Development of a Core Outcome Set for Basal Cell Carcinoma (BCC), Including Low-Risk and Advanced Tumors

BACKGROUND

There is variation in the outcomes reported in clinical studies of basal cell carcinoma (BCC). This can prevent effective meta-analyses to answer important clinical questions.

OBJECTIVE

To identify a recommended minimum set of core outcomes for BCC clinical trials.

METHODS

Patient and professional Delphi process to cull a long-list, culminating in a consensus meeting. To be provisionally accepted, outcomes needed to be deemed 'important' (score: 7-9, of maximum of 9) by 70% of each stakeholder group.

RESULTS

235 candidate outcomes identified via a systematic literature review and survey of key stakeholders were reduced to 74 that were rated by 100 health care professionals and patients in two Delphi rounds. 27 outcomes were provisionally accepted. The final core set of 5 agreed-upon outcomes after the consensus meeting was: complete response; persistent or serious adverse events; recurrence-free survival; quality of life; and patient satisfaction, including with cosmetic outcome.

LIMITATIONS

English-speaking patients and professionals rated outcomes extracted from English-language studies.

CONCLUSIONS

A core outcome set (COS) for basal cell carcinoma has been developed. Use of relevant measures may improve the utility of clinical research and the quality of therapeutic guidance available to clinicians.

Development of a core outcome set for cutaneous squamous cell carcinoma trials: identification of core domains and outcomes

BACKGROUND

The lack of uniformity in the outcomes reported in clinical studies of the treatment of cutaneous squamous cell carcinoma (cSCC) complicates efforts to compare treatment effectiveness across trials.

OBJECTIVES

To develop a core outcome set (COS), a minimum set of agreed-upon outcomes to be measured in all clinical trials of a given disease or outcome, for the treatment of cSCC.

METHODS

One hundred and nine outcomes were identified via a systematic literature review and interviews with 28 stakeholders. After consolidation of this long list, 55 candidate outcomes were rated by 19 physician and 10 patient stakeholders, in two rounds of Delphi exercises. Outcomes scored 'critically important' (score of 7, 8 or 9) by ≥ 70% of patients and ≥ 70% of physicians were provisionally included. At the consensus meeting, after discussion and voting of 44 international experts and patients, the provisional list was reduced to a final core set, for which consensus was achieved among all meeting participants.

RESULTS

A core set of seven outcomes was finalized at the consensus meeting: (i) serious or persistent adverse events, (ii) patient-reported quality of life, (iii) complete response, (iv) partial response, (v) recurrence-free survival, (vi) progression-free survival and (vii) disease-specific survival.

CONCLUSIONS

In order to increase the comparability of results across trials and to reduce selective reporting bias, cSCC researchers should consider reporting these core outcomes. Further work needs to be performed to identify the measures that should be reported for each of these outcomes.