Health-related quality of life in long-term head and neck cancer survivors: a comparison with general population norms

To examine the health-related quality of life (HRQL) in long-term head and neck (H&N) cancer survivors compared with general population norms. HRQL was assessed with three standardized questionnaires: the SF-36 Health Survey (Short Form 36) and the EORTC QLQ-C30 and QLQ-H&N35 (European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Questionnaire, -Core 30 and -Head and Neck 35 cancer module). Altogether 135 H&N cancer patients (mean age 62 years, 31% females) of 151 survivors (89% acceptance) from a longitudinal HRQL study (n = 232) were included 3 years after diagnosis. The H&N cancer patients' SF-36 scores did not differ significantly from those of an age- and sex-matched sample (n = 871) from the Swedish normative population, except on the role-physical functioning scale. On the other hand, treatment-related side-effects and disease-specific problems (e.g., swallowing, local pain and dry mouth) measured by the H&N cancer module were, with few exceptions, significantly worse than norm values. Gender comparisons revealed that female H&N cancer patients generally scored better than the norms on both the SF-36 and the EORTC QLQ-C30, while the male patients scored significantly worse on most SF-36 scales. Patients ≥65 years more often scored worse than the norm than did patients <65. Clinically relevant differences were found on the majority of SF-36 scales in comparison of tumour sites, however, comparisons of patients with small (stage I+II) versus advanced (stage III+IV) tumours revealed few differences. Three years after diagnosis H&N cancer patients still suffer significant functional limitations/problems related to their disease and its treatment but these problems do not generally affect their overall HRQL. Tumour stage no longer differentiates HRQL at 3 years, however, factors related to the patients' age, gender and location of the tumour appear to have bearing on their reported health status. © 2001 Cancer Research Campaign http://www.bjcancer.co

A prospective multicentre study in Sweden and Norway of mental distress and psychiatric morbidity in head and neck cancer patients

A Swedish/Norwegian head and neck cancer study was designed to assess prospectively the levels of mental distress and psychiatric morbidity in a heterogeneous sample of newly diagnosed head and neck cancer patients. A total of 357 patients were included. The mean age was 63 years, and 72% were males. The patients were asked to answer the HAD scale (the Hospital Anxiety and Depression scale) six times during 1 year. The number of possible or probable cases of anxiety or depression disorder was calculated according to standardized cut-offs. Approximately one-third of the patients scored as a possible or probable case of a major mood disorder at each measurement point during the study year. There were new cases of anxiety or depression at each time point. The anxiety level was highest at diagnosis, while depression was most common during treatment. Females were more anxious than males at diagnosis, and patients under 65 years of age scored higher than those over 65. Patients with lower performance status and more advanced disease reported higher levels of mental distress and more often scored as a probable or possible cases of psychiatric disorder. Our psychometric analyses supported the two-dimensional structure and stability of the HAD scale. The HAD scale seems to be the method of choice for getting valid information about the probability of mood disorder in head and neck cancer populations. The prevalence of psychiatric morbidity found in this study emphasizes the importance of improved diagnosis and treatment

Psychosocial interventions for patients with head and neck cancer.

BACKGROUND: A diagnosis of head and neck cancer, like many other cancers, can lead to significant psychosocial distress. Patients with head and neck cancer can have very specific needs, due to both the location of their disease and the impact of treatment, which can interfere with basic day-to-day activities such as eating, speaking and breathing. There is a lack of clarity on the effectiveness of the interventions developed to address the psychosocial distress experienced by patients living with head and neck cancer. OBJECTIVES: To assess the effectiveness of psychosocial interventions to improve quality of life and psychosocial well-being for patients with head and neck cancer. SEARCH METHODS: We searched the Cochrane Ear, Nose and Throat Disorders Group Trials Register; the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL); PubMed; EMBASE; CINAHL; Web of Science; BIOSIS Previews; Cambridge Scientific Abstracts; ICTRP and additional sources for published and unpublished trials. The date of the most recent search was 17 December 2012. SELECTION CRITERIA: We selected randomised controlled trials and quasi-randomised controlled trials of psychosocial interventions for adults with head and neck cancer. For trials to be included the psychosocial intervention had to involve a supportive relationship between a trained helper and individuals diagnosed with head and neck cancer. Outcomes had to be assessed using a validated quality of life or psychological distress measure, or both. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two review authors independently selected trials, extracted data and assessed the risk of bias, with mediation from a third author where required. Where possible, we extracted outcome measures for combining in meta-analyses. We compared continuous outcomes using either mean differences (MD) or standardised mean differences (SMD) and 95% confidence intervals (CI), with a random-effects model. We conducted meta-analyses for the primary outcome measure of quality of life and secondary outcome measures of psychological distress, including anxiety and depression. We subjected the remaining outcome measures (self esteem, coping, adjustment to cancer, body image) to a narrative synthesis, due to the limited number of studies evaluating these specific outcomes and the wide divergence of assessment tools used. MAIN RESULTS: Seven trials, totaling 542 participants, met the eligibility criteria. Studies varied widely on risk of bias, interventions used and outcome measures reported. From these studies, there was no evidence to suggest that psychosocial intervention promotes global quality of life for patients with head and neck cancer at end of intervention (MD 1.23, 95% CI -5.82 to 8.27) as measured by the European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Questionnaire (EORTC QLQ-C30). This quality of life tool includes five functional scales, namely cognitive, physical, emotional, social and role. There was no evidence to demonstrate that psychosocial intervention provides an immediate or medium-term improvement on any of these five functional scales. From the data available, there was no significant change in levels of anxiety (SMD -0.09, 95% CI -0.40 to 0.23) or depression following intervention (SMD -0.03, 95% CI -0.24 to 0.19). At present, there is insufficient evidence to refute or support the effectiveness of psychosocial intervention for patients with head and neck cancer. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: The evidence for psychosocial intervention is limited by the small number of studies, methodological shortcomings such as lack of power, difficulties with comparability between types of interventions and a wide divergence in outcome measures used. Future research should be targeted at patients who screen positive for distress and use validated outcome measures, such as the EORTC scale, as a measure of quality of life. These studies should implement interventions that are theoretically derived. Other shortcomings should be addressed in future studies, including using power calculations that may encourage multi-centred collaboration to ensure adequate sample sizes are recruited

Patient experiences of anxiety, depression and acute pain after surgery: a longitudinal perspective

This study sought to explore the impact of the psychological variables anxiety and depression, on pain experience over time following surgery. Eighty-five women having major gynaecological surgery were assessed for anxiety, depression and pain after surgery. To gain further understanding, 37 patients participated in a semi-structured taped telephone interview 4–6 weeks post-operatively. Pre-operative anxiety was found to be predictive of post-operative anxiety on Day 2, with patients who experienced high levels of anxiety before surgery continuing to feel anxious afterwards. By Day 4 both anxiety and depression scores increased as pain increased and one-third of the sample experienced levels of anxiety in psychiatric proportions whilst under one-third experienced similar levels of depression. These findings have significant implications for the provision of acute pain management after surgery. Future research and those managing acute pain services need to consider the multidimensional effect of acute pain and the interface between primary and secondary care

Self evaluation of communication experiences after laryngeal cancer – A longitudinal questionnaire study in patients with laryngeal cancer

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Aim of this longitudinal study was to investigate the sensitivity to change of the Swedish Self Evaluation of Communication Experiences after Laryngeal Cancer questionnaire (the S-SECEL), addressing communication dysfunction in patients treated for laryngeal cancer. Previous studies have highlighted the need for more specific questionnaires for this purpose.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>100 patients with Tis-T4 laryngeal cancer were included prior to treatment onset. Patients answered four questionnaires at six occasions during one year; the S-SECEL, the European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) Core Quality of Life Core Questionnaire (QLQ-C30) supplemented by the Head and Neck cancer module (QLQ-H&N35) and the Hospital Anxiety and Depression (HAD) scale. In addition, performance status was assessed. Differences within groups were tested with the Wilcoxon paired signed ranks test and between-group analyses were carried out using the Mann-Whitney <it>U </it>test. Magnitude of group differences was analyzed by means of effect sizes.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>The S-SECEL was well accepted with a response rate of 76%. Communication dysfunction increased at 1 month, followed by a continuous decrease throughout the year. Changes were statistically significant at most measurement, demonstrating the sensitivity of the S-SECEL to changes in communication over time. The S-SECEL and the EORTC QLQ-C30 with the QLQ-H&N35 demonstrated similar results; however the S-SECEL was more sensitive regarding communication dysfunction. The largest changes were found in the most diagnose specific items concerning voice and speech.</p> <p>Conclusion</p> <p>The S-SECEL was investigated in the largest Scandinavian longitudinal study concerning health-related quality of life (HRQL) in laryngeal cancer patients. The questionnaire was responsive to change and showed convergent results when compared to established HRQL questionnaires. Our findings also indicate that the S-SECEL could be a more suitable instrument than the EORTC QLQ-C30 with QLQ-H&N35 when measuring communication experiences in patients with laryngeal cancer; it is more sensitive, shorter and can be used on an individual basis. As a routine screening instrument the S-SECEL could be a valuable tool for identifying patients at risk for psychosocial problems and to help plan rehabilitation. It is therefore recommended for clinical use in evaluation of communication dysfunction for all patients with laryngeal cancer irrespective of treatment.</p

Long-term functional outcomes and the patient perspective following altered fractionation with concomitant boost for oropharyngeal cancer

With no long-term data available in published research to date, this study presents details of the swallowing outcomes as well as barriers to and facilitators of oral intake and weight maintenance at 2 years after altered fractionation radiotherapy with concomitant boost (AFRT-CB). Twelve patients with T1-T3 oropharyngeal cancer who received AFRT-CB were assessed at baseline, 6 months, and 2 years post-treatment for levels of dysphagia and salivary toxicity, food and fluid tolerance, functional swallowing outcomes, patient-reported function, and weight. At 2 years, participants were also interviewed to explore barriers and facilitators of oral intake. Outcomes were significantly worse at 2 years when compared to baseline for late toxicity, functional swallowing, and patient-rated physical aspects of swallowing. Most patients (83%) tolerated a full diet pretreatment, but the rate fell to 42% (remainder tolerated soft diets) at 2 years. Multiple barriers to oral intake that impacted on activity and participation levels were identified. Participants lost 11 kg from baseline to 2 years, which was not regained between 6 months and 2 years. Global, social, and emotional domains of patient-reported function returned to pretreatment levels. At 2 years post AFRT-CB, worsening salivary and dysphagia toxicity, declining functional swallowing, and multiple reported ongoing barriers to oral intake had a negative impact on participants' activity and participation levels relating to eating. These ongoing deficits contributed to significant deterioration in physical swallowing functioning determined by the MDADI. In contrast, patients perceived their broader functioning had improved at 2 years, suggesting long-term adjustment to ongoing swallowing deficits

Development of the EORTC QLQ-CAX24, a questionnaire for cancer patients with cachexia

Context Cachexia is commonly found in cancer patients and has profound consequences; yet there is only one questionnaire that examines the patient's perspective. Objective To report a rigorously developed module for patient self-reported impact of cancer cachexia. Methods Module development followed published guidelines. Patients from across the cancer cachexia trajectory were included. In Phase 1, health-related quality of life (HRQOL) issues were generated from a literature review and interviews with patients in four countries. The issues were revised based on patient and health care professional (HCP) input. In Phase 2, questionnaire items were formulated and translated into the languages required for Phase 3, the pilot phase, in which patients from eight countries scored the relevance and importance of each item, and provided qualitative feedback. Results A total of 39 patients and 12 HCPs took part in Phase 1. The literature review produced 68 HRQOL issues, with 22 new issues arising from the patient interviews. After patient and HCP input, 44 issues were formulated into questionnaire items in Phase 2. One hundred ten patients took part in Phase 3. One item was reworded, and 20 items were deleted as a consequence of patient feedback. Conclusions The QLQ-CAX24 is a cancer cachexia-specific questionnaire, comprising 24 items, for HRQOL assessment in clinical trials and practice. It contains five multi-item scales (food aversion, eating and weight-loss worry, eating difficulties, loss of control, and physical decline) and four single items

The impact of electronic versus paper-based data capture on data collection logistics and on missing scores in thyroid cancer patients.

The purpose of this study was to investigate the impact of the type of data capture on the time and help needed for collecting patient-reported outcomes as well as on the proportion of missing scores. In a multinational prospective study, thyroid cancer patients from 17 countries completed a validated questionnaire measuring quality of life. Electronic data capture was compared to the paper-based approach using multivariate logistic regression. A total of 437 patients were included, of whom 13% used electronic data capture. The relation between data capture and time needed was modified by the emotional functioning of the patients. Those with clinical impairments in that respect needed more time to complete the questionnaire when they used electronic data capture compared to paper and pencil (OR &lt;sub&gt;adj&lt;/sub&gt; 24.0; p = 0.006). This was not the case when patients had sub-threshold emotional problems (OR &lt;sub&gt;adj&lt;/sub&gt; 1.9; p = 0.48). The odds of having the researcher reading the questions out (instead of the patient doing this themselves) (OR &lt;sub&gt;adj&lt;/sub&gt; 0.1; p = 0.01) and of needing any help (OR &lt;sub&gt;adj&lt;/sub&gt; 0.1; p = 0.01) were lower when electronic data capture was used. The proportion of missing scores was equivalent in both groups (OR &lt;sub&gt;adj&lt;/sub&gt; 0.4, p = 0.42). The advantages of electronic data capture, such as real-time assessment and fewer data entry errors, may come at the price of more time required for data collection when the patients have mental health problems. As this is not uncommon in thyroid cancer, researchers need to choose the type of data capture wisely for their particular research question

The impact of electronic versus paper-based data capture on data collection logistics and on missing scores in thyroid cancer patients

Purpose The purpose of this study was to investigate the impact of the type of data capture on the time and help needed for collecting patient-reported outcomes as well as on the proportion of missing scores. Methods In a multinational prospective study, thyroid cancer patients from 17 countries completed a validated questionnaire measuring quality of life. Electronic data capture was compared to the paper-based approach using multivariate logistic regression. Results A total of 437 patients were included, of whom 13% used electronic data capture. The relation between data capture and time needed was modified by the emotional functioning of the patients. Those with clinical impairments in that respect needed more time to complete the questionnaire when they used electronic data capture compared to paper and pencil (ORadj 24.0; p = 0.006). This was not the case when patients had sub-threshold emotional problems (ORadj 1.9; p = 0.48). The odds of having the researcher reading the questions out (instead of the patient doing this themselves) (ORadj 0.1; p = 0.01) and of needing any help (ORadj 0.1; p = 0.01) were lower when electronic data capture was used. The proportion of missing scores was equivalent in both groups (ORadj 0.4, p = 0.42). Conclusions The advantages of electronic data capture, such as real-time assessment and fewer data entry errors, may come at the price of more time required for data collection when the patients have mental health problems. As this is not uncommon in thyroid cancer, researchers need to choose the type of data capture wisely for their particular research question