The EORTC QLQ-C15-PAL questionnaire: validation study for Spanish bone metastases patients.

PURPOSE: Quality of life (QL) is a key outcome for advanced disease cancer patients. The European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) has developed the QLQ-C15-PAL questionnaire, a short version of the QLQ-C30 for palliative care. The aim of the present study is to validate the QLQ-C15-PAL for use with Spanish patients with bone metastasis. METHODS: For this study, we used a consecutive sample of stage IV cancer patients with bone metastases who started radiotherapy with palliative intention. Two assessments were proposed for each patient: one on the first day of treatment and one a month after the end of the radiotherapy sessions. Psychometric evaluation of the structure, reliability, and validity was undertaken. RESULTS: One hundred and sixteen patients completed the first questionnaire and seventy five completed the second. Multitrait scaling analysis showed that all items met the standards for convergent validity, and all except the fatigue scale met the standards for divergent validity. Cronbach's coefficient met the 0.7 alpha criterion on all scales except pain (second assessment). Most QLQ-C15-PAL areas had low-to-moderate correlations with the other areas. Significant differences appeared in the comparisons between groups with regard to: patients who died before the second assessment (six areas); patients receiving chemotherapy before starting radiotherapy in the two assessments (three and four areas, respectively); the performance status in the two assessments (nine and eight areas); and the number of RT sessions received (four). Quality of life was better in the second assessment in nine areas. CONCLUSION: The QLQ-C15-PAL is a reliable and valid instrument when applied to a sample of Spanish patients. These results are in line with those of other validation studies.

PEACE V-Salvage Treatment of OligoRecurrent nodal prostate cancer Metastases (STORM): Acute Toxicity of a Randomized Phase 2 Trial.

BACKGROUND: Treatment recommendations for patients with limited nodal recurrences are lacking, and different locoregional treatment approaches are currently being used. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this trial is to compare metastasis-directed therapy (MDT) with or without elective nodal pelvic radiotherapy (ENRT). DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: PEACE V-Salvage Treatment of OligoRecurrent nodal prostate cancer Metastases (STORM) is an international, phase 2, open-label, randomized, superiority trial (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT03569241). Patients diagnosed with positron emission tomography-detected pelvic nodal oligorecurrence (five or fewer nodes) following radical local treatment for prostate cancer were randomized in a 1:1 ratio between arm A (MDT and 6 mo of androgen deprivation therapy [ADT]) and arm B (ENRT [25 × 1.8 Gy] with MDT and 6 mo of ADT). OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS AND STATISTICAL ANALYSIS: We report the secondary endpoint acute toxicity, defined as worst grade ≥2 Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events v4.0 gastrointestinal (GI) or genitourinary (GU) toxicity within 3 mo of treatment. The chi-square test was used to compare toxicity between treatment arms. We also compare the quality of life (QoL) using the European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer QLQ C30 and PR25 questionnaires. RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS: Between June 2018 and April 2021, 196 patients were assigned randomly to MDT or ENRT. Ninety-seven of 99 patients allocated to MDT and 93 of 97 allocated to ENRT received per-protocol treatment. Worst acute GI toxicity proportions were as follows: grade ≥2 events in three (3%) in the MDT group versus four (4%) in the ENRT group (p = 0.11). Worst acute GU toxicity proportions were as follows: grade ≥2 events in eight (8%) in the MDT group versus 12 (13%) in the ENRT group (p = 0.95). We observed no significant difference between the study groups in the proportion of patients with a clinically significant QoL reduction from baseline for any subdomain score area. CONCLUSIONS: No clinically meaningful differences were observed in worst grade ≥2 acute GI or GU toxicity or in QoL subdomains between MDT and ENRT. PATIENT SUMMARY: We found no evidence of differential acute bowel or urinary side effects using metastasis-directed therapy and elective nodal radiotherapy for the treatment of patients with a pelvic lymph node recurrence.

Oligorecurrent nodal prostate cancer: Radiotherapy quality assurance of the randomized PEACE V-STORM phase II trial.

PURPOSE: Aim of this study is to report the results of the radiotherapy quality assurance program of the PEACE V-STORM randomized phase II trial for pelvic nodal oligorecurrent prostate cancer (PCa). MATERIAL AND METHODS: A benchmark case (BC) consisting of a postoperative case with 2 nodal recurrences was used for both stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT, 30 Gy/3 fx) and whole pelvic radiotherapy (WPRT, 45 Gy/25 fx + SIB boost to 65 Gy). RESULTS: BC of 24 centers were analyzed. The overall grading for delineation variation of the 1st BC was rated as 'UV' (Unacceptable Variation) or 'AV' (Acceptable Variation) for 1 and 7 centers for SBRT (33%), and 3 and 8 centers for WPRT (46%), respectively. An inadequate upper limit of the WPRT CTV (n = 2), a missing delineation of the prostate bed (n = 1), and a missing nodal target volume (n = 1 for SBRT and WPRT) constituted the observed 'UV'. With the 2nd BC (n = 11), the overall delineation review showed 2 and 8 'AV' for SBRT and WPRT, respectively, with no 'UV'. For the plan review of the 2nd BC, all treatment plans were per protocol for WPRT. SBRT plans showed variability in dose normalization (Median D90% = 30.1 Gy, range 22.9-33.2 Gy and 30.6 Gy, range 26.8-34.2 Gy for nodes 1 and 2 respectively). CONCLUSIONS: Up to 46% of protocol deviations were observed in delineation of WPRT for nodal oligorecurrent PCa, while dosimetric results of SBRT showed the greatest disparities between centers. Repeated BC resulted in an improved adherence to the protocol, translating in an overall acceptable contouring and planning compliance rate among participating centers.

Quality of life and voice assessment in patients with early-stage glottic cancer.

BACKGROUND: The purpose of this study was to assess the quality of life (QOL) and voice handicap in a sample of disease-free patients who had been treated at our center with radiotherapy (RT) or surgery for early glottic cancer. METHODS: QOL and voice handicap were assessed using the European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) questionnaires Quality of Life Questionnaire-Core 30-questions (QLQ-C30) and Quality of Life Questionnaire-Head and Neck 35-questions (QLQ-H&N35) and the Voice Handicap Index (VHI). RESULTS: Ninety-one patients completed the questionnaires. Fifty-nine patients (65%) were treated with RT and 32 (35%) with surgery. QOL scores for the sample recorded, moderate limitations in 6 areas, and more than moderate limitations (>30 of 100) in 2 areas. Significant differences were found in emotional functioning (88.5 vs 76.6) and social contact (4.6 vs 12.1) on the EORTC questionnaires and on the VHI (6.1 vs 12.8), which favored the RT group. CONCLUSION: In this cross-sectional study, voice quality, emotional functioning, and social contact were better in the RT group.

The EORTC information questionnaire, EORTC QLQ-INFO25. Validation study for Spanish patients.

INTRODUCTION: The EORTC QLQ-INFO25 evaluates the information received by cancer patients. This study assesses the psychometric properties of the QLQ-INFO25 when applied to a sample of Spanish patients. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A total of 169 patients with different cancers and stages of disease completed the EORTC QLQINFO25, the EORTC QLQ-C30 and the information scales of the inpatient satisfaction module EORTC IN-PATSAT32 on two occasions during the patients' treatment and follow- up period. Psychometric evaluation of the structure, reliability, validity and responsiveness to changes was conducted. Patient acceptability was assessed with a debriefing questionnaire. RESULTS: Multi-trait scaling confirmed the 4 multi-item scales (information about disease, medical tests, treatment and other services) and eight single items. All items met the standards for convergent validity and all except one met the standards of item discriminant validity. Internal consistency for all scales (α>0.70) and the whole questionnaire (α>0.90) was adequate in the three measurements, except information about the disease (0.67) and other services (0.68) in the first measurement, as was test-retest reliability (intraclass correlations >0.70). Correlations with related areas of IN-PATSAT32 (r>0.40) supported convergent validity. Divergent validity was confirmed through low correlations with EORTC QLQ-C30 scales (r<0.30). The EORTC QLQ-INFO-25 discriminated among groups based on gender, age, education, levels of anxiety and depression, treatment line, wish for information and satisfaction. One scale and an item showed changes over time. CONCLUSIONS: The EORTC QLQ-INFO 25 is a reliable and valid instrument when applied to a sample of Spanish cancer patients. These results are in line with those of the EORTC validation study.