Patient-reported outcome measures for use in gynaecological oncology: a systematic review

Robotic and laparoscopic gynaecological surgery: a prospective multicentre observational cohort study and economic evaluation in England

OBJECTIVE

To compare the health-related quality of life and cost-effectiveness of robot-assisted laparoscopic surgery (RALS) versus conventional 'straight stick' laparoscopic surgery (CLS) in women undergoing hysterectomy as part of their treatment for either suspected or proven gynaecological malignancy.

DESIGN

Multicentre prospective observational cohort study.

SETTING

Patients aged 16+ undergoing hysterectomy as part of their treatment for gynaecological malignancy at 12 National Health Service (NHS) cancer units and centres in England between August 2017 and February 2020.

PARTICIPANTS

275 patients recruited with 159 RALS, 73 CLS eligible for analysis.

OUTCOME MEASURES

Primary outcome was the European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life measure (EORTC). Secondary outcomes included EuroQol-5 Dimension (EQ-5D-5L) utility, 6-minute walk test (6MWT), NHS costs using pounds sterling (£) 2018-2019 prices and cost-effectiveness. The cost-effectiveness evaluation compared EQ-5D-5L quality adjusted life years and costs between RALS and CLS.

RESULTS

No difference identified between RALS and CLS for EORTC, EQ-5D-5L utility and 6MWT. RALS had unadjusted mean cost difference of £556 (95% CI -£314 to £1315) versus CLS and mean quality adjusted life year (QALY) difference of 0.0024 (95% CI -0.00051 to 0.0057), non-parametric incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of £231 667per QALY. For the adjusted cost-effectiveness analysis, RALS dominated CLS with a mean cost difference of -£188 (95% CI -£1321 to £827) and QALY difference of 0.0024 (95% CI -0.0008 to 0.0057).

CONCLUSIONS

Findings suggest that RALS versus CLS in women undergoing hysterectomy (after adjusting for differences in morbidity) is cost-effective with lower costs and QALYs. Results are highly sensitive to the usage of robotic hardware with higher usage increasing the probability of cost-effectiveness. Non-inferiority randomised controlled trial would be of benefit to decision-makers to provide further evidence on the cost-effectiveness of RALS versus CLS but may not be practical due to surgical preferences of surgeons and the extensive roll out of RALS.

Areas to Improve Quality of Life After Ovarian Tumor Surgery and Adjuvant Treatment

BACKGROUND/AIM

To evaluate quality of life (QoL) in women treated for ovarian tumors one year after laparotomy.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

The validated quality of life questionnaires (EORTC QLQ-C30 and QLQ-OV28) were sent to women who had undergone laparotomy due to ovarian tumors 12 months after surgery. The answers were analyzed and grouped according to the ovarian tumor histology (benign, borderline and cancer).

RESULTS

A total of 621 patients (87.5% out of 710) agreed to participate in the study. Ovarian cancer patients experienced statistically worse QoL one year after laparotomy in several analyzed parameters, including financial difficulties, compared to patients treated for benign and borderline tumors.

CONCLUSION

Women with ovarian cancer still need further cancer rehabilitation and support one year after diagnosis to improve their QoL. The novel finding was that ovarian cancer patients suffered from financial difficulties even in a free of charge health care system.

A systematic review of English language patient-reported outcome measures for use in urogynaecology and female pelvic medicine

INTRODUCTION

Patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) are widely used in clinical practice and research in urogynaecology. There is no consensus on which PROMs should be used. No unifying document identifies all available PROMs and compares the psychometric properties of these.

METHODS

Systematic review of the literature following PRISMA guidelines. Studies where women had been administered an English-language PROM which assessed pelvic-floor symptomatology and psychometric properties had been reported were included.

RESULTS

85 PROMs assessing pelvic-floor symptoms in a urogynaecology population were identified. 43 PROMs assessed lower urinary tract symptoms in 95 studies, four PROMS assessed vaginal symptoms in seven studies, 20 PROMs assessed bowel symptoms in 27 studies and three PROMs assessed sexual symptoms in seven studies. 15 PROMs assessed two or more of these symptom areas in 60 studies. PROMs with the with the best available psychometric evidence within these five areas were (urinary symptoms) the Incontinence Quality-of-Life questionnaire (I-QOL aka ICIQ-UIqol) and International Consultation on Incontinence Questionnaire (ICIQ-UI-SF), (bowel symptoms) the Accidental Bowel Leakage Evaluation (ABLE) questionnaire and the International Consultation on Incontinence Bowel questionnaire (ICIQ-B), (vaginal symptoms) the Pelvic Organ Prolapse Symptom Score (POPSS), (sexual symptoms) the Pelvic organ prolapse- urinary Incontinence Sexual function Questionnaire- IUGA revised (PISQ-IR) and (comprehensive PROMs) the Australian Pelvic Floor Questionnaire and the Electronic Personal Assessment Questionnaire-Pelvic-Floor (ePAQ-PF).

CONCLUSIONS

Multiple PROMs with robust psychometric properties are available. Some widely used PROMs have weak evidence. Formal recommendations on which English-language PROMs to use within clinical practice and research in urogynaecology are required.

Enhanced recovery pathways and patient-reported outcome measures in gynaecological oncology

Comprehensive peri-operative care for women with gynaecological malignancy is essential to ensure optimal clinical outcomes and maximise patient experience through the continuum of care. Implementation of peri-operative enhanced recovery pathways in gynaecological oncology have been repeatedly shown to improve postoperative recovery, decrease complications and reduce healthcare costs. With increasing emphasis being placed on patient-centred care in the current healthcare environment, incorporation of patient-reported outcome data collection and analysis within the enhanced recovery pathway as part of quality measurement is not only useful, but necessary. Inclusion of patient-reported outcome enhanced recovery pathway evaluation enables clinicians to capture authentic patient-reported parameters such as subtle symptoms, changes in function and multiple dimensions of well-being, directly from the source. These data guide the treatment course by encouraging shared decision-making between the patient and clinicians and provide the necessary foundation for ongoing peri-operative quality improvement efforts. Elements of the gynaecological oncology enhanced recovery pathway are divided into five phases of care: pre-admission; pre-operative; intra-operative; postoperative; and post-discharge. The development process starts with detailing each step of the patient's journey in all five phases, then identifying stakeholder groups responsible for care at each of these phases and assembling a multidisciplinary team including: gynaecologists; anaesthetists; nurses; nutritionists; physical therapists; and others, to provide input into the institutional pathway. To practically integrate patient-reported outcomes into an enhanced recovery pathway, a validated measurement tool should be incorporated into the peri-operative workflow. The ideal tool should be concise to facilitate longitudinal assessments by the clinical staff.

Validation of the QLQ-EN24 instrument for the assessment of health-related quality of life for women with endometrial cancer in México

PURPOSE

The impact of disease activity or treatments on health-related quality of life (HRQL) is crucial in Oncology, but adequate instruments for this assessment are scarce. Our aim is to validate the Mexican-Spanish version of the QLQ-EN24 questionnaire to evaluate HRQL in women with endometrial cancer (EC).

METHODS

This is a prospective study of Mexican women with EC, attending a single cancer centre, who responded the QLQ-C30 and QLQ-EN24 instruments; usual psychometric analysis were performed as well as the association of HRQL scales and relevant clinical data. Correlation analysis was performed with the Spearman's method, reliability analysis with the Cronbach's alpha, known-group comparisons with the Kruskal-Wallis test, and survival analysis with the Kaplan-Meier method and Log-rank test.

RESULTS

One hundred and eighty-nine women with EC were assessed. Most functional scales reported high values, and most symptom scales, low. Questionnaire compliance rates were high and internal consistency tests demonstrated adequate convergent and divergent validity. Cronbach's α coefficients of the five multi-item scales the QLQ-EN24 instruments were from 0.659 to 0.887. Scales of the QLQ-C30 and QLQ-EN24 instruments distinguished among clinically distinct groups of patients, particularly based on serum albumin levels. The Urological symptoms, Gastrointestinal symptoms, Body image, Pelvic pain and Taste change scales were significantly associated with OS.

CONCLUSION

The Mexican-Spanish version of the QLQ-EN24 questionnaire is reliable and valid for the assessment of HRQL in patients with EC and can be broadly used in multi-national clinical trials. However, conclusions derived from scales evaluating sexual function should be handled carefully.

Quality of life in long term survivors of cervical cancer: A cross sectional study

Background

Quality of life (QOL) is an important parameter to evaluate and modify in patients treated for cervical cancer as long-term survival is excellent in early-stage and reasonably good in locally advanced stage compared to other solid cancers. The aim of the study was the cross sectional evaluation of the quality of life in survivors completing at least 3 years of follow-up after curative therapy for cervical cancer at a tertiary cancer institute.

Methods

All patients, following primary curative treatment with no evidence of recurrence and completing at least 3 years follow-up, were assessed for QOL using the European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) Quality of Life Questionnaire (QLQ)-30 and its cervical cancer module (Cx24). Patients were subdivided based on the modality of treatment. Analysis was done using Kruskal-Wallis and Mann-Whitney U test.

Results

One hundred seven patients were analyzed out of the 113 patients initially included. Treated patients showed good global QOL (mean value: 84.07) and functional scores (covering all domains). In the cervical cancer module, sexual activity, sexual enjoyment, and sexual function were low in the majority of the respondents. Chronic lymphedema, symptom experience, and sexual worry were significant across all the treatment arms.

Conclusion

Cervical cancer survivors have an overall good QOL. However, certain concerns related to the sexual quality of life, symptom experience, and chronic lymphedema need to be addressed appropriately.

Quality of life and associated factors after surgical treatment of vulvar cancer by vulvar field resection (VFR)

Purpose

To investigate patient-reported quality of life (QoL) and associated factors in vulvar cancer patients treated surgically by vulvar field resection (VFR) without adjuvant radiation.

Methods

We retrospectively evaluated patient-reported QoL as part of the prospective monocentric VFR trial using the 30-item European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer quality-of-life questionnaire (EORTC QLQ-C30) supplemented by a question assessing sexual activity. All patients had been treated by VFR and no participant had received adjuvant radiotherapy. The gynecologic cancer lymphedema questionnaire (GCLQ) was used to determine the presence of lymphedema. Structured telephone interviews were conducted to assess postoperative sequelae and long-term complications.

Results

Forty-three VFR patients (median age 63 years) were available for QoL assessment. Thirty-eight (88%) had received inguinal lymph-node dissection in addition to VFR. Mean global QoL (global health status) rating among all patients was 66.1 (± 25.5) on a scale from 0 to 100 with higher scores indicating better QoL. Higher GCLQ scores were significantly associated with lower global QoL scores (Spearman's rank correlation ρ =− 0.7, p < 0.0001). The presence of preoperative co-morbidities and postoperative wound-healing complications were also linked to reduced QoL (p < 0.01 for both). In a multivariable regression model, there was a significant interaction between preoperative co-morbidities and wound-healing complications with regard to global QoL (p < 0.05).

Conclusion

Overall, VFR patients exhibit good quality of life postoperatively. The presence of lymphedema, wound-healing complications, and preoperative morbidities were associated with reduced QoL. Prospective longitudinal studies have to confirm our findings in the future.

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (10.1007/s00404-020-05584-5) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Proactive use of PROMs in ovarian cancer survivors: a systematic review

INTRODUCTION

The use of patient reported outcome measures (PROMs) has increased during the past decade, and the focus on how to use them has resulted in a more proactive application. Studies have shown that proactive use of PROMs during treatment improves patient-clinician communication, leads to better symptom management and may prolong survival among advanced cancer patients. Ovarian cancer is a serious disease in which the majority of patients experience recurrence during the follow-up period and suffer from a number of severe symptoms from underlying disease. This systematic review was conducted to assess the evidence on the proactive use of PROMs as a dialogue tool during follow-up of ovarian cancer patients.

RESULTS

The following databases were searched for relevant literature; PubMed, EMBASE, CINAHL, and the Cochrane Library. The search was conducted in April 2019 without any filters or limits. A total of 643 publications were identified, and 48 studies were found to be potentially eligible. Of the 48 papers, none met the final inclusion criterion of using PROMs proactively as a dialogue tool for ovarian cancer patients during follow-up.

CONCLUSION

Studies have shown that PROMs can identify otherwise undetected symptoms. Using PROMs proactively during the consultation has been shown to improve symptom management for patients with some other types of cancer. However, we found no studies that had examined the proactive use of PROMs during follow-up of ovarian cancer patients. Future studies should evaluate if the proactive use of PROMs could facilitate a more individualized and more effective follow-up program tailored to the ovarian cancer patient's needs and preferences.

A Systematic Review of Health-Related Quality of Life Reporting in Ovarian Cancer Phase III Clinical Trials: Room to Improve

BACKGROUND

Epithelial ovarian cancer (OC) remains a significant cause of morbidity and mortality for women worldwide. Patients may experience a multitude of disease- and treatment-related symptoms that can impact quality of life (QOL) and should be measured and reported in clinical trials. This systematic review investigated the adequacy of reporting of QOL in randomized phase III trials in OC in both the first-line and recurrent disease setting.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A systematic review of MEDLINE and EMBASE identified randomized clinical trials of systemic therapy in OC from 1980 to 2014. The adequacy of reporting QOL was evaluated with respect to adherence to established guidelines on reporting QOL in clinical trials and the recent recommendations on the inclusion of patient-reported outcomes in clinical trials from the Fifth Ovarian Cancer Consensus Conference.

RESULTS

Of 3,247 abstracts, 35 studies, including 24,664 patients, met inclusion criteria. Twenty-two trials (63%) were in the first-line setting, with 13 (37%) in the recurrent setting. The inclusion of QOL assessments increased from 2% (1980s) to 62% (2010+). Quality of life was a co-primary endpoint in only one trial.Minimal clinically important differences in QOL were defined in eight trials (23%), with results included in the abstract in 37% and article in 86%. Compliance was reported in 26 trials (74%), with 13 trials (37%) reporting specifically how they dealt with missing data. Only seven trials reported the reasons for missing data (20%).Group results were published in 29 trials (83%), with 6 (17%) reporting individual patient results. Results were more commonly reported as a mean overall score (21 trials; 60%), with specific domain scores in only 9 trials (26%). No studies reported QOL beyond progression or included predefined context-specific endpoints based on objectives of treatment (i.e., palliation/cure/maintenance) and the patient population. Duration of benefit of palliative chemotherapy was reported in only one study.

CONCLUSION

Inclusion and reporting of QOL as a trial endpoint has improved in phase III trials in OC, but there are still significant shortfalls that need to be addressed in future trials.

IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE

The impact of treatment on quality of life (QOL) is an important consideration in patients with ovarian cancer for whom treatment is often given with palliative intent. Both the disease and treatment impact a patient's QOL and require careful evaluation in clinical trials. Matching the QOL questions to the patient population of interest is critical. Similar rigor to that used to assess progression-based endpoints is essential to guide clinical decisions. This systematic review demonstrated that although the inclusion and reporting of QOL as a trial endpoint has improved in phase III trials there are still significant shortfalls that need to be addressed in future trials.

OV21/PETROC: a randomized Gynecologic Cancer Intergroup phase II study of intraperitoneal versus intravenous chemotherapy following neoadjuvant chemotherapy and optimal debulking surgery in epithelial ovarian cancer

Background

The purpose of this multistage, adaptively, designed randomized phase II study was to evaluate the role of intraperitoneal (i.p.) chemotherapy following neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NACT) and optimal debulking surgery in women with epithelial ovarian cancer (EOC).

Patients and methods

We carried out a multicenter, two-stage, phase II trial. Eligible patients with stage IIB-IVA EOC treated with platinum-based intravenous (i.v.) NACT followed by optimal (<1 cm) debulking surgery were randomized to one of the three treatment arms: (i) i.v. carboplatin/paclitaxel, (ii) i.p. cisplatin plus i.v./i.p. paclitaxel, or (iii) i.p. carboplatin plus i.v./i.p. paclitaxel. The primary end point was 9-month progressive disease rate (PD9). Secondary end points included progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS), toxicity, and quality of life (QOL).

Results

Between 2009 and 2015, 275 patients were randomized; i.p. cisplatin containing arm did not progress beyond the first stage of the study after failing to meet the pre-set superiority rule. The final analysis compared i.v. carboplatin/paclitaxel (n = 101) with i.p. carboplatin, i.v./i.p. paclitaxel (n = 102). The intention to treat PD9 was lower in the i.p. carboplatin arm compared with the i.v. carboplatin arm: 24.5% (95% CI 16.2% to 32.9%) versus 38.6% (95% CI 29.1% to 48.1%) P = 0.065. The study was underpowered to detect differences in PFS: HR PFS 0.82 (95% CI 0.57-1.17); P = 0.27 and OS HR 0.80 (95% CI 0.47-1.35) P = 0.40. The i.p. carboplatin-based regimen was well tolerated with no reduction in QOL or increase in toxicity compared with i.v. administration alone.

Conclusion

In women with stage IIIC or IVA EOC treated with NACT and optimal debulking surgery, i.p. carboplatin-based chemotherapy is well tolerated and associated with an improved PD9 compared with i.v. carboplatin-based chemotherapy.

Clinical trial number

clinicaltrials.gov, NCT01622543.

OV21/PETROC: a randomized Gynecologic Cancer Intergroup phase II study of intraperitoneal versus intravenous chemotherapy following neoadjuvant chemotherapy and optimal debulking surgery in epithelial ovarian cancer

Background

The purpose of this multistage, adaptively, designed randomized phase II study was to evaluate the role of intraperitoneal (i.p.) chemotherapy following neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NACT) and optimal debulking surgery in women with epithelial ovarian cancer (EOC).

Patients and methods

We carried out a multicenter, two-stage, phase II trial. Eligible patients with stage IIB-IVA EOC treated with platinum-based intravenous (i.v.) NACT followed by optimal (<1 cm) debulking surgery were randomized to one of the three treatment arms: (i) i.v. carboplatin/paclitaxel, (ii) i.p. cisplatin plus i.v./i.p. paclitaxel, or (iii) i.p. carboplatin plus i.v./i.p. paclitaxel. The primary end point was 9-month progressive disease rate (PD9). Secondary end points included progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS), toxicity, and quality of life (QOL).

Results

Between 2009 and 2015, 275 patients were randomized; i.p. cisplatin containing arm did not progress beyond the first stage of the study after failing to meet the pre-set superiority rule. The final analysis compared i.v. carboplatin/paclitaxel (n = 101) with i.p. carboplatin, i.v./i.p. paclitaxel (n = 102). The intention to treat PD9 was lower in the i.p. carboplatin arm compared with the i.v. carboplatin arm: 24.5% (95% CI 16.2% to 32.9%) versus 38.6% (95% CI 29.1% to 48.1%) P = 0.065. The study was underpowered to detect differences in PFS: HR PFS 0.82 (95% CI 0.57-1.17); P = 0.27 and OS HR 0.80 (95% CI 0.47-1.35) P = 0.40. The i.p. carboplatin-based regimen was well tolerated with no reduction in QOL or increase in toxicity compared with i.v. administration alone.

Conclusion

In women with stage IIIC or IVA EOC treated with NACT and optimal debulking surgery, i.p. carboplatin-based chemotherapy is well tolerated and associated with an improved PD9 compared with i.v. carboplatin-based chemotherapy.

Clinical trial number

clinicaltrials.gov, NCT01622543.

Measuring health-related quality of life in cervical cancer patients: a systematic review of the most used questionnaires and their validity

Background

Data on health-related quality of life (HRQoL) is paramount for shared and evidence based decision-making. Since an overview of cervical cancer HRQoL tools and their validity appears to be lacking, we performed a systematic review on usage of disease specific HRQoL instruments in cervical cancer patients and their psychometric properties to identify the most suitable cervical cancer specific HRQoL tool.

Methods

We searched Pubmed, EMBASE and PsycINFO from inception up to 18 October 2016 for studies on quality of life in cervical cancer patients. Data extraction and HRQoL identification was performed by two independent reviewers. Validation studies of the identified cervical cancer specific HRQoL tools were retrieved and assessed on psychometric properties using the COSMIN checklist. All used cervical cancer specific HRQoL instruments were scored and ranked according to their psychometric properties.

Results

We included 156 studies (20,690 patients) and identified 31 HRQoL tools. The EORTC QLQ-CX24 (35 studies; 5,556 patients) and FACT-Cx (22 studies; 4,224 patients) were the only cervical cancer specific tools.

The EORTC QLQ-CX24 had 4 out of 9 positive rated psychometric properties; internal consistency, content and construct validity, and agreement. Criterion validity, reliability, and interpretability scored doubtful. Responsiveness and floor- and ceiling effects were not reported. The FACT-Cx had 2 out of 9 positive rated psychometric properties; internal consistency and agreement. Content validity, reliability, and interpretability scored doubtful while criterion and construct validity scored negative. Responsiveness and floor- and ceiling effects were not reported.

Conclusion

The validity of the often used EORTC QLQ-CX24 questionnaire for cervical cancer patients remains uncertain as 5 out of 9 psychometric properties were doubtful or not reported in current literature. Cervical cancer specific HRQoL tools should therefore always be used in conjunction with validated generic cancer HRQoL tools until proper validity has been proven, or a more valid tool has been developed.

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s12874-016-0289-x) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Electronic patient-reported outcomes from home in patients recovering from major gynecologic cancer surgery: A prospective study measuring symptoms and health-related quality of life

PURPOSE

We previously reported on the feasibility of a Web-based system to capture patient-reported outcomes (PROs) in the immediate postoperative period. The purpose of this study was to update the experience of these patients and assess patient and provider satisfaction and feedback regarding the system.

METHODS

This is a prospective cohort study of patients scheduled to undergo laparotomy for presumed gynecologic malignancy. Patients completed a Web-based Symptom Tracking and Reporting (STAR) questionnaire preoperatively and weekly during a 6-week postoperative period. Email alerts were sent to study nurses when concerning patient responses were entered. The patient and the nurse assessments of STAR's usefulness were measured via an exit survey.

RESULTS

The study enrolled 96 eligible patients. Of these, 71 patients (74%) completed at least four of seven total sessions. Of the patients who completed the exit satisfaction survey, 98% found STAR easy to use; 84% found it useful; and 82% would recommend it to other patients. Despite positive feedback from patients, clinical personnel found that the STAR system increased their current workload without enhancing patient care.

CONCLUSIONS

Application of an electronic program for PROs in those recovering from major gynecologic cancer surgery is feasible, and acceptable to most patients. While most clinicians did not find STAR clinically helpful, the majority of patients reported a positive experience with the system and would recommend its use. The program helped many patients feel more empowered in their postoperative recovery.