Swipe om te navigeren naar een ander artikel
The online version of this article (doi:10.1007/s11136-013-0470-1) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.
NCI PRO-CTCAE Study Group members are Cindy Geoghegan, Jeff A. Sloan (Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN, USA), Charles S. Cleeland (University of Texas M.D. Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, USA), Amy P. Abernethy (Duke University Medical Center, Durham, NC, USA), Deborah W. Bruner (University of Pennsylvania School of Nursing, Philadelphia, PA, USA), Allison Barz (The Children’s Hospital of Philadelphia, Philadelphia, PA, USA), Amylou C. Dueck (Mayo Clinic, Scottsdale, AZ, USA), and Yuelin Li (Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA).
The National Cancer Institute’s Patient-Reported Outcomes version of the Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (PRO-CTCAE) is a library of question items that enables patient reporting of adverse events (AEs) in clinical trials. This study contributes content validity evidence of the PRO-CTCAE by incorporating cancer patient input of the relevance and comprehensiveness of the item library.
Cognitive interviews were conducted among patients undergoing chemotherapy or radiation therapy at multiple sites to evaluate comprehension, memory retrieval, judgment, and response mapping related to AE terms (e.g., nausea), attribute terms (regarding frequency, severity, or interference), response options, and recall period. Three interview rounds were conducted with ≥20 patients completing each item per round. Items were modified and retested if ≥3 patients exhibited cognitive difficulties or if experienced by ≤25 % patients.
One hundred and twenty-seven patients participated (35 % ≤high school, 28 % non-white, and 59 % female). Most AE terms (63/80) generated no cognitive difficulties. The remaining 17 were modified without further difficulties by Round 3. Terms were comprehended regardless of education level. Attribute terms and response options required no modifications. Patient adherence to recall period (7 days) was improved when the reference period was incorporated.
This study provides evidence confirming comprehension of the US English language versions of items in the PRO-CTCAE library for measuring symptomatic AEs from the patient perspective within the context of cancer treatment. Several minor changes were made to the items to improve item clarity, comprehension, and ease of response judgment. This study helps to establish the content validity of PRO-CTCAE items for patient reporting of AEs during cancer treatment.
Log in om toegang te krijgen
Met onderstaand(e) abonnement(en) heeft u direct toegang:
Supplementary material 1 (DOCX 23 kb)11136_2013_470_MOESM1_ESM.docx
National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, US Department of Health and Human Services. Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (CTCAE) Version 4.0. Published May 28, 2009; Revised version 4.03 June 14, 2010 (Vol. Available from: http://evs.nci.nih.gov/ftp1/CTCAE/CTCAE_4.03_2010-06-14_QuickReference_5x7.pdf. Accessed 20 May 2013).
Basch, E., Iasonos, A., McDonough, T., Barz, A., Culkin, A., Kris, M. G., et al. (2006). Patient versus clinician symptom reporting using the National Cancer Institute Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events: Results of a questionnaire-based study. Lancet Oncology, 7, 903–909. doi: 10.1016/S1470-2045(06)70910-X. PubMedCrossRef
Xiao, C., Polomano, R., & Bruner, D. W. (2012). Comparison between patient-reported and clinician-observed symptoms in oncology. Cancer Nursing,. doi: 10.1097/NCC.0b013e318269040f.
Greimel, E. R., Bjelic-Radisic, V., Pfisterer, J., Hilpert, F., Daghofer, F., Pujade-Lauraine, E., et al. (2011). Toxicity and quality of life outcomes in ovarian cancer patients participating in randomized controlled trials. Supportive Care in Cancer, 19(9), 1421–1427. doi: 10.1007/s00520-010-0969-8. PubMedCrossRef
Flores, L. T., Bennett, A. V., Law, E. B., Hajj, C., Griffith, M. P., & Goodman, K. A. (2012). Patient-reported outcomes versus clinician symptom reporting during chemoradiation for rectal cancer. Gastrointestinal Cancer Research, 5(4), 119–124. PubMed
US Department of Health and Human Services. Guidance for industry. patient- reported outcome measures: Use in medical development to support labeling claims (December 2009. Available from: http://www.fda.gov/downloads/Drugs/GuidanceComplianceRegulatoryInformation/Guidances/UCM193282.pdf. Accessed 20 May 2013).
European Medicines Agency. Committee for medicinal products for human use (CHMP). Pre-authorisation evaluation of medicines for human use: Reflection paper on the regulatory guidance for the use of health-related quality of life (HRQL) measures in the evaluation of medicinal products (January 2006, Available from: http://www.ispor.org/workpaper/emea-hrql-guidance.pdf. Accessed 20 May 2013).
Ashley, L., Jones, H., Thomas, J., Forman, D., Newsham, A., Morris, E., et al. (2011). Integrating cancer survivors’ experiences into UK cancer registries: Design and development of the ePOCS system (electronic Patient-reported Outcomes from Cancer Survivors). British Journal of Cancer, 105, S74–S81. doi: 10.1038/Bjc.2011.424. PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRef
Boers-Doets, C. B., Gelderblom, H., Lacouture, M. E., Epstein, J. B., Nortier, J. W., & Kaptein, A. A. (2013). Experiences with the FACT-EGFRI-18 instrument in EGFRI-associated mucocutaneous adverse events. Supportive Care in Cancer,. doi: 10.1007/s00520-013-1752-4.
Farnell, D. J., Mandall, P., Anandadas, C., Routledge, J., Burns, M. P., Logue, J. P., et al. (2010). Development of a patient-reported questionnaire for collecting toxicity data following prostate brachytherapy. Radiotherapy and Oncology, 97(1), 136–142. doi: 10.1016/j.radonc.2010.05.011. PubMedCrossRef
Johansen, M. A., Henriksen, E., Horsch, A., Schuster, T., & Berntsen, G. K. R. (2012). Electronic symptom reporting between patient and provider for improved health care service quality: A systematic review of randomized controlled trials. Part 1: State of the Art. Journal of Medical Internet Research, 14(5). doi: 10.2196/jmir.2214.
Johansen, M. A., Henriksen, E., Berntsen, G., & Horsch, A. (2011). Electronic symptom reporting by patients: A literature review. Studies in Health Technology and Informatics, 169, 13–17. PubMed
Wild, D., Eremenco, S., Mear, I., Martin, M., Houchin, C., Gawlicki, M., et al. (2009). Multinational trials-recommendations on the translations required, approaches to using the same language in different countries, and the approaches to support pooling the data: The ISPOR patient-reported outcomes translation and linguistic validation good research practices task force report. Value in Health, 12(4), 430–440. doi: 10.1111/j.1524-4733.2008.00471.x. PubMedCrossRef
Basch, E., Reeve, B. B., Mitchell, S. A., Clauser, S. B., Minasian, L. M., Atkinson, T. M., et al. (Under Review). Development of the National Cancer Institute’s Patient-Reported Outcomes version of the Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (PRO-CTCAE). Journal of National Cancer Institute.
Willis, G. B. (2005). Cognitive interviewing: A tool for improving questionnaire design. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications, Inc.
Patrick, D. L., Burke, L. B., Gwaltney, C. J., Leidy, N. K., Martin, M. L., Molsen, E., et al. (2011). Content validity-establishing and reporting the evidence in newly Developed patient-reported outcomes (PRO) instruments for medical product evaluation: ISPOR PRO good research practices task force report: Part 2-assessing respondent understanding. Value in Health, 14(8), 978–988. doi: 10.1016/j.jval.2011.06.013. PubMedCrossRef
Schwarz, N., Oyserman, D., & Petycheva, E. (2010). Cognition, communication, and culture: Implications for the survey response process. In J. A. Harkness, M. Braun, B. Edwards, T. P. Johnson, L. E. Lyberg, P. P. Mohler, et al. (Eds.), Survey methods in multinational, multicultural, and multiregional contexts (pp. 177–190). Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons.
Tourangeau, R. (1984). Cognitive science and survey methods. In T. Jabine, M. Straf, J. Tanur, & R. Tourangeau (Eds.), Cognitive aspects of survey design: Building a bridge between disciplines (pp. 73–100). Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
Namey, E., Guest, G., Thairy, L., & Johnson, L. (2008). Data reduction techniques for large qualitative data sets. In G. Guest & K. M. MacQueen (Eds.), Handbook for team-based qualitative research (pp. 137–161). Lanham, MD: AltaMira Press.
Saldana, J. (2009). The coding manual for qualitative researchers. Los Angeles, CA: Sage Publications.
Symptom Management and Quality of Life Steering Committee. Clinical trials planning meeting—building bridges: The identification of core symptoms and health-related quality of life domains for use in cancer research (September 22–23, 2011. Available from: http://transformingtrials.cancer.gov/files/SxQOLSCPROCTPMExecutive%20Summary_FINAL.pdf Accessed 7 June 2012).
Mitchell, S. A., Lang, K., Nichols, C., Clauser, S. B., Federico, V., Lalla, D., et al. (2012). Validation of the NCI Patient-Reported Outcomes version of the Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (PRO-CTCAE) in women receiving treatment for metastatic breast cancer. Chicago, IL: Annual Meeting of the American Society of Clinical Oncology.
Dueck, A. C., Mendoza, T., Mitchell, S. A., Reeve, B. B., Castro, K., Denicoff, A., et al. (2012). Validity and reliability of the Patient-Reported Outcomes version of the Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (PRO-CTCAE). Chicago, IL: Annual Meeting of the American Society of Clinical Oncology.
Coons, S. J., Gwaltney, C. J., Hays, R. D., Lundy, J. J., Sloan, J. A., Revicki, D. A., et al. (2009). Recommendations on evidence needed to support measurement equivalence between electronic and paper-based patient-reported outcome (PRO) measures: ISPOR ePRO good research practices task force report. Value in Health, 12(4), 419–429. doi: 10.1111/j.1524-4733.2008.00470.x. PubMedCrossRef
(2012) Methodological standards and patient-centeredness in comparative effectiveness research—The PCORI perspective. JAMA, 307(15), 1636–1640. doi: 10.1001/jama.2012.466.
- Cognitive interviewing of the US National Cancer Institute’s Patient-Reported Outcomes version of the Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (PRO-CTCAE)
Jennifer L. Hay
Thomas M. Atkinson
Bryce B. Reeve
Sandra A. Mitchell
Tito R. Mendoza
Lori M. Minasian
Steven B. Clauser
Antonia V. Bennett
Diane B. Paul
the NCI PRO-CTCAE Study Group
- Springer International Publishing