A study demonstrating users’ preference for the adapted-REQUITE patient-reported outcome questionnaire over PRO-CTCAE <sup>®</sup> in patients with lung cancer

There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

Abstract

Introduction

The use of patient-reported outcomes (PROs) has been shown to enhance the accuracy of symptom collection and improve overall survival and quality of life. This is the first study comparing concordance and patient preference for two PRO tools: Patient-Reported Outcomes version of the Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (PRO-CTCAE ^®) and the adapted-REQUITE Lung Questionnaire.

Materials and Methods

Patients with lung cancer were recruited to the study while attending outpatient clinics at a tertiary cancer centre. Clinician-reported outcomes were generated through initial patient assessment with CTCAE v4.03. Participants then completed the PRO-CTCAE ^® and adapted-REQUITE questionnaires. Concordance between the 2 questionnaires was assessed by calculating Pearson correlation coefficient. PRO-CTCAE ^® and CTCAE concordance was demonstrated by calculating Pearson correlation coefficient from the linear predictors of an ordinal logistic regression. P-values were also calculated.

Results

Out of 74 patients approached, 65 provided written informed consent to participate in the study. 63 (96.9%) patients completed both PRO-CTCAE ^® and adapted-REQUITE questionnaires. Pearson correlation coefficient between PRO tools was 0.8-0.83 (p <.001). Correlation between CTCAE and PRO-CTCAE ^® ranged between 0.66-0.82 (p <.001). Adapted-REQUITE and CTCAE correlation was higher for all symptoms ranging between 0.79-0.91 (p <.001). Acceptable discrepancies within one grade were present in 96.8%-100% of symptom domains for REQUITE and in 92.1%-96.8% for all domains in the PRO-CTCAE ^®. 54% of the total participant cohort favored the adapted-REQUITE questionnaire due to reduced subjectivity in the questions and ease of use.

Conclusion

The adapted-REQUITE questionnaire has shown a superior correlation to clinician-reported outcomes and higher patient preference than the PRO-CTCAE ^®. The results of this study suggest the use of the REQUITE questionnaire for patients with lung cancer in routine clinical practice.

Related collections

Most cited references 39

Record: found
Abstract: found
Article: not found

Development and preliminary testing of the new five-level version of EQ-5D (EQ-5D-5L)

M. Herdman, C. Gudex, S Lloyd … (2011)

Purpose This article introduces the new 5-level EQ-5D (EQ-5D-5L) health status measure. Methods EQ-5D currently measures health using three levels of severity in five dimensions. A EuroQol Group task force was established to find ways of improving the instrument’s sensitivity and reducing ceiling effects by increasing the number of severity levels. The study was performed in the United Kingdom and Spain. Severity labels for 5 levels in each dimension were identified using response scaling. Focus groups were used to investigate the face and content validity of the new versions, including hypothetical health states generated from those versions. Results Selecting labels at approximately the 25th, 50th, and 75th centiles produced two alternative 5-level versions. Focus group work showed a slight preference for the wording ‘slight-moderate-severe’ problems, with anchors of ‘no problems’ and ‘unable to do’ in the EQ-5D functional dimensions. Similar wording was used in the Pain/Discomfort and Anxiety/Depression dimensions. Hypothetical health states were well understood though participants stressed the need for the internal coherence of health states. Conclusions A 5-level version of the EQ-5D has been developed by the EuroQol Group. Further testing is required to determine whether the new version improves sensitivity and reduces ceiling effects.

0 comments Cited 2391 times – based on 0 reviews      Review now

Bookmark

Record: found
Abstract: not found
Article: not found

Metastatic non-small cell lung cancer: ESMO Clinical Practice Guidelines for diagnosis, treatment and follow-up†

D Planchard, S Popat, K Kerr … (2018)

0 comments Cited 606 times – based on 0 reviews      Review now

Bookmark

Record: found
Abstract: found
Article: not found

Symptom Monitoring With Patient-Reported Outcomes During Routine Cancer Treatment: A Randomized Controlled Trial.

Ethan Basch, Allison M Deal, Mark Kris … (2016)

There is growing interest to enhance symptom monitoring during routine cancer care using patient-reported outcomes, but evidence of impact on clinical outcomes is limited.

0 comments Cited 519 times – based on 0 reviews      Review now

Bookmark

All references

Author and article information

Contributors

Thomas Jordan: URI : https://loop.frontiersin.org/people/2568263Role: Role: Role: Role: Role: Role: Role:

Thitikorn Nuamek: URI : https://loop.frontiersin.org/people/2507880Role: Role: Role:

Isabella Fornacon-Wood: Role: Role: Role:

Raffaele Califano: Role: Role: Role:

Joanna Coote: Role: Role: Role:

Margaret Harris: Role: Role: Role:

Hitesh Mistry: URI : https://loop.frontiersin.org/people/199892Role: Role: Role:

Paul Taylor: Role: Role: Role:

David Woolf: Role: Role: Role:

Corinne Faivre-Finn: URI : https://loop.frontiersin.org/people/1701479Role: Role: Role: Role: Role: Role: Role:

Journal

Journal ID (nlm-ta): Front Oncol

Journal ID (iso-abbrev): Front Oncol

Journal ID (publisher-id): Front. Oncol.

Title: Frontiers in Oncology

Publisher: Frontiers Media S.A.

ISSN (Electronic): 2234-943X

Publication date (Electronic): 10 April 2024

Publication date Collection: 2024

Volume: 14

Electronic Location Identifier: 1328871

Affiliations

[1] ¹ Division of Cancer Sciences, Faculty of Biology, Medicine, and Health, University of Manchester , Manchester, United Kingdom

[2] ² The Christie NHS Foundation Trust , Manchester, United Kingdom

[3] ³ Wrightington, Wigan and Leigh Teaching Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust , Wigan, United Kingdom

Author notes

Edited by: Suleman Atique, Norwegian University of Life Sciences, Norway

Reviewed by: Hosna Salmani, Iran University of Medical Sciences, Iran

Raphael Oladeji Akangbe, Lagos State Government, Nigeria

Carlos Gil Ferreira, Instituto Oncoclínicas, Brazil

Xing Wei, Sichuan Cancer Hospital, China

*Correspondence: Thitikorn Nuamek, thitikorn.nuamek@ 123456nhs.net

†These authors share first authorship

Article

DOI: 10.3389/fonc.2024.1328871

PMC ID: 11039780

PubMed ID: 38660130

SO-VID: 265ab30e-5340-4e05-947f-334313d9d583

License:

This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY). The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) and the copyright owner(s) are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.

History

Date received : 27 October 2023

Date accepted : 27 March 2024

Page count

Figures: 1, Tables: 5, Equations: 0, References: 43, Pages: 9, Words: 4824

Funding

The author(s) declare that no financial support was received for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

Custom metadata

section-in-acceptance Thoracic Oncology

ScienceOpen disciplines: Oncology & Radiotherapy

Keywords: patient reported outcome,ctcae,requite,quality of life,symptoms,lung cancer

Data availability:

ScienceOpen disciplines: Oncology & Radiotherapy

Keywords: patient reported outcome, ctcae, requite, quality of life, symptoms, lung cancer