Skip Navigation


Annals of Oncology Advance Access originally published online on August 13, 2007
Annals of Oncology 2007 18(12):1935-1942; doi:10.1093/annonc/mdm121
This Article
Right arrow Full Text
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow All Versions of this Article:
18/12/1935    most recent
mdm121v1
Right arrow E-letters: Submit a response
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me when E-letters are posted
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in ISI Web of Science
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to My Personal Archive
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow Search for citing articles in:
ISI Web of Science (2)
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Right arrow Disclaimer
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Joly, F.
Right arrow Articles by Tannock, I. F.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Joly, F.
Right arrow Articles by Tannock, I. F.
Related Collections
Right arrow 2007 - Review Articles
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us  
What's this?

© 2007 European Society for Medical Oncology

reviews

Quality of life and/or symptom control in randomized clinical trials for patients with advanced cancer

F. Joly1, J. Vardy2, M. Pintilie3 and I. F. Tannock2,*

1 Department of Medical Oncology, Centre François Baclesse, Caen, France
2 Department of Medical Oncology and Hematology
3 Department of Biostatistics, Princess Margaret Hospital and University of Toronto, Toronto, Canada

* Correspondence to: Dr Tannock, Department of Medical Oncology and Hematology, Princess Margaret Hospital and University of Toronto, 610 University Avenue, Toronto, ON M5G 2M9, Canada. E-mail: ian.tannock{at}uhn.on.ca

Background: Measures reflecting quality of life (QoL) or symptom control should be included as major endpoints in most phase III trials for patients with advanced cancer. Here we review the use of such endpoints.

Methods: We evaluated methodological aspects relating to QoL or symptom control in randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that included ≥150 patients, published from 1994 to 2004, using a 10-point checklist.

Results: Of 112 RCTs that met our criteria, few were rated as high quality: 22% defined QoL or symptom control as a primary endpoint; 19% established an a priori hypothesis relevant to palliation and 21% defined minimal differences in QoL or symptom scores that were clinically meaningful. Most trials (81%) analyzed differences between mean or median scores across groups and only 21% defined the proportion of individual patients who met criteria for palliative response. Only 15% of the studies met more than 5/10 criteria from our checklist. There was improvement over time in methodology and reporting.

Conclusions: Current standards for analyzing QoL and symptom control in RCTs are poor. Definition of a palliative endpoint, with an a priori hypothesis, is essential; defining the proportion of patients with palliative response is preferred. The proposed checklist could raise standards of reporting in future RCTs.

Key words: quality of life, randomized controlled trial, symptom control

Received for publication July 4, 2006. Revision received November 7, 2006. Revision received December 13, 2006. Accepted for publication March 8, 2007.


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us    What's this?




Disclaimer:
Please note that abstracts for content published before 1996 were created through digital scanning and may therefore not exactly replicate the text of the original print issues. All efforts have been made to ensure accuracy, but the Publisher will not be held responsible for any remaining inaccuracies. If you require any further clarification, please contact our Customer Services Department.