Patient-Reported Physical Function Measures in Cancer Clinical Trials

Patient-reported outcomes (PROs) are increasingly used to monitor treatment-related symptoms and physical function decrements in cancer clinical trials. As more patients enter survivorship, it is important to capture PRO physical function throughout trials to help restore pretreatment levels of func...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Epidemiologic reviews 2017-01, Vol.39 (1), p.59-70
Hauptverfasser: Atkinson, Thomas M, Stover, Angela M, Storfer, Daniel F, Saracino, Rebecca M, D'Agostino, Thomas A, Pergolizzi, Denise, Matsoukas, Konstantina, Li, Yuelin, Basch, Ethan
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
container_end_page 70
container_issue 1
container_start_page 59
container_title Epidemiologic reviews
container_volume 39
creator Atkinson, Thomas M
Stover, Angela M
Storfer, Daniel F
Saracino, Rebecca M
D'Agostino, Thomas A
Pergolizzi, Denise
Matsoukas, Konstantina
Li, Yuelin
Basch, Ethan
description Patient-reported outcomes (PROs) are increasingly used to monitor treatment-related symptoms and physical function decrements in cancer clinical trials. As more patients enter survivorship, it is important to capture PRO physical function throughout trials to help restore pretreatment levels of function. We completed a systematic review of PRO physical function measures used in cancer clinical trials and evaluated their psychometric properties on the basis of guidelines from the US Food and Drug Administration. Five databases were searched through October 2015: PubMed/MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL (Cumulative Index of Nursing and Allied Health Literature), Health and Psychosocial Instruments, and Cochrane. From an initial total of 10,233 articles, we identified 108 trials that captured PRO physical function. Within these trials, approximately 67% used the European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Questionnaire and 25% used the Medical Outcomes Study Short Form 36. Both the European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Questionnaire and Medical Outcomes Study Short Form 36 instruments generically satisfy most Food and Drug Administration requirements, although neither sought direct patient input as part of item development. The newer Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System physical function short form may be a brief, viable alternative. Clinicians should carefully consider the psychometric properties of these measures when incorporating PRO instrumentation into clinical trial design to provide a more comprehensive understanding of patient function.
doi_str_mv 10.1093/epirev/mxx008
format Article
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>gale_pubme</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_pubmedcentral_primary_oai_pubmedcentral_nih_gov_5858035</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><galeid>A614526397</galeid><oup_id>10.1093/epirev/mxx008</oup_id><sourcerecordid>A614526397</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c487t-30e9ce6d68bea3db96bc54293b350274b6258543e43c983635d094d319c0ed133</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNqFkcFrFTEQh4Mo9lk9epUFL71sm-wk2eQilEerQsUiFbyFbHZeG9lN1mS3tP-9qVurBUFyGMh88zHDj5DXjB4yquEIJ5_w-mi8uaFUPSEbxltVy7bRT8mGMg21Bvltj7zI-TulVDaMPSd7jeICZNNuyMm5nT2Guf6CU0wz9tX51W32zg7V6RLc7GOoPqHNS8Jc-VBtbXCYqu3gwy_oInk75Jfk2a4UfHVf98nX05OL7Yf67PP7j9vjs9px1c41UNQOZS9Vhxb6TsvOCd5o6EDQpuWdbIQSHJCD0wokiJ5q3gPTjmLPAPbJu9U7Ld2IvSuLJzuYKfnRplsTrTePO8Ffmct4bYpWURBFcHAvSPHHgnk2o88Oh8EGjEs2TGkQvOWgCvp2RS_tgMaHXSxGd4ebY8m4aCTotlCH_6DK63H0Lgbc-fL_aKBeB1yKOSfcPWzPqLlL1KyJmjXRwr_5--QH-neEf06Ky_Qf109TkauV</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Open Access Repository</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>1893547438</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Patient-Reported Physical Function Measures in Cancer Clinical Trials</title><source>MEDLINE</source><source>Oxford University Press Journals All Titles (1996-Current)</source><source>EZB-FREE-00999 freely available EZB journals</source><source>Alma/SFX Local Collection</source><creator>Atkinson, Thomas M ; Stover, Angela M ; Storfer, Daniel F ; Saracino, Rebecca M ; D'Agostino, Thomas A ; Pergolizzi, Denise ; Matsoukas, Konstantina ; Li, Yuelin ; Basch, Ethan</creator><creatorcontrib>Atkinson, Thomas M ; Stover, Angela M ; Storfer, Daniel F ; Saracino, Rebecca M ; D'Agostino, Thomas A ; Pergolizzi, Denise ; Matsoukas, Konstantina ; Li, Yuelin ; Basch, Ethan</creatorcontrib><description>Patient-reported outcomes (PROs) are increasingly used to monitor treatment-related symptoms and physical function decrements in cancer clinical trials. As more patients enter survivorship, it is important to capture PRO physical function throughout trials to help restore pretreatment levels of function. We completed a systematic review of PRO physical function measures used in cancer clinical trials and evaluated their psychometric properties on the basis of guidelines from the US Food and Drug Administration. Five databases were searched through October 2015: PubMed/MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL (Cumulative Index of Nursing and Allied Health Literature), Health and Psychosocial Instruments, and Cochrane. From an initial total of 10,233 articles, we identified 108 trials that captured PRO physical function. Within these trials, approximately 67% used the European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Questionnaire and 25% used the Medical Outcomes Study Short Form 36. Both the European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Questionnaire and Medical Outcomes Study Short Form 36 instruments generically satisfy most Food and Drug Administration requirements, although neither sought direct patient input as part of item development. The newer Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System physical function short form may be a brief, viable alternative. Clinicians should carefully consider the psychometric properties of these measures when incorporating PRO instrumentation into clinical trial design to provide a more comprehensive understanding of patient function.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0193-936X</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1478-6729</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1093/epirev/mxx008</identifier><identifier>PMID: 28453627</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>United States: Oxford University Press</publisher><subject>Activities of Daily Living ; Cancer ; Clinical trials ; Clinical Trials as Topic ; Health Status ; Humans ; Measurement ; Neoplasms - physiopathology ; Neoplasms - therapy ; Patient Reported Outcome Measures ; Quality of Life ; Review ; Symptom Assessment</subject><ispartof>Epidemiologic reviews, 2017-01, Vol.39 (1), p.59-70</ispartof><rights>The Author 2017. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health. All rights reserved. For permissions, please e-mail: journals.permissions@oup.com. 2017</rights><rights>The Author 2017. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health. All rights reserved. For permissions, please e-mail: journals.permissions@oup.com.</rights><rights>COPYRIGHT 2017 Oxford University Press</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><oa>free_for_read</oa><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c487t-30e9ce6d68bea3db96bc54293b350274b6258543e43c983635d094d319c0ed133</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c487t-30e9ce6d68bea3db96bc54293b350274b6258543e43c983635d094d319c0ed133</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><link.rule.ids>230,314,780,784,885,1584,27924,27925</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28453627$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Atkinson, Thomas M</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Stover, Angela M</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Storfer, Daniel F</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Saracino, Rebecca M</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>D'Agostino, Thomas A</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Pergolizzi, Denise</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Matsoukas, Konstantina</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Li, Yuelin</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Basch, Ethan</creatorcontrib><title>Patient-Reported Physical Function Measures in Cancer Clinical Trials</title><title>Epidemiologic reviews</title><addtitle>Epidemiol Rev</addtitle><description>Patient-reported outcomes (PROs) are increasingly used to monitor treatment-related symptoms and physical function decrements in cancer clinical trials. As more patients enter survivorship, it is important to capture PRO physical function throughout trials to help restore pretreatment levels of function. We completed a systematic review of PRO physical function measures used in cancer clinical trials and evaluated their psychometric properties on the basis of guidelines from the US Food and Drug Administration. Five databases were searched through October 2015: PubMed/MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL (Cumulative Index of Nursing and Allied Health Literature), Health and Psychosocial Instruments, and Cochrane. From an initial total of 10,233 articles, we identified 108 trials that captured PRO physical function. Within these trials, approximately 67% used the European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Questionnaire and 25% used the Medical Outcomes Study Short Form 36. Both the European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Questionnaire and Medical Outcomes Study Short Form 36 instruments generically satisfy most Food and Drug Administration requirements, although neither sought direct patient input as part of item development. The newer Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System physical function short form may be a brief, viable alternative. Clinicians should carefully consider the psychometric properties of these measures when incorporating PRO instrumentation into clinical trial design to provide a more comprehensive understanding of patient function.</description><subject>Activities of Daily Living</subject><subject>Cancer</subject><subject>Clinical trials</subject><subject>Clinical Trials as Topic</subject><subject>Health Status</subject><subject>Humans</subject><subject>Measurement</subject><subject>Neoplasms - physiopathology</subject><subject>Neoplasms - therapy</subject><subject>Patient Reported Outcome Measures</subject><subject>Quality of Life</subject><subject>Review</subject><subject>Symptom Assessment</subject><issn>0193-936X</issn><issn>1478-6729</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2017</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>EIF</sourceid><recordid>eNqFkcFrFTEQh4Mo9lk9epUFL71sm-wk2eQilEerQsUiFbyFbHZeG9lN1mS3tP-9qVurBUFyGMh88zHDj5DXjB4yquEIJ5_w-mi8uaFUPSEbxltVy7bRT8mGMg21Bvltj7zI-TulVDaMPSd7jeICZNNuyMm5nT2Guf6CU0wz9tX51W32zg7V6RLc7GOoPqHNS8Jc-VBtbXCYqu3gwy_oInk75Jfk2a4UfHVf98nX05OL7Yf67PP7j9vjs9px1c41UNQOZS9Vhxb6TsvOCd5o6EDQpuWdbIQSHJCD0wokiJ5q3gPTjmLPAPbJu9U7Ld2IvSuLJzuYKfnRplsTrTePO8Ffmct4bYpWURBFcHAvSPHHgnk2o88Oh8EGjEs2TGkQvOWgCvp2RS_tgMaHXSxGd4ebY8m4aCTotlCH_6DK63H0Lgbc-fL_aKBeB1yKOSfcPWzPqLlL1KyJmjXRwr_5--QH-neEf06Ky_Qf109TkauV</recordid><startdate>20170101</startdate><enddate>20170101</enddate><creator>Atkinson, Thomas M</creator><creator>Stover, Angela M</creator><creator>Storfer, Daniel F</creator><creator>Saracino, Rebecca M</creator><creator>D'Agostino, Thomas A</creator><creator>Pergolizzi, Denise</creator><creator>Matsoukas, Konstantina</creator><creator>Li, Yuelin</creator><creator>Basch, Ethan</creator><general>Oxford University Press</general><scope>CGR</scope><scope>CUY</scope><scope>CVF</scope><scope>ECM</scope><scope>EIF</scope><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>7X8</scope><scope>5PM</scope></search><sort><creationdate>20170101</creationdate><title>Patient-Reported Physical Function Measures in Cancer Clinical Trials</title><author>Atkinson, Thomas M ; Stover, Angela M ; Storfer, Daniel F ; Saracino, Rebecca M ; D'Agostino, Thomas A ; Pergolizzi, Denise ; Matsoukas, Konstantina ; Li, Yuelin ; Basch, Ethan</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c487t-30e9ce6d68bea3db96bc54293b350274b6258543e43c983635d094d319c0ed133</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2017</creationdate><topic>Activities of Daily Living</topic><topic>Cancer</topic><topic>Clinical trials</topic><topic>Clinical Trials as Topic</topic><topic>Health Status</topic><topic>Humans</topic><topic>Measurement</topic><topic>Neoplasms - physiopathology</topic><topic>Neoplasms - therapy</topic><topic>Patient Reported Outcome Measures</topic><topic>Quality of Life</topic><topic>Review</topic><topic>Symptom Assessment</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Atkinson, Thomas M</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Stover, Angela M</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Storfer, Daniel F</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Saracino, Rebecca M</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>D'Agostino, Thomas A</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Pergolizzi, Denise</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Matsoukas, Konstantina</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Li, Yuelin</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Basch, Ethan</creatorcontrib><collection>Medline</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE (Ovid)</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><collection>PubMed Central (Full Participant titles)</collection><jtitle>Epidemiologic reviews</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Atkinson, Thomas M</au><au>Stover, Angela M</au><au>Storfer, Daniel F</au><au>Saracino, Rebecca M</au><au>D'Agostino, Thomas A</au><au>Pergolizzi, Denise</au><au>Matsoukas, Konstantina</au><au>Li, Yuelin</au><au>Basch, Ethan</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Patient-Reported Physical Function Measures in Cancer Clinical Trials</atitle><jtitle>Epidemiologic reviews</jtitle><addtitle>Epidemiol Rev</addtitle><date>2017-01-01</date><risdate>2017</risdate><volume>39</volume><issue>1</issue><spage>59</spage><epage>70</epage><pages>59-70</pages><issn>0193-936X</issn><eissn>1478-6729</eissn><abstract>Patient-reported outcomes (PROs) are increasingly used to monitor treatment-related symptoms and physical function decrements in cancer clinical trials. As more patients enter survivorship, it is important to capture PRO physical function throughout trials to help restore pretreatment levels of function. We completed a systematic review of PRO physical function measures used in cancer clinical trials and evaluated their psychometric properties on the basis of guidelines from the US Food and Drug Administration. Five databases were searched through October 2015: PubMed/MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL (Cumulative Index of Nursing and Allied Health Literature), Health and Psychosocial Instruments, and Cochrane. From an initial total of 10,233 articles, we identified 108 trials that captured PRO physical function. Within these trials, approximately 67% used the European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Questionnaire and 25% used the Medical Outcomes Study Short Form 36. Both the European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Questionnaire and Medical Outcomes Study Short Form 36 instruments generically satisfy most Food and Drug Administration requirements, although neither sought direct patient input as part of item development. The newer Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System physical function short form may be a brief, viable alternative. Clinicians should carefully consider the psychometric properties of these measures when incorporating PRO instrumentation into clinical trial design to provide a more comprehensive understanding of patient function.</abstract><cop>United States</cop><pub>Oxford University Press</pub><pmid>28453627</pmid><doi>10.1093/epirev/mxx008</doi><tpages>12</tpages><oa>free_for_read</oa></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext
identifier ISSN: 0193-936X
ispartof Epidemiologic reviews, 2017-01, Vol.39 (1), p.59-70
issn 0193-936X
1478-6729
language eng
recordid cdi_pubmedcentral_primary_oai_pubmedcentral_nih_gov_5858035
source MEDLINE; Oxford University Press Journals All Titles (1996-Current); EZB-FREE-00999 freely available EZB journals; Alma/SFX Local Collection
subjects Activities of Daily Living
Cancer
Clinical trials
Clinical Trials as Topic
Health Status
Humans
Measurement
Neoplasms - physiopathology
Neoplasms - therapy
Patient Reported Outcome Measures
Quality of Life
Review
Symptom Assessment
title Patient-Reported Physical Function Measures in Cancer Clinical Trials
url https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2024-12-26T23%3A36%3A02IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-gale_pubme&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Patient-Reported%20Physical%20Function%20Measures%20in%20Cancer%20Clinical%20Trials&rft.jtitle=Epidemiologic%20reviews&rft.au=Atkinson,%20Thomas%20M&rft.date=2017-01-01&rft.volume=39&rft.issue=1&rft.spage=59&rft.epage=70&rft.pages=59-70&rft.issn=0193-936X&rft.eissn=1478-6729&rft_id=info:doi/10.1093/epirev/mxx008&rft_dat=%3Cgale_pubme%3EA614526397%3C/gale_pubme%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=1893547438&rft_id=info:pmid/28453627&rft_galeid=A614526397&rft_oup_id=10.1093/epirev/mxx008&rfr_iscdi=true