ReviewCancers2025
Patient-Reported Outcome Measurement and Reporting for Patients with Soft Tissue Tumors: A Scoping Literature Review.
Review in Cancers, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Patient-centred and fit-for-purpose clinical trials in rare cancers: lessons from sarcomas for operationalising 2024 WHO Guidance and ICH E6(R3).EClinicalMedicine · 2026Review
- Locked-Window EQ-5D-5L (Index and VAS) Benchmarking in Sarcoma Care: Rule-Based Traffic-Light Classification Across Two Institutions.Diseases (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- TESS 2.0-Adaptation of the German Version of the Toronto Extremity Salvage Score: Addition of an Item Regarding the Use of a Touchscreen and Keyboard in the Upper Extremity Questionnaire.Journal of clinical medicine · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
(1) Background: Quality of life (QoL) assessment is a crucial aspect for patients diagnosed with cancer. Over the years, different tools have been developed to measure QoL, both generic and pathology specific, but the inclusion of quality of life among other indicators of efficacy in randomized controlled trials (RCTs) remains a controversial issue. In this review, we aim to review the frequency and modality of QoL assessment in RCTs, enrolling patients diagnosed with mesenchymal tumors. (2) Methods: An electronic literature search of bone and soft tissue sarcoma and GIST-related RCTs published between January 2000 and December 2023 was performed by two independent reviewers using PubMed. English-language phase II and III clinical trials enrolling at least more than 15 patients were included, regardless of the disease stage. Studies involving patients under the age of 18 years or for which the full text was not available were excluded. For each study, data regarding the journal and year of publication, the study design, the primary objective, and the evaluation of quality of life as an endpoint with any type of patient-reported outcomes used were extracted. (3) Results: Among the 742 publications screened, 171 resulted eligible. QoL assessment was listed among the endpoints in 35 trials and QoL results were reported in 29 primary publications. In these trials, 16 included patients with soft tissue sarcomas, 8 Kaposi sarcomas, 6 GIST, and 3 desmoid tumors. Among all the trials included, 10.4% on an adjuvant/neoadjuvant setting and 24.4% on a metastatic setting included QoL as an endpoint. The proportion of trials, including QoL, was variable over time, as follows: 16.9% of trials in 2000-2014 vs. 23.4% in 2015-2023. In 35 trials, including QoL endpoints, 27 had a superiority design and 25 reported a positive result. In the majority of trials (80%), the tools for QoL assessment were generic and those mostly used were the EORTC QLQ-C30, the EQ-5D questionnaire, and the modified Brief Pain Inventory-Short Form. (4) Conclusions: Quality of life has not been assessed or published in many phase II and III trials, despite an improvement over time. QoL evaluation in RCTs should be considered even more carefully in patients with rare tumors, where the low number of patients who can be enrolled makes it difficult to draw statistically significant conclusions on the effectiveness of treatments.
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.