Despite the high prevalence of insomnia in patients with advanced cancer, there are no randomized controlled trials on pharmacological interventions for insomnia in this group of patients. A variety of pharmacological agents is recommended to manage sleep disturbance for insomnia in the general population, but their efficacy and safety in adults with advanced cancer are not established. Thus, there is a need to evaluate the effectiveness of medications for insomnia in order to improve the evidence in patients with advanced cancer. One of the most used sleep medications at present in patients with cancer is zopiclone.

Objective or purpose To develop and test a patient-reported outcome measure for assessing health-related quality of life (HRQOL) in surgically amenable epiphora. Design Questionnaire development and validation study. Participants 201 patients with a cause of epiphora amenable to surgical intervention, recruited across three independent centres. Methods, intervention or testing The watery eye quality of life (WEQOL) questionnaire was developed and refined according to defined psychometric standards. Both surgical and non-surgical participants completed WEQOL at baseline and follow-up (>3 months), along with the Lacrimal Symptom Questionnaire (Lac-Q), RAND Short Form Health Survey (SF-36) and Glasgow Benefit Inventory (GBI). Convergent validity of WEQOL was evaluated according to correlation ( R > 0.40) with each of these additional tests. Responsiveness of WEQOL to intervention was evaluated according to patient-reported success. Test-retest reliability was assessed by the Bland–Altman method and intraclass correlation (ICC) in a subset of 64 participants at baseline. Main outcome measures WEQOL construct validity, responsiveness and test-retest reliability. Results WEQOL was moderately correlated ( R > 0.4) with the Lac-Q and several subscales of the SF-36 (physical role limitation, social, emotional role limitation and emotional well-being). A stronger correlation was found between the change in WEQOL at follow-up and GBI ( R = 0.61). An appropriate graded response was found with a significant change in WEQOL score being observed in patients reporting successful (−28%, p < 0.0001) and partially successful surgery (−6%, p = 0.04), but not in those reporting unsuccessful surgery (+2%, p = 0.9). High test-retest reliability was observed (ICC = 0.93). Conclusions The WEQOL questionnaire has been developed systematically according to modern psychometric standards and has been designed to evaluate the quality of life in patients with epiphora that is of a surgically amenable cause. In this study, it has demonstrated appropriate test-retest reliability, responsiveness and construct validity.

Background Few studies have investigated the content of interventions provided in early specialised palliative care (SPC). Objectives To characterise the content of interventions delivered in early SPC in the Danish Palliative Care Trial (DanPaCT), a multicentre trial with six participating sites. Methods A retrospective qualitative and quantitative study coding all new interventions initiated by the palliative teams and documented in the medical records during the 8-week study period of DanPaCT. Interventions were categorised according to (a) symptom/problem prompting the intervention, (b) type of intervention and (c) professional(s) providing the intervention. Results In total, 145 patients were randomised to the SPC teams. According to the medical records, patients received a median of 3.5 (range 0-22) new interventions in the 8-week intervention-period from the palliative teams. For 24 (18%) of the patients there was no documented interventions in the medical records. The most frequent symptom/problems treated were pain, (100 interventions; 20% of interventions given) and impaired physical function (62; 13% of interventions given). The most frequent type of intervention was pharmacological (232; 42% of interventions given). Conclusions This is one of the first studies to meticulously investigate the content of interventions documented in the medical records for patients receiving early SPC. Diverse symptoms were treated with many different interventions. However, a relatively low number of interventions were documented. This may explain the lack of effect in DanPaCT but also questions whether all interventions were adequately documented

BACKGROUND:Targeted therapies (TTs) have revolutionised cancer treatment with their enhanced specificity of action. Compared with conventional therapies, TTs are delivered over a longer period and often have unusual symptom profiles. Patient-reported outcome measures such as symptom side-effect lists need to be developed in a time-efficient manner to enable a rapid and full evaluation of new treatments and effective clinical management OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to develop a set of TT-related symptoms and identify the optimal method for developing symptom lists.PATIENTS AND METHODS:Symptoms from TT treatment in the context of Chronic Myeloid Leukaemia (CML), HER2-positive breast cancer, or Gastrointestinal Stromal Tumours (GIST) were identified through literature reviews, interviews with healthcare professionals (HCPs) and patients, and patient focus groups. The symptom set was then pilot tested in patients across the three cancer diagnoses: The number of items derived from each source (literature, patients, or HCPs) were compared.RESULTS:A total of 316 patients and 86 HCPs from 16 countries participated. An initial set of 209 symptoms was reduced to 61 covering 12 symptom categories. Patient interviews made the greatest contribution to the item set.CONCLUSIONS:Symptom lists should be created based on input from patients. The item set described will be applicable to the assessment of new TTs, and in monitoring treatment.

Purpose Although corticosteroids are frequently used in patients with advanced cancer, few studies have examined the impact of these drugs on patient-reported sleep. We aimed to examine the short-term impact of methylprednisolone on patient-reported sleep in patients with advanced cancer. Methods Patient-reported sleep was a predefined secondary outcome in a prospective, randomized, placebo-controlled, double-blind trial that evaluated the analgesic efficacy of corticosteroids in advanced cancer patients (18+), using opioids, and having pain ≥ 4 past 24 h (NRS 0–10). Patients were randomized to the methylprednisolone group with methylprednisolone 16 mg × 2/day or placebo for 7 days. The EORTC QLQ-C30 (0–100) and the Pittsburgh Sleep Quality Index questionnaire (PSQI) (0–21) were used to assess the impact of corticosteroids on sleep at baseline and at day 7. Results Fifty patients were randomized of which 25 were analyzed in the intervention group and 22 in the control group. Mean age was 64 years, mean Karnofsky performance status was 67 (SD 13.3), 51% were female, and the mean oral daily morphine equivalent dose was 223 mg (SD 222.77). Mean QLQ-C30 sleep score at baseline was 29.0 (SD 36.7) in the methylprednisolone group and 24.2 (SD 27.6) in the placebo group. At day 7, there was no difference between the groups on QLQ-C30 sleep score (methylprednisolone 20.3 (SD 32.9); placebo 28.8 (SD 33.0), p = 0.173). PSQI showed similar results. Conclusions Methylprednisolone 16 mg twice daily for 7 days had no impact on patient-reported sleep in this cohort of patients with advanced cancer. Trial registration Clinical trial information NCT00676936 (13.05.2008)

Purpose To ensure that observed differences in the scores of the European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Questionnaire Core 30 (EORTC QLQ-C30) reflect actual differences in health-related quality of life (HRQoL) rather than measurement bias, measurement invariance needs to be established. We investigated the assumption of measurement invariance of the EORTC QLQ-C30 in patients with hematological malignancies across age, sex, comorbidity, disease type, and time. Methods We used a large database of patients with hematological malignancies, which included HRQoL data collected with the EORTC QLQ-C30. We used the structural equation modeling approach to test for measurement (metric and scalar) invariance across groups (age, sex, comorbidity, disease) and time (baseline, 1 month and 2 month follow-up). Longitudinal invariance was examined in a subgroup of patients diagnosed with myelodysplastic syndromes. Results Confirmatory factor analyses demonstrated full measurement invariance for age and comorbidity and over time, while support for partial scalar invariance was obtained for sex and disease. Violations of invariance for sex were observed for items of the physical functioning scale and the emotional functioning scale, while for disease type, violations of invariance were observed for items of the physical functioning scale, emotional functioning scale, and the cognitive functioning scale. Conclusions Our findings support measurement invariance of the EORTC QLQ-C30 in a large sample of patients with hematological malignancies. The results showed that the number of non-invariant items was negligible, suggesting that this questionnaire is a valid and robust measurement tool in patients with hematological malignancies, also for comparisons across groups and time.

Because depressive symptoms are a part of health-related quality-of-life (HRQOL) measures, measures of depression will be empirically associated with HRQOL. We discuss examples of published research where authors ignored or did not fully account for overlap between depressive symptom and HRQOL measures. Future researchers need to recognize when their models include conceptually similar variables on the same side or both sides of the equation. This awareness will lead to more accurate conclusions about the prognostic value of depression and other HRQOL measures for health care utilization, mortality, and other outcomes. It will also result in fewer incorrect claims about the effect of depression on HRQOL.

ObjectivesPatient-reported outcome (PRO) measurements used in cancer research can assess a number of health domains. Our primary objective was to investigate which broad types of PRO domains (namely, functional health, symptoms, and global quality of life [QoL]) most frequently yielded significant differences between treatments in randomized controlled trials (RCTs).MethodsA total of 229 RCTs published between January 2004 and February 2019, conducted on patients diagnosed with the most common solid malignancies and assessed using the European Organization for the Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) Quality of Life Questionnaire (QLQ)-C30, were considered. Studies were identified systematically using literature searches in key electronic databases. Unlike other PRO measurements typically used in RCTs, the scoring algorithm of the multidimensional EORTC QLQ-C30 allowed us to clearly distinguish the 3 broad types of PRO domains.ResultsIn total, 134 RCTs (58.5%) reported statistically significant differences between treatment arms for at least 1 of the QLQ-C30 domains. Most frequently, differences were reported for 2 or all 3 broad types of PRO domains (78 of 134 trials; 58.2%). In particular, 35 trials (26.1%) found significant differences for symptoms, functional health, and global QoL, 24 trials (17.9%) for symptoms and functional health, 11 trials (8.2%) for functional health and global QoL, and 8 trials (6.0%) for symptoms and global QoL. The likelihood of finding a statistically significant difference between treatment arms was not associated with key study characteristics, such as study design (ie, open-label vs blinded trials) and industry support.ConclusionsOur findings emphasize the importance of a multidimensional PRO assessment to most comprehensively capture the overall burden of therapy from the patients’ standpoint.

Purpose Half of the 21-item Minnesota Living with Heart Failure Questionnaire (MLHFQ) response categories are labeled (0 = No, 1 = Very little, 5 = Very much) and half are not (2, 3, and 4). We hypothesized that the unlabeled response options would not be more likely to be chosen at some place along the scale continuum than other response options and, therefore, not satisfy the monotonicity assumption of simple-summated scoring. Methods We performed exploratory and confirmatory factor analyses of the MLHFQ items in a sample of 1437 adults in the Better Effectiveness After Transition-Heart Failure study. We evaluated the unlabeled response options using item characteristic curves from item response theory-graded response models for MLHFQ physical and emotional health scales. Then, we examined the impact of collapsing response options on correlations of scale scores with other variables. Results The sample was 46% female; 71% aged 65 or older; 11% Hispanic, 22% Black, 54% White, and 12% other. The unlabeled response options were rarely chosen. The standard approach to scoring and scores obtained by collapsing adjacent response categories yielded similar associations with other variables, indicating that the existing response options are problematic. Conclusions The unlabeled MLHFQ response options do not meet the assumptions of simple-summated scoring. Further assessment of the performance of the unlabeled response options and evaluation of alternative scoring approaches is recommended. Adding labels for response options in future administrations of the MLHFQ should be considered.

Objectives Inclusion of patient-reported outcomes (PROs) in cancer randomised controlled trials (RCTs) may be particularly important for older patients. The objectives of this systematic review were to quantify the frequency with which older patients are included in RCTs with PROs and to evaluate the quality of PRO reporting in those trials. Methods All RCTs with PRO endpoints, published between January 2004 and February 2019, which included a patient sample with a mean/median age ≥70 years, were considered for this systematic review. The following cancer malignancies were considered: breast, colorectal, lung, prostate, gynaecological and bladder cancer. Quality of PRO reporting was evaluated using the International Society for Quality of Life Research–PRO standards. Studies meeting at least two-thirds of these criteria were considered to have high-quality PRO reporting. Results Of 649 RCTs identified with a PRO endpoint, only 72 (11.1%) included older patients. Of these, 35 trials (48.6%) were conducted in patients with metastatic/advanced disease. PROs were primary endpoints in 20 RCTs (27.8%). Overall survival was the most frequently reported clinical outcome in studies of patients with metastatic/advanced cancer (n=28, 80%). One-third of the RCTs (n=24, 33.3%) were considered to have high-quality PRO reporting. Overall, the largest prevalence of RCTs with high-quality PRO reporting was observed in prostate and colorectal cancers. Conclusions Our review indicates not only that PRO–RCT-based studies in oncology rarely include older patients but also that completeness of PRO reporting of many of them is often suboptimal.

Although patients with advanced cancer report poor sleep quality, few studies have assessed sleep quality with a combination of subjective and objective measures. We aimed to examine sleep quality in hospitalized patients with advanced cancer by combining patient-reported outcome-measures (PROMs) and polysomnography (PSG) or actigraphy. A one-night prospective observational study of sleep in hospitalized patients with metastatic cancer using WHO step III opioids was conducted. Total sleep time, sleep onset latency, number of awakenings, and wake after sleep onset were assessed by PROMs and actigraphy. Sleep quality was assessed by the Pittsburgh Sleep Quality Index (PSQI) (range; 0–21), where higher scores indicate worse sleep quality. Forty patients were monitored. Median age was 70, median oral morphine equivalent dose was 80 mg/24 h (10–1725), median Karnofsky Performance Score was 50 (20–90), and median time to death from inclusion was 38 days (4–319). Mean PSQI score was 6.5 (SD ± 3.4). PROMs and actigraphy of mean (SD) sleep onset latency were 46 (± 64) and 35 min (± 61), respectively, while mean time awake at night was 37 (± 35) and 40 min (± 21). PROMs and actigraphy differed on number of awakenings (mean 2 (± 1) vs. 24 (± 15), p ˂ 0.001). Bland-Altman plots showed large individual differences between PROMs and actigraphy. PSG was not feasible. PROMs and actigraphy documented poor sleep quality, but a lack of agreement across methods. The study demonstrates a need to improve assessment of sleep quality and treatment of sleep disturbance in hospitalized patients with advanced cancer near end of life.

e18217 Background: Inclusion of PROs in RCTs involving elderly cancer patients may be particularly important, as the elderly are often frail and vulnerable, and treatment decisions need to carefully balance potential burden against benefit. We aimed to determine how many RCTs involving elderly patients have included a PRO endpoint, and identified the most relevant PRO information available in this area. Methods: A systematic review in PubMed/Medline and Cochrane Library identified RCTs with PRO endpoint that enrolled a cancer sample (breast, colorectal, lung, prostate, gynaecological and bladder cancer) with a mean/ median age ≥70 years, published from January 2004 to June 2018. The quality of PRO reporting was evaluated using the ISOQOL-PRO recommended criteria. Two reviewers independently performed data extraction. RCTs meeting at least two-thirds of the recommended criteria were considered as “probably-robust” and therefore most likely to be able to inform patient care. Results: Out of the 610 RCTs with PRO endpoint identified, only 67 RCTs (11%) enrolled a sample that met the above criteria. In 19 RCTs (28.4%) PROs were the primary endpoint and 35 RCTs (52.2%) were conducted in a metastatic population. Less than one-third of these trials (n = 21) were considered as probably-robust. In 10 (47.6%) out of the 21 probably-robust RCTs, PROs favored the experimental arm and in 8 (38.1%) the arms did not differ. Overall survival (OS) was an endpoint in 13 of the probably-robust RCTs. In only 3 of these RCTs (23.1%) did OS improve in the experimental arm and in 10 (76.9%) there was no difference in OS between arms. In about half of the probably-robust trials evaluating OS (n = 7, 53.8%), PROs provided information that contrasted with survival findings. In two RCTs, OS improved in the experimental arm, while PROs either did not change between arms (n = 1) or favoured the control arm (n = 1). Conversely, in 5 RCTs (38.5%), OS did not differ between arms whereas PROs favoured the experimental arm. Conclusions: Among cancer RCTs including PROs, the proportion of those conducted in the elderly is low. However, PRO data may provide useful information for these type of patients and their clinicians.

e18218 Background: PRO endpoints are increasingly being used in cancer RCTs. However, the PRO assessment in such trials often suffers from serious methodological shortcomings, and the results seldom impact on clinical policy or practice. Methods: We performed a systematic review to identify RCTs with a PRO endpoint in breast, colorectal, lung, prostate, gynaecological and bladder cancer. A checklist score for quality of PRO reporting (ranging between 0-100), based on that of the International Society for Quality of Life Research (ISOQOL) and the CONSORT PRO extension, was computed for each RCT. Analyses were also conducted by type of PRO endpoint (primary versus secondary) and year of publication (i.e. before and after the publication of the CONSORT PRO extension). Results: We identified 610 RCTs with a total of 323,482 patients. PROs were most frequently used in RCTs of breast (N = 176), followed by lung (N = 123), prostate (N = 108), colorectal (N = 103), gynaecological (N = 83) and bladder (N = 17) cancer. Quality of PRO reporting (mean score: 56.4) was highest in RCTs conducted in prostate cancer (PCa) (Table). Regardless of cancer type, quality of reporting was typically higher in RCTs where PROs were primary endpoints. Quality of reporting was higher for RCTs published after the CONSORT PRO Extension (2013), with the exception of RCTs conducted in PCa, where quality was stable over time. Conclusions: PRO reporting of RCTs conducted in PCa has better quality than in the other cancer sites that were reviewed. Regardless of cancer site, quality of PRO reporting has improved after the publication of the CONSORT PRO Extension. [Table: see text]

OBJECTIVES:We investigated the validity of the recently developed European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Questionnaire Core 30 (EORTC QLQ-C30) summary score in patients with hematologic malignancies. Specifically, we evaluated the adequacy of a single-factor measurement model for the QLQ-C30, and its known-groups validity and responsiveness to change over time. METHODS:We used confirmatory factor analysis to test the single-factor model of the QLQ-C30, using baseline QLQ-C30 data (N = 2134). The QLQ-C30 summary score was compared to the original QLQ-C30 scales using general (age, sex, Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status, comorbidity) and disease-specific (red blood cell transfusion dependency) groups. Repeated measurements allowed us to investigate responsiveness to change in a subgroup of patients with acute myeloid leukemia. RESULTS:The single-factor model of the QLQ-C30 exhibited adequate fit in patients with hematologic malignancies. Known-group comparisons generally supported the construct validity of the summary score when using more general grouping variables (sociodemographics, broad clinical parameters). Nevertheless, when groups were formed on the basis of disease-specific variables (eg, transfusion dependency), the summary score performed less well the some of the original, separate scales of the QLQ-C30. CONCLUSION:Our findings provide support for the validity of the single-factor model of the EORTC QLQ-C30 in patients with hematologic malignancies. Specifically, the results suggest that the summary score can be used as an endpoint in this population when symptom- or other health domain-specific hypotheses are not available.

Objective: The European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) QLQ-C30 health-related quality of life questionnaire is one of the most widely used cancer-specific health-related quality of life questionnaires worldwide. General population norm data can facilitate the interpretation of QLQ-C30 data obtained from cancer patients. This study aimed at systematically collecting norm data from the general population to develop European QLQ-C30 norm scores and to generate comparable norm data for individual countries in Europe and North America. Methods: We collected QLQ-C30 data from the general population across 11 European Union (EU) countries, Russia, Turkey, Canada and United States (n >= 1000/country). Representative samples were stratified by sex and age groups (18-39, 40-49, 50-59, 60-69 and >= 70 years). After applying weights based on the United Nations population distribution statistics, we calculated QLQ-C30 domain scores to generate a 'European QLQ-C30 Norm' based on the EU countries. Further, we calculated QLQ-C30 norm scores for all 15 individual countries. Results: A total of 15,386 respondents completed the online survey. For the EU sample, most QLQ-C30 domains showed differences by sex/age, with men scoring somewhat better health than women, while age effects varied across domains. Substantially larger differences were seen in inter-country comparisons, with Austrian and Dutch respondents reporting consistently better health compared with British and Polish respondents. Conclusions: This study is the first to systematically collect EORTC QLQ-C30 general population norm data across Europe and North America applying a consistent data collection method across 15 countries. These new norm data facilitate valid intra-country as well as inter-country comparisons and QLQ-C30 score interpretation. (C) 2018 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Ltd. This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/).

Background: To optimise measurement precision, relevance to patients and flexibility, patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) should ideally be adapted to the individual patient/study while retaining direct comparability of scores across patients/studies. This is achievable using item banks and computerized adaptive tests (CATs). The EORTC QLQ-C30 is one of the most widely used PROMs in cancer research and clinical practice. Here we provide an overview of the research program to develop CAT versions of the QLQ-C(cid:1007)(cid:1004)(cid:859)(cid:400) 14 functional and symptom domains. Methods: The EORTC Quality of Life Group (cid:859)(cid:400) (cid:400)(cid:410)(cid:396)(cid:258)(cid:410)(cid:286)(cid:336)(cid:455) (cid:296)(cid:381)(cid:396) (cid:282)(cid:286)(cid:448)(cid:286)(cid:367)(cid:381)(cid:393)(cid:349)(cid:374)(cid:336) CAT item banks consists of: literature search to identify potential candidate items; formulation of new items compatible with the QLQ-C30 item style; expert evaluations and patient interviews; field-testing and psychometric analyses, including factor analysis, item response theory (IRT) calibration, and simulation of measurement properties. In addition, software for setting up, running, and scoring CAT has been developed. Results: Across 8 rounds of data collections, 9,782 patients were recruited from 12 countries for the field-testing. The four phases of development resulted in a total of 260 unique items across the 14 domains. Each item bank consists of 7-34 items. Psychometric evaluations indicated higher measurement precision and increased statistical power of the CAT measures compared to the QLQ-C30 scales. Using CAT, sample size requirements may be reduced by approximately 20-35% on average without loss of power. Conclusions: The QLQ-C30-CAT represents a more precise, powerful and flexible measurement system than the QLQ-C30

Early and integrated specialized palliative care is often recommended but has still only been investigated in relatively few randomized clinical trials. To investigate the effect of early specialized palliative care plus standard care versus standard care on the explorative outcomes in the Danish Palliative Care Trial (DanPaCT). We conducted a randomized multicentre, parallel-group clinical trial. Consecutive patients with metastatic cancer were included if they had symptoms or problems that exceeded a predefined threshold according to the European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Questionnaire (EORTC QLQ-C30). Outcomes were estimated as the differences between the intervention and the control groups in the change from baseline to the weighted mean of the 3- and 8-week follow-ups measured as areas under the curve. In total, 145 patients were randomized to early specialized palliative care plus standard care versus 152 to standard care only. Early specialized palliative care had no significant effect on any of the symptoms or problems. Of the 21 items addressing satisfaction, specialized palliative care improved the item ‘overall satisfaction with the help received from the health care system’ with 9 points (95% confidence interval 3.8 to 14.2, p = 0.0006) and three other items (all p < 0.05). In line with the analyses of the primary and secondary outcomes in DanPaCT, we did not find that specialized palliative care, as provided in DanPaCT, affected symptoms and problems. However, patients in the intervention group seemed more satisfied with the health care received than those in the standard care group. NCT01348048

Background & aims: Home parenteral nutrition-quality of life (HPN-QOL (c)) is a self-assessment tool for the measurement of QOL in patients on HPN. The aims of this study were: to re-assess the basic psychometric properties of the HPN-QOL (c) in a multinational sample of adult patients; to provide a description of QOL dimensions by short and long HPN treatment duration; to explore clinical factors potentially associated to QOL scores. Methods: Patients (n = 699) from 14 countries completed the HPN-QOL (c). The questionnaires were analysed to evaluate data completeness, convergent/discriminant validity and internal-consistency reliability. The association of overall QOL and HPN treatment duration as well as other clinical factors were investigated using multivariable linear regression models. Results: The analysis of the multitrait-scaling and internal consistency indicates a good fit with the questionnaire structure for most items. Item discriminant validity correlation was satisfactory and psychometric evaluation of the HPN-QOL (c) in the different English, French and Italian language patient sub-groups confirmed psychometric equivalence of the three questionnaire versions. The results of the multivariable linear regression showed that QOL scores were significantly associated with HPN duration (better in long-term), underlying disease (better in Crohn's disease and mesenteric ischaemia) and living status (worse in living alone) and, after adjusting for the other factors, with the number of days of HPN infusion per week. Conclusions: The HPN-QOL (c), is a valid tool for measurement of QOL in patients on HPN, to be used in the clinical practice as well as in research. (C) 2018 Elsevier Ltd and European Society for Clinical Nutrition and Metabolism. All rights reserved.