ArticleClinical trials (London, England)2016
Feasibility and clinical impact of sharing patient-reported symptom toxicities and performance status with clinical investigators during a phase 2 cancer treatment trial.
Article in Clinical trials (London, England), 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT00807573 (A Phase II Trial of Paclitaxel, Bevacizumab and Pemetrexed in Patients With Untreated, Advanced Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer Using Web-Based Data Collection, Patient Self-Reporting of Adverse Effects and Automated Response Assessment), which is not on this map. Cited by 35 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
A Phase II Trial of Paclitaxel, Bevacizumab and Pemetrexed in Patients With Untreated, Advanced Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer Using Web-Based Data Collection, Patient Self-Reporting of Adverse Effects and Automated Response Assessment
Who cites it
35 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 53 citations in OpenAlex.
- Patient-Reported Physical Function Measures in Cancer Clinical Trials.Epidemiologic reviews · 2017Pooled it
- Feasibility Assessment of Patient Reporting of Symptomatic Adverse Events in Multicenter Cancer Clinical Trials.JAMA oncology · 2017Trial
- Phase II Study of a Non-Platinum-Containing Doublet of Paclitaxel and Pemetrexed with Bevacizumab as Initial Therapy for Patients with Advanced Lung Adenocarcinomas.Journal of thoracic oncology : official publication of the International Association for the Study of Lung Cancer · 2016Trial
- Quality of life and care experiences in a US multi-institutional neuroendocrine tumor cohort.Journal of the National Cancer Institute · 2026Article
- Article
- Article
- Assessing the assessment: a scoping review of the mode of patient-reported outcome assessment in solid cancer clinical trials.Quality of life research : an international journal of quality of life aspects of treatment, care and rehabilitation · 2026Article
- Review
- Effectiveness of symptom monitoring on electronic patient-reported outcomes (ePROs) among patients with lung cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis.NPJ digital medicine · 2025Article
- Article
- Efficacy and Safety of PD-1/L1 Inhibitors Combined with Anlotinib versus PD-1/L1 Inhibitors Combined with Bevacizumab in Second-Line Treatment of Advanced Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer Patients: A Comparative Cohort Study.Current cancer drug targets · 2025Article
- Mobility Assessment Instruments.Seminars in oncology nursing · 2024Review
- Surveillance of Symptom Burden Using the Patient-Reported Outcome Version of the Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events in Patients With Various Types of Cancers During Chemoradiation Therapy: Real-World Study.JMIR public health and surveillance · 2023Article
- Using Patient-Reported Outcomes in Dose-Finding Oncology Trials: Surveys of Key Stakeholders and the National Cancer Research Institute Consumer Forum.The oncologist · 2022Article
- Article
- Verification of the Usefulness of an Assessment and Risk Control Sheet that Promotes Management of Cancer Drug Therapy.Frontiers in pharmacology · 2022Article
- Article
- Article
- Adherence to oral therapies among patients with renal cell carcinoma: Post hoc analysis of the ECOG-ACRIN E2805 trial.Cancer medicine · 2021Article
- Patient-Reported Outcomes for Tolerability Assessment in Phase I Cancer Clinical Trials.Journal of the National Cancer Institute · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundClinicians can miss up to half of patients' symptomatic toxicities in cancer clinical trials and routine practice. Although patient-reported outcome questionnaires have been developed to capture this information, it is unclear whether clinicians will make use of patient-reported outcomes to inform their own toxicity documentation, or to prompt symptom management activities.
methods44 lung cancer patients that participated in a phase 2 treatment trial self-reported 13 symptomatic toxicities derived from the National Cancer Institute's Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events and Karnofsky Performance Status via tablet computers in waiting areas immediately preceding scheduled visits. During visits, clinicians viewed patients' self-reported toxicity and performance status ratings on a computer interface and could agree or disagree/reassign grades ("shared" reporting). Agreement of clinicians with patient-reported grades was tabulated, and compared using weighted kappa statistics. Clinical actions in response to patient-reported severe (grade 3/4) toxicities were measured (e.g. treatment discontinuation, dose reduction, supportive medications). For comparison, 45 non-trial patients with lung cancer being treated in the same clinic by the same physicians were simultaneously enrolled in a parallel cohort study in which patients also self-reported toxicity grades but reports were not shared with clinicians ("non-shared" reporting).
resultsToxicities and performance status were reported by patients and reviewed by clinicians at (780/782) 99.7% of study visits in the phase 2 trial which used "shared" reporting. Clinicians agreed with patients 93% of the time with kappas 0.82-0.92. Clinical actions were taken in response to 67% of severe patient-reported toxicities. In the "non-shared" reporting comparison group, clinicians agreed with patients 56% of the time with kappas 0.04-0.48 (significantly worse than shared reporting for all symptoms), and clinical actions were taken in response to 44% of severe patient-reported toxicities.
conclusionClinicians will frequently agree with patient-reported symptoms and performance status, and will use this information to guide documentation and symptom management. (ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT00807573).
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.