Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27465049›Full record

ArticleSupportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer2016

Classification of painful bone metastases as mild, moderate, or severe using both EORTC QLQ-C15-PAL and EORTC QLQ-BM22.

Rachel McDonald, Keyue Ding, Edward Chow, Ralph M Meyer, Abdenour Nabid, Pierre Chabot, Genevieve Coulombe, Shahida Ahmed, Joda Kuk, Rashid Dar and 9 more

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

4 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

19 authors.

Rachel McDonaldSunnybrook Odette Cancer Centre, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada.
Keyue DingCanadian Clinical Trials Group, Cancer Research Institute, Queen's University, Kingston, ON, Canada.
Edward ChowSunnybrook Odette Cancer Centre, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada. Edward.Chow@sunnybrook.ca.
Ralph M MeyerJuravinski Hospital and Cancer Centre and McMaster University, Hamilton, ON, Canada.
Abdenour NabidCentre Hospitalier Universitaire de Sherbrooke, Sherbrooke, QC, Canada.
Pierre ChabotHopital Maisonneuve-Rosemont, Montreal, QC, Canada.
Genevieve CoulombeCHUM-Hopital Notre-Dame, Montreal, QC, Canada.
Shahida AhmedCancerCare Manitoba, Winnipeg, MB, Canada.
Joda KukGrand River Regional Cancer Centre, Grand River Hospital, Kitchener, ON, Canada.
Rashid DarLondon Regional Cancer Program, London, ON, Canada.
Aamer MahmudCancer Centre of Southeastern Ontario, Kingston General Hospital, Kingston, ON, Canada.
Alysa FairchildCross Cancer Institute, Edmonton, AB, Canada.
Carolyn F WilsonCanadian Clinical Trials Group, Cancer Research Institute, Queen's University, Kingston, ON, Canada.
Jackson S Y WuTom Baker Cancer Centre, University of Calgary, Calgary, AB, Canada.
Kristopher DennisUniversity of Ottawa, Ottawa Hospital Research Institute, Ottawa, ON, Canada.
Carlo DeAngelisSunnybrook Odette Cancer Centre, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada.
Rebecca K S WongPrincess Margaret Hospital, Radiation Medicine Program, Ontario Cancer Institute, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada.
Liting ZhuCanadian Clinical Trials Group, Cancer Research Institute, Queen's University, Kingston, ON, Canada.
Michael BrundageQueen's University, Kingston, ON, Canada.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposePrevious studies have determined optimal cut points (CPs) for the classification of pain severity as mild, moderate, or severe using only the Brief Pain Inventory (BPI) or the BPI in conjunction with a quality of life (QOL) tool. The purpose of our study was to determine the optimal CPs based on correlation with only QOL outcomes.

methodsWe conducted an analysis of 298 patients treated with radiation therapy for painful bone metastases on a phase III randomized trial. Prior to treatment, patients provided their worst pain score on a scale of 0 (no pain) to 10 (worst possible pain), as well as completed the European Organization of Cancer Research and Treatment (EORTC) QOL Questionnaire Bone Metastases module (QLQ-BM22) and the EORTC QOL Questionnaire Core-15 Palliative (QLQ-C15-PAL). Optimal CPs were determined to be those that yielded the largest F ratio for the between category effect on each subscale of the QLQ-BM22 and QLQ-C15-PAL using the multivariate analysis of variance (MANOVA).

resultsThe two largest F ratios for Wilk's λ, Pillai's Trace, and Hotelling's Trace were for CPs 5,6 and 5,7. Combining both, the optimal CPs to differentiate between mild, moderate, and severe pain were 5 and 7. Pain scores of 1-5, 6, and 7-10 were classified as mild, moderate, and severe, respectively. Patients with severe pain experienced greater functional interference and poorer QOL when compared to those with mild pain.

conclusionOur results suggest that, based on the impact of pain on QOL measures, pain scores should be classified as follows: 1-5 as mild pain, 6 as moderate pain, and 7-10 as severe pain. Optimal CPs vary depending on the type of outcome measurement used.

Indexed as

AgedBone NeoplasmsFemaleHumansMaleOutcome Assessment, Health CarePain MeasurementQuality of LifeSurveys and QuestionnairesBone metastasesCut pointsFunctional interferencePain severityQuality of lifeSurvival

Identifiers

PMID27465049

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.