11
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Evaluating methodological quality of Prognostic models Including Patient-reported HeAlth outcomes iN oncologY (EPIPHANY): a systematic review protocol

      protocol

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          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

          While there is mounting evidence of the independent prognostic value of patient-reported outcomes (PROs) for overall survival (OS) in patients with cancer, it is known that the conduct of these studies may hold a number of methodological challenges. The aim of this systematic review is to evaluate the quality of published studies in this research area, in order to identify methodological and statistical issues deserving special attention and to also possibly provide evidence-based recommendations.

          Methods and analysis

          An electronic search strategy will be performed in PubMed to identify studies developing or validating a prognostic model which includes PROs as predictors. Two reviewers will independently be involved in data collection using a predefined and standardised data extraction form including information related to study characteristics, PROs measures used and multivariable prognostic models. Studies selection will be reported following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines, with data extraction form using fields from the Critical Appraisal and Data Extraction for Systematic Reviews of Prediction Modelling Studies (CHARMS) checklist for multivariable models. Methodological quality assessment will also be performed and will be based on prespecified domains of the CHARMS checklist. As a substantial heterogeneity of included studies is expected, a narrative evidence synthesis will also be provided.

          Ethics and dissemination

          Given that this systematic review will use only published data, ethical permissions will not be required. Findings from this review will be published in peer-reviewed scientific journals and presented at major international conferences. We anticipate that this review will contribute to identify key areas of improvement for conducting and reporting prognostic factor analyses with PROs in oncology and will lay the groundwork for developing future evidence-based recommendations in this area of research.

          Prospero registration number

          CRD42018099160.

          Related collections

          Most cited references20

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: found
          Is Open Access

          Patient reported outcomes: looking beyond the label claim

          The use of patient reported outcome scales in clinical trials conducted by the pharmaceutical industry has become more widespread in recent years. The use of such outcomes is particularly common for products developed to treat chronic, disabling conditions where the intention is not to cure but to ameliorate symptoms, facilitate functioning or, ultimately, to improve quality of life. In such cases, patient reported evidence is increasingly viewed as an essential complement to traditional clinical evidence for establishing a product's competitive advantage in the marketplace. In a commercial setting, the value of patient reported outcomes is viewed largely in terms of their potential for securing a labelling claim in the USA or inclusion in the summary of product characteristics in Europe. Although, the publication of the recent US Food and Drug Administration guidance makes it difficult for companies to make claims in the USA beyond symptom improvements, the value of these outcomes goes beyond satisfying requirements for a label claim. The European regulatory authorities, payers both in the US and Europe, clinicians and patients all play a part in determining both the availability and the pricing of medicinal products and all have an interest in patient-reported data that go beyond just symptoms. The purpose of the current paper is to highlight the potential added value of patient reported outcome data currently collected and held by the industry for these groups.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            Quality of patient-reported outcome reporting across cancer randomized controlled trials according to the CONSORT patient-reported outcome extension: A pooled analysis of 557 trials.

            The main objectives of this study were to identify the number of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) including a patient-reported outcome (PRO) endpoint across a wide range of cancer specialties and to evaluate the completeness of PRO reporting according to the Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials (CONSORT) PRO extension.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Is a patient's self-reported health-related quality of life a prognostic factor for survival in non-small-cell lung cancer patients? A multivariate analysis of prognostic factors of EORTC study 08975.

              The aim of this prognostic factor analysis was to investigate if a patient's self-reported health-related quality of life (HRQOL) provided independent prognostic information for survival in non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) patients. Pretreatment HRQOL was measured in 391 advanced NSCLC patients using the EORTC QLQ-C30 and the EORTC Lung Cancer module (QLQ-LC13). The Cox proportional hazards regression model was used for both univariate and multivariate analyses of survival. In addition, a bootstrap validation technique was used to assess the stability of the outcomes. The final multivariate Cox regression model retained four parameters as independent prognostic factors for survival: male gender with a hazard ratio (HR) = 1.32 (95% CI 1.03-1.69; P = 0.03); performance status (0 to 1 versus 2) with HR = 1.63 (95% CI 1.04-2.54; P = 0.032); patient's self-reported score of pain with HR= 1.11 (95% CI 1.07-1.16; P < 0.001) and dysphagia with HR = 1.12 (95% CI 1.04-1.21; P = 0.003). A 10-point shift worse in the scale measuring pain and dysphagia translated into an 11% and 12% increased in the likelihood of death respectively. A risk group categorization was also developed. The results suggest that patients' self-reported HRQOL provide independent prognostic information for survival. This finding supports the collection of such data in routine clinical practice.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Journal
                BMJ Open
                BMJ Open
                bmjopen
                bmjopen
                BMJ Open
                BMJ Publishing Group (BMA House, Tavistock Square, London, WC1H 9JR )
                2044-6055
                2018
                24 October 2018
                : 8
                : 10
                : e025054
                Affiliations
                [1 ] departmentData Center and Health Outcomes Research Unit , Italian Group for Adult Hematologic Diseases (GIMEMA) , Rome, Italy
                [2 ] departmentCentre for Statistics in Medicine , University of Oxford , Oxford, UK
                [3 ] departmentMethodology and Quality of Life in Oncology Unit (INSERM UMR 1098) , University Hospital of Besançon , Besançon, France
                Author notes
                [Correspondence to ] Dr Fabio Efficace; f.efficace@ 123456gimema.it
                Article
                bmjopen-2018-025054
                10.1136/bmjopen-2018-025054
                6224737
                30361409
                4a4855bf-b568-4371-bf6f-d7c4d51d5d01
                © Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2018. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.

                This is an open access article distributed in accordance with the Creative Commons Attribution Non Commercial (CC BY-NC 4.0) license, which permits others to distribute, remix, adapt, build upon this work non-commercially, and license their derivative works on different terms, provided the original work is properly cited, appropriate credit is given, any changes made indicated, and the use is non-commercial. See: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/.

                History
                : 27 June 2018
                : 31 August 2018
                : 20 September 2018
                Categories
                Research Methods
                Protocol
                1506
                1730
                Custom metadata
                unlocked

                Medicine
                patient-reported outcomes,prognosis,cancer,survival
                Medicine
                patient-reported outcomes, prognosis, cancer, survival

                Comments

                Comment on this article