Breast-cancer specific comprehensive archive of Patient-Reported Outcome Measures (PROMs) for clinical research and clinical practice in oncology: Results from the PRO4All project

被引:0
|
作者
Valsecchi, Anna Amela [1 ]
Giovanardi, Filippo [2 ]
Malandrini, Francesco [3 ]
Meregaglia, Michela [3 ]
Servetto, Alberto [4 ]
Bennati, Chiara [5 ]
Pinto, Carmine [2 ]
Di Maio, Massimo [1 ]
Ciani, Oriana [3 ]
机构
[1] Univ Turin, Osped Molinette, AOU Citta Salute & Sci Torino, Dept Oncol, Turin, Italy
[2] IRCCS, Azienda Unita Sanit Locale, Med Oncol, Reggio Emilia, Italy
[3] Ctr Res Hlth & Social Care Management, SDA Bocconi Sch Management, Milan, Italy
[4] Univ Naples Federico II, Dept Clin Med & Surg, Naples, Italy
[5] Ausl Romagna Ravenna, Oncol Unit, Emilia Romagna, Italy
关键词
Patient-reported outcome measure; Health-related quality of life; Breast cancer; Outcome domains; Archive; PRO4All; QUALITY; CARE; IMPROVEMENT; TRIALS;
D O I
10.1016/j.breast.2024.103817
中图分类号
R73 [肿瘤学];
学科分类号
100214 ;
摘要
Background: Inclusion of patient-reported outcomes (PROs) in oncology clinical trials is strongly recommended. However, selecting the most appropriate patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) is not easy. This study aimed to develop a breast cancer (BC) specific comprehensive archive of PROMs. Methods: As part of the PRO4All project, we identified available PROMs in oncology by searching facit.org, eortc. org, eprovide.mapi-trust.org, PubMed, ema.europa.eu (European Public Assessment Reports) and published reviews. For this analysis, only BC tools were extracted. We described information about PROM name, type of questionnaire, questionnaire variant(s), recall period, number of items, and presence of minimum clinically important difference (MCID) reference in literature. Then, we assigned each item to a specific domain according to a predefined taxonomy of 38 items for outcome classification. Results: We identified and analyzed 383 PROMs. Of these, 29 were BC specific, but 2 were excluded because the questionnaires description was not available. 6 (22.2 %) were variants of another questionnaire. All questionnaires were self-reported. In 6 cases (22.2 %) the recall period to consider was the "last week". The mean number of items per questionnaire was 25.81 (range 6-71). 602 items were assigned to an outcome domain: emotional functioning/wellbeing in 26.6 % of cases, physical functioning in 14.1 %, delivery of care in 10.8 %, and general outcomes in 10.5 %. MCID reference was found only in 4 (14.8 %) cases. Conclusions: The newly developed archive represents a useful tool to optimize the use of PROMs in the evaluation of treatments in BC patients, promoting a patient-centered approach both in clinical research and practice.
引用
收藏
页数:6
相关论文
共 17 条
  • [11] Durable usage of patient-reported outcome measures in clinical practice to monitor health-related quality of life in head and neck cancer patients
    Duman-Lubberding, S.
    van Uden-Kraan, C. F.
    Jansen, F.
    Witte, B. I.
    Eerenstein, S. E. J.
    van Weert, S.
    de Bree, R.
    Leemans, C. R.
    Verdonck-de Leeuw, I. M.
    SUPPORTIVE CARE IN CANCER, 2017, 25 (12) : 3775 - 3783
  • [12] Comparison of patient-reported symptoms with multi-item patient-reported outcome measures of fatigue, anxiety, and depression in the clinical care of women undergoing chemotherapy for early breast cancer
    Nyrop, Kirsten A.
    Deal, Allison M.
    Aman, Coral H.
    Muss, Hyman B.
    Reeve, Bryce B.
    QUALITY OF LIFE RESEARCH, 2025, 34 (04) : 1069 - 1077
  • [13] Choosing patient-reported outcome measures for cancer clinical research - Practical principles and an algorithm to assist non-specialist researchers
    Luckett, T.
    King, M. T.
    EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF CANCER, 2010, 46 (18) : 3149 - 3157
  • [14] Durable usage of patient-reported outcome measures in clinical practice to monitor health-related quality of life in head and neck cancer patients
    S. Duman-Lubberding
    C. F. van Uden-Kraan
    F. Jansen
    B. I. Witte
    S. E. J. Eerenstein
    S. van Weert
    R. de Bree
    C. R. Leemans
    I. M. Verdonck-de Leeuw
    Supportive Care in Cancer, 2017, 25 : 3775 - 3783
  • [15] Using Single-Case Experimental Design and Patient-Reported Outcome Measures to Evaluate the Treatment of Cancer-Related Cognitive Impairment in Clinical Practice
    Ferguson, Robert J.
    Terhorst, Lauren
    Gibbons, Benjamin
    Posluszny, Donna M.
    Chang, Hsuan
    Bovbjerg, Dana H.
    Mcdonald, Brenna C.
    CANCERS, 2023, 15 (18)
  • [16] Attitudes of older people/seniors to completion of electronic patient-reported outcome measures and use of mobile applications in clinical trials: results of a qualitative research study
    Garner, Katie
    Byrom, Bill
    JOURNAL OF COMPARATIVE EFFECTIVENESS RESEARCH, 2020, 9 (04) : 307 - 316
  • [17] Feasibility test of a UK-scalable electronic system for regular collection of patient-reported outcome measures and linkage with clinical cancer registry data: The electronic Patient-reported Outcomes from Cancer Survivors (ePOCS) system
    Ashley, Laura
    Jones, Helen
    Forman, David
    Newsham, Alex
    Brown, Julia
    Downing, Amy
    Velikova, Galina
    Wright, Penny
    BMC MEDICAL INFORMATICS AND DECISION MAKING, 2011, 11