Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30100773›Full record

ArticlePatient related outcome measures2018

Patient-reported outcomes in head and neck cancer: prospective multi-institutional patient-reported toxicity.

M Sean Peach, Daniel M Trifiletti, Carolyn Vachani, Karen Arnold-Korzeniowski, Christina Bach, Margaret Hampshire, James M Metz, Christine E Hill-Kayser

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Patient related outcome measures, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
9citing 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

9 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Patient-reported outcome measures in patients undergoing radiotherapy for head and neck cancer.Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer · 2021
    Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
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

8 authors.

M Sean PeachDepartment of Radiation Oncology, University of Virginia, Charlottesville, VA, USA.
Daniel M TrifilettiDepartment of Radiation Oncology, Mayo Clinic, Jacksonville, FL, USA.
Carolyn VachaniDepartment of Radiation Oncology, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, USA, hill@uphs.upenn.edu.
Karen Arnold-KorzeniowskiDepartment of Radiation Oncology, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, USA, hill@uphs.upenn.edu.
Christina BachDepartment of Radiation Oncology, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, USA, hill@uphs.upenn.edu.
Margaret HampshireDepartment of Radiation Oncology, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, USA, hill@uphs.upenn.edu.
James M MetzDepartment of Radiation Oncology, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, USA, hill@uphs.upenn.edu.
Christine E Hill-KayserDepartment of Radiation Oncology, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, USA, hill@uphs.upenn.edu.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeHead and neck cancer is occurring in an increasingly younger patient population, with treatment toxicity that can cause significant morbidity. Using a patient guided, Internet-based survivorship care plan program, we obtained and looked at patterns of patient-reported outcomes data from survivors seeking information after treatment for head and neck cancer.

methodsThe Internet-based OncoLife and LIVESTRONG Care Plan programs were employed, which design unique survivorship care plans based on patient-reported data. Care plans created for survivors of head and neck cancer were used in this evaluation. Demographics, treatment modality, and toxicity were included in this evaluation. Toxicity was further analyzed, grouped into system-based subsets.

resultsA total of 602 care plans were created from self-identified head and neck cancer survivors, from which patient-reported outcome data were attained. A majority of patients were Caucasian (96.2%) with median age at diagnosis of 55 years, living in suburban locations (39.9%), with ~50% receiving care within 20 miles of their residence. There was an equal distribution of education levels from high school only to graduate school. The majority of patients received care through cancer centers (96.7%), with a split between academic and non-academic centers. Ninety-three percent of patients had radiation therapy as part of their treatment modality, with 70.3% having chemotherapy and 60.1% having surgery. The most common system toxicities affected the oropharynx, followed by epithelium (skin/hair/nail), and then general global health. Specifically, the most common side effects were difficulty swallowing (61.5%) and changes in skin color/texture (49.7%). One third of patients experienced hearing/tinnitus/vertigo, xerostomia, loss of tissue flexibility, or fatigue.

conclusionThe current work demonstrates the ability to obtain patient-reported outcomes of head and neck cancer survivors through an Internet-based survivorship care plan program. For this group dysphagia and dermatitis were the most commonly reported toxicities, as was expected; however, global effects of therapy, such as fatigue, were also significant and should be addressed in future survivorship planning.

Indexed as

chemotherapyhead and neck radiationInternetpatient reported outcomespatient-reported outcomessurgerysurvivorship care plan

Identifiers

PMID30100773
PMCPMC6067627

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.