ArticleESMO open2021
Management of lung cancer patients' quality of life in clinical practice: a Delphi study.
Article in ESMO open, 2021. 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.
- Quality of life and care experience in durable responders to immune checkpoint inhibitors for advanced or metastatic NSCLC or melanoma.Immuno-oncology technology · 2026Article
- Role of Quality of Life in Daily Functioning, Communication with Care Teams, and Treatment Decisions in Patients withJTO clinical and research reports · 2025Article
- Assessment of the quality of life in metastatic colorectal cancer patients with KRAS gene mutant: a case-control study.BMC cancer · 2025Article
- Article
- A comprehensive clinical evaluation of first-line drugs for ALK-positive advanced non-small cell lung cancer.Journal of thoracic disease · 2023Article
- A Delphi Study of Expert Consensus on Chinese Medicine Syndrome Differentiation and Herbal Use for Early Breast Cancer.Integrative cancer therapiesArticle
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe assessment of health-related quality of life (HRQoL) has seen exponential growth in oncology clinical trials. However, the measurement of HRQoL has yet to be optimised in routine clinical practice. This study aimed at exploring the operationalisation of HRQoL in clinical practice with the goal of reaching a consensus from a panel of physicians. MATERIALS AND
methodsPhysicians involved in the management of lung cancer patients in France were recruited to participate in a Delphi study. The study involved three rounds of iterated queries to gain consensus on management aspects of HRQoL, including timing of discussion on HRQoL, which specific domains of HRQoL should be discussed, and what was the most appropriate method of assessment. The threshold adopted for consensus was at least 70% agreement among physicians. A scientific committee reviewed results following each round of the Delphi study.
resultsA representative panel of 60 physicians participated in this study. Consensus was obtained for HRQoL management at all time points in the patient care pathway. Panellists agreed that HRQoL discussions should occur during routine visits and hospitalisation. The involvement of patients' relatives was also recognised as important, except when discussing side-effects and involvement of a multidisciplinary team. There was a lack of consensus on a systematic assessment for all patients at each visit and no consensus on how HRQoL should be measured in clinical practice.
conclusionsHRQoL discussions are considered an integral part in the management of lung cancer patients, and are deemed key to success in patient-physician interaction. Further research is required to harmonise how best to implement HRQoL assessment.
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.