ArticleSupportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer2022
How do patients interpret and respond to a single-item global indicator of cancer treatment tolerability?
Article in Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 15 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
15 citing papers in PubMed, 19 citations in OpenAlex.
- Trial
- Assessing tolerability with the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy item GP5: psychometric evidence from LIBRETTO-531, a phase 3 trial of selpercatinib in medullary thyroid cancer.Journal of patient-reported outcomes · 2024Trial
- Overall side effect assessment of oxaliplatin toxicity in rectal cancer patients in NRG oncology/NSABP R04.Quality of life research : an international journal of quality of life aspects of treatment, care and rehabilitation · 2024Trial
- The FACT-GP5 as a global tolerability measure: responsiveness and robustness to missing assessments.Quality of life research : an international journal of quality of life aspects of treatment, care and rehabilitation · 2024Trial
- Patient-Reported Adverse Events and Early Treatment Discontinuation Among Patients With Multiple Myeloma.JAMA network open · 2024Trial
- Generalized Pairwise Comparisons in Dose Optimization Oncology Trials: Beyond Safety to Multi-outcome Dose Selection.Clinical cancer research : an official journal of the American Association for Cancer Research · 2026Article
- Patient-Perceived Overall Side Effect Bother at and After Cancer Treatment Discontinuation: An Analysis Using Commercial Cancer Trial Data.Therapeutic innovation & regulatory science · 2026Article
- Patient-Reported Side Effect Bother: Understanding the Value of the Baseline Report.The patient · 2026Article
- Article
- Review
- National Cancer Institute Cancer Treatment Tolerability Consortium: Current status and future directions.Cancer · 2025Article
- Measure selection for an electronic patient-reported outcome (ePRO) system for CAR T-cell therapy patients: a modified Delphi consensus study.EClinicalMedicine · 2025Article
- Article
- Importance of Low- and Moderate-Grade Adverse Events in Patients' Treatment Experience and Treatment Discontinuation: An Analysis of the E1912 Trial.Journal of clinical oncology : official journal of the American Society of Clinical Oncology · 2024Article
- Patient-Reported Outcomes to Inform Tolerability Characterization in Cancer Trials: A Critical Perspective on Unresolved Methodological Issues.Cancer control : journal of the Moffitt Cancer CenterArticle
Corrections and comments
- Erratum issued
Authors and funding
11 authors at 5 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundThere is increasing interest in patient-reported measures of cancer treatment tolerability. A global measure of bother, the FACT GP5 item ("I am bothered by side effects of treatment") is potentially useful for regulatory, research, and clinical use. To understand this item's appropriateness for capturing treatment tolerability, we conducted cognitive interviews on this item with 3 samples of cancer patients.
methodsPatients with ovarian cancer (Study 1: N = 21; on treatment), lymphoma (Study 2: N = 14; on treatment), and colorectal or lung cancer (Study 3: N = 16; treatment naïve) were interviewed about GP5's understandability and relevance to their treatment side effects. What patients think about when answering GP5 was also assessed. In all studies, the interview included both structured and open-ended questions. Qualitative data were coded to extract themes and responses to structured questions were tallied.
resultsMost patients on treatment (Studies 1 and 2) reported that the GP5 item wording is appropriate (88%) and its meaning is clear (97%). They were very confident or confident in their response (97%) and stated that GP5 was relevant to their cancer experience (97%). When answering GP5, patients considered their treatment and specific side effects. A large proportion (40%) of the treatment-naïve (Study 3) patients reported that GP5 was not relevant to their cancer treatment, and the largest proportion responded to GP5 thinking of negative side effect expectancies.
conclusionThis study provides assurance that GP5 is a useful indicator of treatment tolerability, and is meaningful to people with cancer, especially once they have started treatment.
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.