Survey of the Administration of quality of life (QL) questionnaires in three multicentre randomised trials in cancer. The Medical Research Council Lung Cancer Working Party the CHART Steering Committee

Factors predicting missing instruments in three cancer randomized clinical trials

PURPOSE

Missing patient-reported outcome (PRO) data can seriously threaten the validity of randomized clinical trials (RCTs). Identifying which factors predict missing instruments may help researchers develop strategies to prevent it from happening. This study examined the association of factors with time to the first missing instrument after randomization in three cooperative group RCTs.

METHODS

We performed descriptive analyses and Cox proportional hazards regressions for three RCTs selected from the Canadian Cancer Trials Group: MA17 (breast cancer), PR7 (prostate cancer), and LY12 (non-Hodgkin's lymphoma). The outcome was the time from randomization to the first missing instrument. Variables for 15 factors were used as covariates based on availability and previously-reported putative associations with missing PRO data.

RESULTS

Nine percent of 1352 subjects on MA17, 37% of 923 subjects on PR7, and 59% of 477 subjects on LY12 had a missing instrument. Twenty-five percent of subjects on MA17 had first missing instrument within 4.6 years. The median time to first missing instrument was: not observed for MA17, 7.3 years for PR7, 0.12 years for LY12. Cox regression revealed statistically significant independent associations with outcome for only five factors: baseline age (PR7) and level of well-being (LY12), and centre level of activity (LY12), presence of post-graduate residency training program (MA17, PR7), and centre geographic location (PR7, LY12).

CONCLUSION

Many factors reported to have association with missing instruments do not seem to predict time to the first missing instrument after randomization in RCTs. Context is important in understanding the few that may.

Patient-reported pain and other quality of life domains as prognostic factors for survival in a phase III clinical trial of patients with advanced breast cancer

Background

Patient-reported outcomes have been associated with survival in numerous studies across cancer types, including breast cancer. However, the Brief Pain Inventory-Short Form (BPI-SF) and the Rotterdam Symptom Checklist (RSCL) have rarely been investigated in this regard in breast cancer.

Methods

Here we describe a post hoc analysis of the prognostic effect of baseline scores of these instruments on survival in a phase III trial of patients with advanced breast cancer who received gemcitabine plus paclitaxel or paclitaxel alone after anthracycline-based adjuvant or neoadjuvant therapy. The variables for this analysis were baseline BPI-SF “worst pain” and BPI-SF “pain interference” scores, and four RSCL subscales (each transformed to 0–100). Univariate and multivariate Cox models were used, the latter in the presence of 11 demographic/clinical variables. Kaplan-Meier curves and log-rank tests were used to compare survival for patients by BPI-SF or RSCL scores.

Results

Of 529 randomized patients, 286 provided BPI-SF data and 336 provided RSCL data at baseline. Univariate analyses identified BPI-SF worst pain and pain interference (both hazard ratios [HR], 1.07 for a 1-point increase; both p ≤ 0.0061) and three of four RSCL subscales [activity level, physical distress, and health-related quality of life (HRQOL) (HR, 0.86–0.91 for 10-point increase all p ≤ 0.0104)], to have significant prognostic effect for survival. BPI-SF worst pain (p = 0.0342) and RSCL activity level (p = 0.0004) were prognostic in the multivariate analysis. Median survival for patients categorized by BPI-SF worst pain score was 23.8 (n = 91), 17.9 (n = 94) and 14.6 (n = 94) months for scores 0, 1–4, and 5–10, respectively (log-rank p = 0.0065). Median survival was 23.8 and 14.6 months for patients (n = 330) with above- and below-median RSCL activity level scores respectively (log-rank p < 0.0001).

Conclusion

Pretreatment BPI-SF worst pain and RSCL activity scores provide distinct prognostic information for survival in patients receiving paclitaxel or gemcitabine plus paclitaxel for advanced breast cancer even after controlling for multiple demographic and clinical factors.

Trial registration

Clinicaltrials.gov, NCT00006459.

Systematic collection of patient reported outcome research data: A checklist for clinical research professionals

Understanding the human experience is no longer an outcome explored strictly by social and behavioral researchers. Increasingly, biomedical researchers are also including patient reported outcomes (PROs) in their clinical research studies not only due to calls for increased patient engagement in research but also healthcare. Collecting PROs in clinical research studies offers a lens into the patient's unique perspective providing important information to industry sponsors and the FDA. Approximately 30% of trials include PROs as primary or secondary endpoints and a quarter of FDA new drug, device and biologic applications include PRO data to support labeling claims. In this paper PRO, represents any information obtained directly from the patient or their proxy, without interpretation by another individual to ascertain their health, evaluate symptoms or conditions and extends the reference of PRO, as defined by the FDA, to include other sources such as patient diaries. Consumers and clinicians consistently report that PRO data are valued, and can aide when deciding between treatment options; therefore an integral part of clinical research. However, little guidance exists for clinical research professionals (CRPs) responsible for collecting PRO data on the best practices to ensure quality data collection so that an accurate assessment of the patient's view is collected. Therefore the purpose of this work was to develop and validate a checklist to guide quality collection of PRO data. The checklist synthesizes best practices from published literature and expert opinions addressing practical and methodological challenges CRPs often encounter when collecting PRO data in research settings.

Inconsistencies in quality of life data collection in clinical trials: a potential source of bias? Interviews with research nurses and trialists

Background

Patient-reported outcomes (PROs), such as health-related quality of life (HRQL) are increasingly used to evaluate treatment effectiveness in clinical trials, are valued by patients, and may inform important decisions in the clinical setting. It is of concern, therefore, that preliminary evidence, gained from group discussions at UK-wide Medical Research Council (MRC) quality of life training days, suggests there are inconsistent standards of HRQL data collection in trials and appropriate training and education is often lacking. Our objective was to investigate these reports, to determine if they represented isolated experiences, or were indicative of a potentially wider problem.

Methods And Findings

We undertook a qualitative study, conducting 26 semi-structured interviews with research nurses, data managers, trial coordinators and research facilitators involved in the collection and entry of HRQL data in clinical trials, across one primary care NHS trust, two secondary care NHS trusts and two clinical trials units in the UK. We used conventional content analysis to analyze and interpret our data. Our study participants reported (1) inconsistent standards in HRQL measurement, both between, and within, trials, which appeared to risk the introduction of bias; (2), difficulties in dealing with HRQL data that raised concern for the well-being of the trial participant, which in some instances led to the delivery of non-protocol driven co-interventions, (3), a frequent lack of HRQL protocol content and appropriate training and education of trial staff, and (4) that HRQL data collection could be associated with emotional and/or ethical burden.

Conclusions

Our findings suggest there are inconsistencies in the standards of HRQL data collection in some trials resulting from a general lack of HRQL-specific protocol content, training and education. These inconsistencies could lead to biased HRQL trial results. Future research should aim to develop HRQL guidelines and training programmes aimed at supporting researchers to carry out high quality data collection.

Pain questionnaire performance in advanced prostate cancer: comparative results from two international clinical trials

PURPOSE

To compare pain assessment questionnaires commonly used in advanced prostate cancer trials and to determine the psychometric characteristics and longitudinal relationships by contrasting questionnaire data from two international phase 2 trials.

METHODS

Scores from the Present Pain Intensity (PPI) question of the McGill Pain Questionnaire, the pain intensity scale of the Brief Pain Inventory (BPI), and the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-Prostate (FACT-P) were analyzed using Pearson correlation, intraclass correlation coefficient, and Cronbach's α, respectively. Concordance was evaluated with Cohen's kappa coefficient and McNemar test at baseline (n = 224) and two subsequent observations.

RESULTS

PPI and FACT-P scores were associated with the BPI score at baseline for Trials 1 and 2: PPI r = 0.66 and 0.80, respectively (P < 0.001); FACT-P (pain scale) r = -0.76 and -0.82, respectively (P < 0.001). However, concordance analysis revealed that the BPI identified pain (score > 0) at higher rates than the PPI: at baseline, BPI: 89 % (64/72) and 77 % (95/124), PPI: 68 % (49/72) and 64 % (79/124) [Trials 1 and 2, respectively; McNemar test (P < 0.001) for both studies]. The FACT-P pain scale identified pain similarly to the BPI pain intensity scale; longitudinal analysis produced comparable findings. All pain scales met standard psychometric acceptability criteria, but the BPI and FACT-P performed better than the PPI.

CONCLUSIONS

Data suggest the BPI pain intensity and FACT-P pain scales are better than the PPI question at capturing the pain experience among patients with advanced prostate cancer. Additional comparative research is needed in larger population samples.

Patient reported outcomes (PROs) in clinical trials: is 'in-trial' guidance lacking? a systematic review

Background

Patient reported outcomes (PROs) are increasingly assessed in clinical trials, and guidelines are available to inform the design and reporting of such trials. However, researchers involved in PRO data collection report that specific guidance on ‘in-trial’ activity (recruitment, data collection and data inputting) and the management of ‘concerning’ PRO data (i.e., data which raises concern for the well-being of the trial participant) appears to be lacking. The purpose of this review was to determine the extent and nature of published guidelines addressing these areas.

Methods and Findings

Systematic review of 1,362 articles identified 18 eligible papers containing ‘in-trial’ guidelines. Two independent authors undertook a qualitative content analysis of the selected papers. Guidelines presented in each of the articles were coded according to an a priori defined coding frame, which demonstrated reliability (pooled Kappa 0.86–0.97), and validity (<2% residual category coding). The majority of guidelines present were concerned with ‘pre-trial’ activities (72%), for example, outcome measure selection and study design issues, or ‘post-trial’ activities (16%) such as data analysis, reporting and interpretation. ‘In-trial’ guidelines represented 9.2% of all guidance across the papers reviewed, with content primarily focused on compliance, quality control, proxy assessment and reporting of data collection. There were no guidelines surrounding the management of concerning PRO data.

Conclusions

The findings highlight there are minimal in-trial guidelines in publication regarding PRO data collection and management in clinical trials. No guidance appears to exist for researchers involved with the handling of concerning PRO data. Guidelines are needed, which support researchers to manage all PRO data appropriately and which facilitate unbiased data collection.

The Patient Deficit Model Overturned: a qualitative study of patients' perceptions of invitation to participate in a randomized controlled trial comparing selective bladder preservation against surgery in muscle invasive bladder cancer (SPARE, CRUK/07/011)

BACKGROUND

Evidence suggests that poor recruitment into clinical trials rests on a patient 'deficit' model - an inability to comprehend trial processes. Poor communication has also been cited as a possible barrier to recruitment. A qualitative patient interview study was included within the feasibility stage of a phase III non-inferiority Randomized Controlled Trial (RCT) (SPARE, CRUK/07/011) in muscle invasive bladder cancer. The aim was to illuminate problems in the context of randomization.

METHODS

The qualitative study used a 'Framework Analysis' that included 'constant comparison' in which semi-structured interviews are transcribed, analyzed, compared and contrasted both between and within transcripts. Three researchers coded and interpreted data.

RESULTS

Twenty-four patients agreed to enter the interview study; 10 decliners of randomization and 14 accepters, of whom 2 subsequently declined their allocated treatment.The main theme applying to the majority of the sample was confusion and ambiguity. There was little indication that confusion directly impacted on decisions to enter the SPARE trial. However, confusion did appear to impact on ethical considerations surrounding 'informed consent', as well as cause a sense of alienation between patients and health personnel.Sub-optimal communication in many guises accounted for the confusion, together with the logistical elements of a trial that involved treatment options delivered in a number of geographical locations.

CONCLUSIONS

These data highlight the difficulty of providing balanced and clear trial information within the UK health system, despite best intentions. Involvement of multiple professionals can impact on communication processes with patients who are considering participation in RCTs. Our results led us to question the 'deficit' model of patient behavior. It is suggested that health professionals might consider facilitating a context in which patients feel fully included in the trial enterprise and potentially consider alternatives to randomization where complex interventions are being tested.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ISRCTN61126465.

Psychological impact of genetic counseling for hereditary nonpolyposis colorectal cancer: the role of cancer history, gender, age, and psychological distress

AIMS

We prospectively examined the impact of an initial interdisciplinary genetic counseling (human geneticist, oncologist, and psycho-oncologist) on feelings of anxiety with a special focus on subgroups related to personal cancer history, gender, age, and education.

RESULTS

At baseline, cancer-affected men revealed a significantly higher level of anxiety than unaffected men (p<0.05), whereas history of cancer did not play a role in women. Furthermore, a significant interaction between time, gender, and age was identified for change of anxiety. While women in general and men above 50 years revealed a significant reduction in anxiety, younger men did not show any change over time. A logistic regression indicated that clinical Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale-A cases can be predicted by general distress (Brief Symptom Inventory) as well as by hereditary nonpolyposis colorectal cancer-related cognitions of intrusion and avoidance (impact of event scale) with a correct classification of 86%.

CONCLUSIONS

Although initial hereditary nonpolyposis colorectal cancer counseling leads to an overall reduction of anxiety, differential effects of cancer history, gender, and age focus on subgroups of cancer-affected men, who may display unexpectedly high anxiety scores at baseline. Especially younger men do not seem to reduce this high anxiety level. Baseline anxiety was mainly determined by maladaptive situation-specific cognitions. Therefore, consulters should be more aware of anxiety-related cognitions in cancer-affected younger men.

Clinical neurological outcome and quality of life among patients with limited small-cell cancer treated with two different doses of prophylactic cranial irradiation in the intergroup phase III trial (PCI99-01, EORTC 22003-08004, RTOG 0212 and IFCT 99-01)

BACKGROUND

We recently published the results of the PCI99 randomised trial comparing the effect of a prophylactic cranial irradiation (PCI) at 25 or 36 Gy on the incidence of brain metastases (BM) in 720 patients with limited small-cell lung cancer (SCLC). As concerns about neurotoxicity were a major issue surrounding PCI, we report here midterm and long-term repeated evaluation of neurocognitive functions and quality of life (QoL).

PATIENTS AND METHODS

At predetermined intervals, the European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) QLQ-C30 and brain module were used for self-reported patient data, whereas the EORTC-Radiation Therapy Oncology Group Late Effects Normal Tissue-Subjective, Objective, Management, Analytic scale was used for clinicians' assessment. For each scale, the unfavourable status was analysed with a logistic model including age, grade at baseline, time and PCI dose.

RESULTS

Over the 3 years studied, there was no significant difference between the two groups in any of the 17 selected items assessing QoL and neurological and cognitive functions. We observed in both groups a mild deterioration across time of communication deficit, weakness of legs, intellectual deficit and memory (all P < 0.005).

CONCLUSION

Patients should be informed of these potential adverse effects, as well as the benefit of PCI on survival and BM. PCI with a total dose of 25 Gy remains the standard of care in limited-stage SCLC.

Compliance with patient-reported outcomes in multicenter clinical trials: methodologic and practical approaches

PURPOSE

This report describes interventions undertaken by the National Surgical Adjuvant Breast and Bowel Project (NSABP) to improve compliance with patient-reported outcome (PRO) assessments in the setting of multicenter cancer clinical trials. We describe the effectiveness of several interventions and of observational factors.

METHODS

PRO submission rates were analyzed for the following three NSABP protocols: the Study of Raloxifene and Tamoxifen (STAR), B-32, and B-35. Institutions participating in protocol B-35 were randomly assigned to receive automated reminders of upcoming assessments or not. Compliance was analyzed with a logistic repeated measures mixed modeling.

RESULTS

Compliance was high in the three protocols, with rates greater than 80% for nearly all time points. Institutions were a significant source of variability (P < .01). The largest institutions had the highest compliance in STAR (odds ratio [OR] = 0.68 for < 50 participants enrolled and OR = 0.82 for 50 to 99 participants enrolled v larger institutions; P < .001). Midsized institutions had highest compliance in B-32 (OR = 4.63 for 31 to 50 patients enrolled and OR = 3.12 for > 50 patients enrolled v small institutions; P = .007). Compliance increased with participant age in STAR (OR = 0.57, 0.89, and 1.01 for ages < 50, 50 to 60, and 60 to 70 years, respectively, v > 70 years; P < .001). Race was significant in B-32 (OR = 2.63 for white v nonwhite; P < .001) and in STAR (OR = 1.41 for white v nonwhite; P < .001). Treatment group was significant in B-32 (OR = 0.74; P = .006). The B-35 prospective reminder did not improve compliance significantly (P = .30), but in B-32, delinquency sanctions were significant (OR = 1.56; P = .007).

CONCLUSION

Compliance in NSABP PRO studies is higher now than a decade ago. Results for compliance initiatives were mixed. Age and race are important factors, but institutional variation remains significant and largely unexplained.

Measuring outcomes in randomized prospective trials in palliative care

Palliative care aims to improve the quality of life of patients and their families and reduce suffering from life-threatening illness. In assessing palliative care efficacy, researchers must consider a broad range of potential outcomes, including those experienced by the patient's family/caregivers, clinicians, and the health care system. The purpose of this article is to summarize the discussions and recommendations of an Outcomes Working Group convened to advance the palliative care research agenda, particularly in the context of randomized controlled trials. These recommendations address the conceptualization of palliative care outcomes, sources of outcomes data, application of outcome measures in clinical trials, and the methodological challenges to outcome measurement in palliative care populations. As other fields have developed and refined methodological approaches that address their particular research needs, palliative care researchers must do the same to answer important clinical questions in rigorous and credible ways.

BRCA1/2 testing in hereditary breast and ovarian cancer families III: Risk perception and screening

This study aimed to ascertain whether cancer risk perception changed following the offer and subsequent receipt of BRCA1/2 results and to evaluate breast and ovarian screening practices in testers and non-testers. Members of thirteen HBOC families were offered BRCA1/2 testing for a known family mutation. Perceived risk for developing breast cancer, ovarian cancer or for carrying the familial BRCA1/2 mutation, was assessed at baseline and again at 6-9 months following the receipt of test results. Breast and ovarian cancer screening data were obtained at both time-points. A total of 138 women participated and 120 (87%) chose to be tested for a known familial mutation. Twenty-eight women (24%) were identified as carriers and their perceived ovarian cancer risk and their perception of being a mutation carrier increased (P = 0.01 for both). Those testing negatives had a significant decrease in all dimensions of risk perception (P < 0.01). Regression analysis showed test results to be strong predictors of follow-up risk perception (P = 0.001), however, they were not predictors of screening practices at follow-up. Testers were more likely to have completed a clinical breast exam following testing than decliners. Mammography was positively associated with baseline adherence, age, and intrusive thoughts. Ovarian cancer worries only predicted pelvic ultrasound screening post-testing. Baseline practices and psychological factors appear to be stronger predictors of health behavior than test results.

Psychological outcome of patients following treatment of oral cancer and its relation with functional status and coping mechanisms

BACKGROUND

Traditionally health-care providers have measured outcome of treatment of disease by focusing on tumour response and disease-free survival. However, it has become increasingly apparent that the behavioural and functional impact of treatment on the patient is important. This study investigates the psychological outcome and its relationship with functional status and coping mechanisms following treatment of oral cancer patients.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

Sixty-eight patients were evaluated 6 months to 6 years after treatment (from October 1992 to October 1997) for oral cancer. The Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS) was used for psychological evaluation, the University of Washington Quality of Life Questionnaire (UW-QOL) and The European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer Questionnaire (EORTC QLQ-C30) for evaluating the head and neck specific and general functional status, respectively. Finally, the "Mental Adjustment to Cancer Questionnaire" (MAC-Q) was used for evaluation of coping mechanisms.

RESULTS

The incidence of anxiety and/or depression was 25% and the socio-demographic and medical characteristics showed poor correlation with the psychological outcome in this study. The results indicated that there was a strong association between psychological outcome and head and neck specific and general quality-of-life (QOL) domains, and style of coping. The p-value was less than 0.01 for most of the domains and items of functional status and the effective coping style.

CONCLUSION

Deteriorated functional status and ineffective coping strategies are strongly associated with poor psychological outcome in patients with oral cancer.

Psychological distress in women at risk of hereditary breast/ovarian or HNPCC cancers in the absence of demonstrated mutations

AIM

To examine psychological distress in women at risk of familial breast-ovarian cancer (FBOC) or hereditary non-polyposis colorectal cancer (HNPCC) with absence of demonstrated mutations in the family (unknown mutation).

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Two-hundred and fifty three consecutive women at risk of FBOC and 77 at risk of HNPCC and with no present or past history of cancer. They were aware of their risk and had received genetic counseling. Comparisons were made between these two groups, normal controls, and women who were identified to be BRCA1 mutation carriers. The questionnaires Beck Hopelessness Scale (BHS), General Health Questionnaire (GHQ-28), Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS) and Impact of Event Scale (IES) were employed to assess psychological distress.

RESULTS

No significant differences concerning psychological distress were observed between women with FBOC and women with HNPCC. Compared to mutation carriers for BRCA1, the level of anxiety and depression was significantly higher in the FBOC group with absence of demonstrated mutation. Compared to normal controls, the level of anxiety was higher, while the level of depression was lower in the groups with unknown mutation.

CONCLUSIONS

Women in the absence of demonstrated mutations have higher anxiety and depression levels than women with known mutation-carrier status. Access to genetic testing may be of psychologically benefit to women at risk for FBOC or HNPCC.

Randomized phase II study of two gemcitabine schedules for patients with impaired performance status (Karnofsky performance status </= 70) and advanced non-small-cell lung cancer

PURPOSE

This randomized phase II study compared two treatment schedules of gemcitabine in patients with non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) and impaired Karnofsky performance status (KP). Primary objectives were to record changes from baseline KP and to assess symptom palliation. Secondary objectives were overall survival, tumor response, and toxicity.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Patients with stage IIIb and IV NSCLC and KP </= 70 were randomly assigned to receive gemcitabine 1,000 mg/m(2) on days 1, 8, and 15 of each 28-day cycle (3w4) or gemcitabine 1,500 mg/m(2) on days 1 and 8 of each 21-day cycle (2w3), both for up to six cycles. KP, toxicity, and SS14 lung cancer specific questions were recorded before each cycle of treatment. Response was evaluated 4 weeks after the last cycle.

RESULTS

One hundred seventy-four patients were enrolled. There was significant early attrition due to disease progression; only 61.5% of patients were alive at 2 months. There was a significant improvement in KP from baseline to pre-cycle 3 in both arms, with a trend in favor of the 3w4 regimen for duration and faster onset of improvement. Eight of the 17 quality-of-life (QOL) variables assessed showed an improvement of more than 10% between baseline and the start of the third cycle of treatment. Response rate, survival, and duration were similar in both arms.

CONCLUSION

There was no significant difference between the two schedules examined in terms of improvement in KP or QOL, but there seemed to be a trend in favor of the 3w4 schedule.

Quality-of-life trials in lung cancer: past achievements and future challenges

Much work has been done regarding QOL in lung cancer trials. There are now several validated QOL instruments, particularly for patients with lung cancer. Past accomplishments include key trials demonstrating a benefit of chemotherapy or radiation in patients with advanced NSCLC not only regarding traditional endpoints but also by improving palliation and aspects of QOL such as pain and dyspnea. More recently, studies have emerged that incorporate QOL in patients with locally advanced disease. Key challenges relate to the optimal design and successful completion of these QOL studies. Missing data remains a key problem in many QOL studies, particularly in lung cancer trials. Future studies should focus on incorporating QOL into phase III studies with clear hypotheses that can ultimately lead to clinically meaningful interventions.

Comprehensive genetic counseling for families at risk for HNPCC: impact on distress and perceptions

The aim of the study was to explore distress and health beliefs before and after comprehensive interdisciplinary counseling in families at risk for hereditary non-polyposis colorectal cancer (HNPCC). Results reported here were derived from a consecutive sample of 65 counselees [31 patients with colorectal cancer (CRC) and 34 unaffected at-risk persons] who participated in interdisciplinary counseling provided by human geneticists, surgeons, and psycho-oncologists before genetic testing. Data were collected from self-administered questionnaires before, as well as 4-6 weeks after, counseling. Distress and perceptions specific to HNPCC were assessed at both timepoints using standardized as well as author-derived instruments. Distress declined after counseling, as did worries related to HNPCC. An increase was found in personal belief in control of cancer risk, for instance, in the perceived efficacy of early detection of CRC. We also observed a trend toward greater anticipated ability to cope with a positive gene test after counseling. Changes after counseling were generally more pronounced for persons at risk, as compared to patients with cancer. The decrease in distress was partly attributable to an increase in personal self-confidence. One-third of the sample reported enhanced communication specific to hereditary disease within the family after counseling. A substantial minority, however, said they experienced increased worry and physical symptoms after counseling. Overall, counselees demonstrated less stress and perceived cancer threat as well as enhanced beliefs regarding personal control over cancer, suggesting an overall beneficial impact of comprehensive counseling. Further research is needed to identify those individuals most at risk for increased fear and worry related to HNPCC so that they may be most appropriately counseled.

Functional status of patients with oral cancer and its relation to style of coping, social support and psychological status

Sixty-eight patients were evaluated 6 months to 6 years after treatment for oral cancer using standardized questionnaires to explore the influence of age, sex, site and stage of tumour, and primary treatment on their functional status measured by the University of Washington Quality of Life Questionnaire (UW-QoL), and the association between functional status and psychological outcome measured by the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS), style of coping measured by the Mental Adjustment to Cancer Questionnaire (MAC-Q), and social support measured by the Short-Form Social Support Questionnaire (SSQ-6). Young patients, women, patients with advanced tumours, those with oropharyngeal tumours and those who had been treated with both surgery and radiotherapy reported worse function. The worse the functional domain, the more likely it was to be associated with anxiety, depression and ineffective coping style, and better functional scores were weakly associated with fighting spirit, level of social support and satisfaction with that support. We have identified patients at need and highlighted their problems. Dealing with these problems may ultimately improve the perception of function after treatment of oral cancer.

Important issues in planning and conducting multi-centre randomised trials in cancer and publishing their results

The principles and practical issues involved in planning and conducting multi-centre randomised trials in cancer and in publishing their results are reviewed for the benefit of those conducting trials or planning to do so. There is increasing public awareness of the importance of randomised trials and this needs to be nurtured. Questions addressed by trials must be clinically worthwhile, and trials must be planned and conducted to provide reliable results that will convince the clinical community and influence future clinical practice to patients' benefit. Trial protocols must justify the trial and give clear and unambiguous instructions to collaborating centres. Only data necessary for answering the trial questions should be collected, and the reliability of data should be checked. All trials should be published in peer-reviewed journals, and ways should be considered of communicating their results to patients, their families and the public. Wide consultation and independent review are needed to achieve these aims.

Randomised trial of paclitaxel versus doxorubicin as first-line chemotherapy for advanced breast cancer: quality of life evaluation using the EORTC QLQ-C30 and the Rotterdam symptom checklist

The aim of the study was to compare the quality of life (QL) of patients treated with single-agent paclitaxel versus doxorubicin as first-line chemotherapy for advanced breast cancer. 331 patients with advanced breast cancer were randomised, with 294 eligible for analysis. Patients completed both the EORTC QLQ-C30 questionnaire and the Rotterdam Symptom Checklist (RSCL) with six additional items, at baseline and after the third, fifth and seventh cycles of chemotherapy. A significant difference in progression-free survival in favour of doxorubicin caused a bias in the data with differences in expected completion rates of questionnaires beyond cycle three. Therefore, statistical comparisons were performed only for the first three cycles. Baseline compliance was 64% and 61% for the QLQ-C30 and RSCL questionnaires, respectively. Doxorubicin was associated with significantly more nausea/vomiting (P=0.001), loss of appetite (P=0.010) and a greater burden of disease and treatment (P=0.044), but with less bone pain (P=0.042) and rash (P=0.045) than paclitaxel. Both treatments were associated with improved emotional function and reduction in psychological distress at cycle 3. Longitudinal data suggested that doxorubicin was associated with less pain, specifically bone pain. Doxorubicin was more active but may have had more side-effects during the first three cycles. Long-term QL outcomes could not be assessed.

Gemcitabine plus best supportive care (BSC) vs BSC in inoperable non-small cell lung cancer--a randomized trial with quality of life as the primary outcome. UK NSCLC Gemcitabine Group. Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer

Three hundred patients with symptomatic, locally advanced or metastatic NSCLC not requiring immediate radiotherapy were enrolled into this randomized multicentre trial comparing gemcitabine + BSC vs BSC alone. Patients allocated gemcitabine received 1000 mg/m2 on days 1, 8 and 15 of a 28-day cycle, for a maximum of six cycles. The main aim of this trial was to compare patient assessment of a predefined subset of commonly reported symptoms (SS14) from the EORTC QLQ-C30 and LC13 scales. The primary end-points were defined as (1) the percentage change in mean SS14 score between baseline and 2 months and (2) the proportion of patients with a marked (> or = 25%) improvement in SS14 score between baseline and 2 months sustained for > or =4 weeks. The secondary objectives were to compare treatments with respect to overall survival, and multidimensional QL parameters. The treatment groups were balanced with regard to age, gender, Karnofsky performance status (KPS) and disease stage (40% had metastatic disease). The percentage change in mean SS14 score from baseline to 2 months was a 10% decrease (i.e. improvement) for gemcitabine plus BSC and a 1% increase (i.e. deterioration) for BSC alone (P = 0.113, two-sample t-test). A sustained (> or = 4 weeks) improvement (> or =25%) on SS14 was recorded in a significantly higher proportion of gemcitabine + BSC patients (22%) than in BSC alone patients (9%) (P = 0.0014, Pearson's chi-squared test). The QLQ-C30 and L13 subscales showed greater improvement in the gemcitabine plus BSC arm (in 11 domains) than in the BSC arm (one symptom item). There was greater deterioration in the BSC alone arm (six domains/items) than in the gemcitabine + BSC arm (three QL domains). Tumour response occurred in 19% (95% CI 13-27) of gemcitabine patients. There was no difference in overall survival: median 5.7 months (95% CI 4.6-7.6) for gemcitabine + BSC patients and 5.9 months (95% CI 5.0-7.9) (log-rank, P = 0.84) for BSC patients, and 1 -year survival was 25% for gemcitabine + BSC and 22% for BSC. Overall, 74 (49%) gemcitabine + BSC patients and 119 (79%) BSC patients received palliative radiotherapy. The median time to radiotherapy was 29 weeks for gemcitabine + BSC patients and 3.8 weeks for BSC. Patients treated with gemcitabine + BSC reported better QL and reduced disease-related symptoms compared with those receiving BSC alone. These improvements in patient-assessed QL were significant in magnitude and were sustained.

[Not Available]

Along with the detection of several genetic mutations that are associated with increased susceptibility for hereditary cancer syndromes, e. g. hereditary breast/ovarian and colorectal cancer, genetic tests are available for members of families at risk. Until now, the benefit in terms of prevention still needs to be confirmed. Furthermore, a variety of legal, ethical and psychosocial risks has to be considered, unless predictive genetic testing results in additional härm for individuals and families. Guidelines including Standards for genetic analyses and comprehensive counseling have been established worldwide aiming at the prevention of negative consequences for persons at risk. The knowledge collected in Psychooncology is applicable to the field of genetic counseling. During the pre-test-phase counseling aims at supporting the process of decision-making, both in individuals and in families. After disclosure of test results psychosocial support aims to enhance adjustment and communication within families. A small subgroup at risk for increased psychosocial distress warrants additional support. Efforts in research are needed to evaluate psychosocial issues during the process of decision-making and outcome, with adequate length of follow-up. Risk factors indicating poor psychosocial outcome need to be identified in order to develop appropriate ways of support.

High-dose sequential chemotherapy with recombinant granulocyte colony-stimulating factor and repeated stem-cell support for inflammatory breast cancer patients: does impact on quality of life jeopardize feasibility and acceptability of treatment?

PURPOSE

This study was designed to investigate the quality of life (QOL) of patients enrolled onto the High-Dose Chemotherapy for Breast Cancer Study Group trial (PEGASE 02), a French pilot multicenter trial of the treatment of inflammatory breast cancer (IBC) aimed at evaluating (1) toxicity and feasibility of sequential high-dose chemotherapy (HDC) with recombinant human granulocyte colony-stimulating factor (filgrastim) and stem-cell support and (2) response to HDC in terms of pathologic response and survival.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

QOL measures were performed at inclusion and four times subsequently up to 1 year using an ad hoc side-effect questionnaire (19 physical symptoms) and the European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality-of-Life Questionnaire (EORTC QLQ-C30).

RESULTS

Of the 95 patients entered, the overall QOL questionnaire completion compliance was 75.6%. During cycle 3 of HDC, the number of symptoms was high (mean +/- SD QOL score, 10 +/- 3), with fatigue, hair loss, appetite loss, nausea, change in taste, vomiting, fever, and weight loss reported by more than 60% of patients. Toxicity and distress associated with HDC were reflected in the decline of four EORTC QLQ-C30 scores: global QOL (P =.001), and physical, role, and social functioning (P <.001 for all statistics). However, QOL deterioration disappeared after treatment completion, except for physical functioning (P =.025). One year after inclusion, most QOL scores returned to baseline, and both emotional functioning and global QOL scores were even higher than baseline (P =.030 and P =.009, respectively).

CONCLUSION

If it is confirmed that improvements in pathologic response rates with HDC effectively translate into increased probabilities of survival for IBC patients, adoption of such treatment as PEGASE 02 will not involve crucial choices between length of life and QOL and should not be delayed for QOL arguments.