Cargando…

Patient Experience Captured by Quality-of-Life Measurement in Oncology Clinical Trials

IMPORTANCE: Quality of life (QoL) is an important consideration in cancer medicine, especially because drugs are becoming more costly and may only result in modest gains in overall survival. However, there has been no descriptive analysis for the points at which QoL is measured in cancer trials. OBJ...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Haslam, Alyson, Herrera-Perez, Diana, Gill, Jennifer, Prasad, Vinay
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: American Medical Association 2020
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7057133/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32129865
http://dx.doi.org/10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2020.0363
_version_ 1783503599502884864
author Haslam, Alyson
Herrera-Perez, Diana
Gill, Jennifer
Prasad, Vinay
author_facet Haslam, Alyson
Herrera-Perez, Diana
Gill, Jennifer
Prasad, Vinay
author_sort Haslam, Alyson
collection PubMed
description IMPORTANCE: Quality of life (QoL) is an important consideration in cancer medicine, especially because drugs are becoming more costly and may only result in modest gains in overall survival. However, there has been no descriptive analysis for the points at which QoL is measured in cancer trials. OBJECTIVE: To estimate the prevalence of studies that measure QoL at different points and see how many studies measure QoL for the entirety of a patient’s life. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: This cross-sectional analysis includes all articles on oncology clinical trials in the 3 highest-impact oncology journals, published between July 2015 and June 2018, that reported QoL outcomes. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: Data were abstracted on when QoL was assessed and the characteristics of these studies. RESULTS: For all 149 studies that met inclusion criteria, QoL assessment was high during treatment (104 articles [69.8%]), during follow-up (81 articles [54.4%]), and after the end of the intervention (68 articles [45.6%]). In 5 of the 149 studies (3.4%), QoL was assessed until death, including in only 1 of the 74 studies on metastatic or incurable cancers. Among these 5 studies, only 1 (20%) used a drug intervention, 1 (20%) used a behavioral intervention, and 2 (40%) used a radiation intervention; only 1 of 5 was in the metastatic setting. The number of studies that reported a positive QoL outcome (ie, QoL outcome was more favorable in the intervention group than in the control group) was between 42 of 81 articles (51.9%) and 16 of 28 articles (57.1%) for most QoL assessment points but only 1 of 5 articles (20%) for studies measuring QoL until death. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: This study found that most clinical trials assessed QoL during the treatment or intervention and often during a given amount of follow-up but infrequently assessed QoL on disease progression and rarely followed QoL until the end of the patient’s life. Most studies reporting QoL until the end of life reported worse QoL outcomes for the intervention group than the control group. Future research and policy recommendations should consider not just short-term QoL outcomes but QoL outcomes throughout the patient’s cancer care.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-7057133
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2020
publisher American Medical Association
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-70571332020-03-16 Patient Experience Captured by Quality-of-Life Measurement in Oncology Clinical Trials Haslam, Alyson Herrera-Perez, Diana Gill, Jennifer Prasad, Vinay JAMA Netw Open Original Investigation IMPORTANCE: Quality of life (QoL) is an important consideration in cancer medicine, especially because drugs are becoming more costly and may only result in modest gains in overall survival. However, there has been no descriptive analysis for the points at which QoL is measured in cancer trials. OBJECTIVE: To estimate the prevalence of studies that measure QoL at different points and see how many studies measure QoL for the entirety of a patient’s life. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: This cross-sectional analysis includes all articles on oncology clinical trials in the 3 highest-impact oncology journals, published between July 2015 and June 2018, that reported QoL outcomes. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: Data were abstracted on when QoL was assessed and the characteristics of these studies. RESULTS: For all 149 studies that met inclusion criteria, QoL assessment was high during treatment (104 articles [69.8%]), during follow-up (81 articles [54.4%]), and after the end of the intervention (68 articles [45.6%]). In 5 of the 149 studies (3.4%), QoL was assessed until death, including in only 1 of the 74 studies on metastatic or incurable cancers. Among these 5 studies, only 1 (20%) used a drug intervention, 1 (20%) used a behavioral intervention, and 2 (40%) used a radiation intervention; only 1 of 5 was in the metastatic setting. The number of studies that reported a positive QoL outcome (ie, QoL outcome was more favorable in the intervention group than in the control group) was between 42 of 81 articles (51.9%) and 16 of 28 articles (57.1%) for most QoL assessment points but only 1 of 5 articles (20%) for studies measuring QoL until death. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: This study found that most clinical trials assessed QoL during the treatment or intervention and often during a given amount of follow-up but infrequently assessed QoL on disease progression and rarely followed QoL until the end of the patient’s life. Most studies reporting QoL until the end of life reported worse QoL outcomes for the intervention group than the control group. Future research and policy recommendations should consider not just short-term QoL outcomes but QoL outcomes throughout the patient’s cancer care. American Medical Association 2020-03-04 /pmc/articles/PMC7057133/ /pubmed/32129865 http://dx.doi.org/10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2020.0363 Text en Copyright 2020 Haslam A et al. JAMA Network Open. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the CC-BY License.
spellingShingle Original Investigation
Haslam, Alyson
Herrera-Perez, Diana
Gill, Jennifer
Prasad, Vinay
Patient Experience Captured by Quality-of-Life Measurement in Oncology Clinical Trials
title Patient Experience Captured by Quality-of-Life Measurement in Oncology Clinical Trials
title_full Patient Experience Captured by Quality-of-Life Measurement in Oncology Clinical Trials
title_fullStr Patient Experience Captured by Quality-of-Life Measurement in Oncology Clinical Trials
title_full_unstemmed Patient Experience Captured by Quality-of-Life Measurement in Oncology Clinical Trials
title_short Patient Experience Captured by Quality-of-Life Measurement in Oncology Clinical Trials
title_sort patient experience captured by quality-of-life measurement in oncology clinical trials
topic Original Investigation
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7057133/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32129865
http://dx.doi.org/10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2020.0363
work_keys_str_mv AT haslamalyson patientexperiencecapturedbyqualityoflifemeasurementinoncologyclinicaltrials
AT herreraperezdiana patientexperiencecapturedbyqualityoflifemeasurementinoncologyclinicaltrials
AT gilljennifer patientexperiencecapturedbyqualityoflifemeasurementinoncologyclinicaltrials
AT prasadvinay patientexperiencecapturedbyqualityoflifemeasurementinoncologyclinicaltrials