ArticleJTO clinical and research reports2025
Health Utility and Symptom Scores in Patients With Advanced Malignant Pleural Mesothelioma Treated in a Real-World Setting.
Article in JTO clinical and research reports, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Systematic review of patient-reported outcome item libraries in cancer research: an EORTC Quality of Life Group study.Journal of the National Cancer Institute · 2026Pooled it
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
19 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: There is a paucity of real-world associations between EQ-5D-generated health utility scores (HUS), symptoms as measured by the Edmonton Symptom Assessment System (ESAS), and the patient-reported outcomes version of the common terminology criteria for adverse events (pro-CTCAE), and survival in patients with advanced Malignant Pleural Mesothelioma (aMPM). Methods: Clinico-demographic variables and treatment information were captured retrospectively in patients diagnosed with aMPM between January 2004 and February 2021 at Princess Margaret Cancer Centre. Quality of life outcomes were measured using HUS, ESAS, and pro-CTCAE scales, by stable versus progressive disease and line-of-treatment states. Survival by mean ESAS scores were analyzed using the Kaplan-Meier method. Results: Of the 262 patients, the median age was 69 years (interquartile range: 62-74), 77% were male individuals, 52% were ever-smokers, 67% were the epithelioid-subtype, and 62% received first-line systemic therapy for advanced disease. The mean baseline HUS at diagnosis was 0.68 (95% confidence interval: 0.62-0.74) with most symptoms consisting of pain, dyspnea, and fatigue. Pooled ESAS physical and psychological scores changed significantly with disease state: the mean scores were worst at baseline, improved with stable or responding disease (physical, Conclusions: Baseline quality of life burden is high in patients with aMPM and is well captured by both EQ-5D and ESAS Individual ESAS and pro-CTCAE domains reported low/moderate correlations with HUS, reflecting the inability of one symptom to predict the entire disease state, thus paving the way for future mapping studies. The baseline physical symptom burden (ESAS) was prognostic of survival.
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.