Comparing Physician and Nurse Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group Performance Status (ECOG-PS) Ratings as Predictors of Clinical Outcomes in Patients with Cancer

BACKGROUND

The Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group Performance Status (ECOG-PS) scale is commonly used by physicians and nurses in oncology, as it correlates with cancer morbidity, mortality, and complications from chemotherapy and can help direct clinical decisions and prognostication. This retrospective cohort study aimed to identify whether ECOG-PS scores rated by oncologist versus nurses differ in their ability to predict clinical outcomes.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Over 19 months, 32 oncologists and 41 chemotherapy nurses from a single academic comprehensive cancer center independently scored ECOG-PS (range: 0-5) for a random sample of 311 patients with cancer receiving chemotherapy. Logistic regression models were fit to evaluate the ability of nurse and physician ECOG-PS scores, as well as the nurse-physician ECOG-PS score difference (nurse minus physician), to predict the occurrence of chemotherapy toxicity (CTCAE v4, grade ≥3) and hospitalizations within 1 month from ECOG-PS ratings, as well as 6-month mortality or hospice referrals.

RESULTS

Physician/nurse ECOG-PS agreement was 71% (Cohen's κ = 0.486, p < .0001). Nurse ECOG-PS scores had stronger odds ratio for 6-month mortality or hospice (odds ratio [OR], 3.29, p < .0001) than physician ECOG-PS scores (OR, 2.71, p = .001). Furthermore, ECOG-PS ratings by nurses, but not physicians, correlated with 1-month chemotherapy toxicity (OR, 1.44, p = .021) and 1-month hospitalizations (OR, 1.57, p = .041). Nurse-physician disagreement, but only when physicians gave "healthier" (lower) ratings, was also associated with worse outcomes (chemotherapy toxicity OR = 1.51, p = .045; 1-month hospitalization OR, 1.86, p = .037; 6-month mortality or hospice OR, 2.99, p < .0001).

CONCLUSION

Nurse ECOG-PS ratings seem more predictive of important outcomes than those of physicians, and physician-nurse disagreement in ECOG-PS ratings predicts worse outcomes; scoring by nurses may result in additional clinical benefit.

IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE

Nurse-rated Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group Performance Status (ECOG-PS) scores, compared with those rated by oncologists, better predicted hospitalizations and severe chemotherapy toxicity within 1 month from ECOG-PS assessment, as well as mortality or hospice referrals within 6 months. Physician-nurse disagreement in ECOG-PS scoring was associated with worse hospitalization, chemotherapy toxicity, and mortality and hospice referral rates. Rating performance statuses of patients with cancer by nurses instead or in addition to oncologists can result in additional clinical benefits, such as improved prognostication, as well as better informed clinical decision making regarding whether or not to administer chemotherapy, the need for additional supportive care, and goals of care discussions.

Wearable activity monitors in oncology trials: Current use of an emerging technology

BACKGROUND

Physical activity is an important outcome in oncology trials. Physical activity is commonly assessed using self-reported questionnaires, which are limited by recall and response biases. Recent advancements in wearable technology have provided oncologists with new opportunities to obtain real-time, objective physical activity data. The purpose of this review was to describe current uses of wearable activity monitors in oncology trials.

METHODS

We searched Pubmed, Embase, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials for oncology trials involving wearable activity monitors published between 2005 and 2016. We extracted details on study design, types of activity monitors used, and purpose for their use. We summarized activity monitor metrics including step counts, sleep and sedentary time, and time spent in moderate-to-vigorous activity.

RESULTS

We identified 41 trials of which 26 (63%) involved cancer survivors (post-treatment) and 15 trials (37%) involved patients with active cancer. Most trials (65%) involved breast cancer patients. Wearable activity monitors were commonly used in exercise (54%) or behavioral (29%) trials. Cancer survivors take between 4660 and 11,000 steps/day and those undergoing treatment take 2885 to 8300steps/day.

CONCLUSION

Wearable activity monitors are increasingly being used to obtain objective measures of physical activity in oncology trials. There is potential for their use to expand to evaluate and predict clinical outcomes such as survival, quality of life, and treatment tolerance in future studies. Currently, there remains a lack of standardization in the types of monitors being used and how their data are being collected, analyzed, and interpreted.

PRECIS

Recent advancements in wearable activity monitor technology have provided oncologists with new opportunities to monitor their patients' daily activity in real-world settings. The integration of wearable activity monitors into cancer care will help increase our understanding of the associations between physical activity and the prevention and management of the disease, in addition to other important cancer outcomes.

Telehealth in older adults with cancer in the United States: The emerging use of wearable sensors

As the aging and cancer populations in the world continue to increase, the need for complements to traditional geriatric assessments and the logical incorporation of fast and reliable telehealth tools have become interlinked. In the United States, studies examining the use of telehealth for chronic disease management have shown promising results in small groups. The implementation of health technology on a broader scale requires older adults to both accept and adapt such innovation into routine medical care. Though the commercial and recreational use of new technology has increased in older individuals, the transition into creating a smart and connected home that can interface with both patients and healthcare professionals is in its early phases. Current limitations include an inherent digital divide, as well as concerns regarding privacy, data volume, rapid change, cost and reimbursement. The emergence of low-cost, high-fidelity wearable sensors with a spectrum of clinical utility may be the key to increased use and adaptation by older adults. An opportunity to utilize wearable sensors for objective and real-time assessment of older patients with cancer for baseline functional status and treatment toxicity may be on the horizon.