. Support for the five main areas of concern was variable across centres particularly with limitation of services for psychology; sexual dysfunction and fertility. Pro-active interventions such as psychological screening were rare with support being more commonly provided in response to an identified need. Support provided reactively for the areas of concern was comprehensive across professional groups and centres. Further work explores patients' psychosocial issues and other ways of providing adjuvant support.

Can individual patients assess differences in quality of life between groups of patients?

This qualitative study piloted a method for eliciting patient opinion on the size of group differences in quality of life (QOL) scores from the EORTC QLQ-C30. Using scenarios from published studies, patients were asked the differences in QOL they would expect between two groups of patients or a group of patients over time. Interviews were transcribed verbatim and thematic analysis used. Eleven breast cancer patients were interviewed. The final thematic framework consisted of three major themes: (1) their ability to use published data to judge the size of differences in QOL scores, (2) their ability to gain familiarity and understanding of the QLQ-C30 questionnaire in an interview situation and (3) their ability to understand and assess differences from a group of patients rather than on an individual basis. Patients felt able to understand the questionnaire and scoring. They provided an opinion on whether differences in QOL scores were trivial, small, medium or large. Patient perspectives were often based on their own experience of the disease and treatments and their opinions were varied. In order to estimate clinically meaningful differences from published literature, a larger number of patients with varied experiences would be required and a consensus process used to align opinions where possible.

The impact of age on physical functioning after treatment for breast cancer, as measured by patient-reported outcome measures: A systematic review.

PURPOSE: This systematic review aims to explore the impact of age on physical functioning post-treatment for early-stage, locally advanced, or locally recurrent breast cancer, as measured by patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs), identify PROMs used and variations in physical functioning terms/labels. METHODS: MEDLINE, EmBase, PsycINFO, CINAHL and AMED were searched, along with relevant key journals and reference lists. Risk of bias (quality) assessment was conducted using a Critical Appraisal Skills Programme checklist. Data was synthesised through tables and narrative. RESULTS: 28,207 titles were extracted from electronic databases, resulting in 44 studies with age sub-groups, and 120 without age sub-groups. Of those with findings on the impact of age, there was variability in the way findings were reported and 21 % found that age did not have a significant impact. However, 66 % of the studies found that with older age, physical functioning declined post-treatment. Comorbidities were associated with physical functioning declines. However, findings from sub-groups (breast cancer stage, treatment type and time post-treatment) lacked concordance. Twenty-eight types of PROM were used: the EORTC QLQ-C30 was most common (50.6 %), followed by the SF-36 (32.3 %). There were 145 terms/labels for physical functioning: 'physical functioning/function' was used most often (82.3 %). CONCLUSIONS: Findings point towards an older age and comorbidities being associated with more physical functioning declines. However, it was not possible to determine if stage, treatment type and time since treatment had any influence. More consistent use of the terminology 'physical functioning/function' would aid future comparisons of study results.

Seizing the moment: The time for harnessing electronic patient-reported outcome measures for enhanced and sustainable metastatic breast cancer care is now.

The sustainability of healthcare systems is under pressure. Unlike care for many other chronic diseases, cancer care has yet to empower patients in effectively self-managing both the medical and emotional consequences of their condition, including adapting to changes in lifestyle and work, which is essential to achieve optimal health and recovery. Although proposed as a potential solution for sustainable healthcare and support for optimal health and recovery already decades ago, practical implementation of digital care lags behind. We believe electronic patient reported outcome measures (ePROMs) could play an important role in creating sustainable healthcare, both to guide complex treatment pathways and to empower survivors to self-manage consequences of diagnosis and treatment. That is, ePROMs can be used for screening and monitoring of symptoms, but also for treatment decision-making and to facilitate communication about quality of life. We therefore see opportunities for improvements in quality of care, quality of life, and survival of cancer patients, as well as research opportunities, as ePROMs collection can lead to better understanding of care needs. The '10 Actions for Change report' of the Advanced Breast Cancer Global Alliance stresses a critical need for improvement of care for metastatic breast cancer (MBC) patients. We therefore in this paper focus on MBC care and research.

Impact of the treatment-free interval on health-related quality of life in patients with multiple myeloma: a UK cross-sectional survey.

BACKGROUND: While the impact of various treatments on myeloma patients' health-related quality of life (HRQL) has been reported, the impact of a treatment-free interval (TFI) is currently unclear. The aims of this study were to assess if (1) a TFI is associated with a better HRQL vs. other treatment phases and (2) the length of the TFI influences HRQL. METHODS: A cross-sectional postal survey was conducted in the UK. The survey was sent to 605 multiple myeloma patients via the charity Myeloma UK and asked patients to rate their HRQL using the European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) Quality of Life Questionnaire Core 30 (QLQ-C30), EORTC QLQ-MY20 and the EQ-5D. The results were analysed using ordinary least squares regression. RESULTS: Surveys of 402 (67 %) were returned; 370 (61 %) were considered eligible for analysis. Results demonstrated that being in a first TFI relative to other treatment phases and experiencing a longer TFI were significantly associated with better HRQL as assessed by various domains of the QLQ-C30, MY20 and EQ-5D. CONCLUSION: Patients enjoy better HRQL when in their first TFI, and the length of the TFI also positively impacts on HRQL This information may be important for patients and their physicians making treatment decisions and has implications for treatment protocols incorporating extended therapy.