Trial reportCancer medicine2020
Disagreement between patient- and physician-reported outcomes on symptomatic adverse events as poor prognosis in patients treated with first-line cetuximab plus chemotherapy for unresectable metastatic colorectal cancer: Results of Phase II QUACK trial.
Trial report in Cancer medicine, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.
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.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
6 citing papers in PubMed, 9 citations in OpenAlex.
- Prognostic value of patient-reported outcomes for survival in patients with advanced lung cancer receiving immune checkpoint inhibitors.Frontiers in immunology · 2025Trial
- Trial
- Trial
- Digital symptom monitoring in cancer care: an exploratory evaluation of low uptake and engagement.Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer · 2026Article
- The Impact of Immune Checkpoint Inhibitors-Induced Skin Toxicity on Patients Quality of Life and the Role of Dermatologic Intervention.Dermatology practical & conceptual · 2024Article
- Central Nervous System-related Conditions and Associated Healthcare Resource Use Among Japanese nmCRPC Patients Based on Retrospective Claims Data.Journal of health economics and outcomes research · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
20 authors at 18 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The status and prognostic value of the disagreement between physician and patient assessments of symptomatic adverse events (AEs) remain unclear for patients with metastatic colorectal cancer treated with first-line cetuximab plus chemotherapy. Paired data on patient-reported outcomes using the EORTC QLQ-C30 and physician-reported outcomes using the NCI-CTCAE for eight symptomatic AEs (fatigue, pain, insomnia, dyspnea, constipation, appetite loss, nausea/vomiting, and diarrhea) were collected from a prospective trial assessing the relationships between treatment efficacy, AEs, and quality of life. The overall agreement rates between patient and physician reporting at 4 weeks ranged from 40.2% to 76.5% for 129 patients. The level of agreement based on Cohen's κ statistics was slight to poor for dyspnea, pain, fatigue, and insomnia, while it was moderate to fair for the remaining AEs. No clinicopathological characteristics of disagreement were found. The underreporting by physicians ranged from 12.5% (nausea/vomiting) to 56.7% (fatigue). The 2-year overall survival (OS) rate was more favorable for patients with high agreement than for those with low agreement (71.2% vs. 46.5%, p = .016), and the agreement status was an independent factor of OS (HR, 2.31; 95% CI, 1.13-4.71; p = .022). For patients who were reported as asymptomatic by the physician, the presence of patient-reported symptoms resulted in a trend toward poor prognostic outcomes for appetite loss, dyspnea, diarrhea, and constipation. These findings provide the clinical importance of the monitoring of patient-reported symptoms that can be complementary to physician-reported data to ensure more accurate clinical outcomes.
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.