ArticleESMO real world data and digital oncology2025
Concordance between patient-reported outcomes and CTCAE clinician-reported toxicities during outpatient chemotherapy courses: a retrospective cohort study in routine care.
Article in ESMO real world data and digital oncology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Patient-reported oral adverse events during cancer chemotherapy: longitudinal evaluation using patient-reported outcomes version of the common terminology criteria for adverse events (PRO-CTCAE) and concordance with clinician assessments.Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer · 2025Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Patient-reported outcomes (PROs) are increasingly used but often correlate poorly with physicians' assessment of adverse events. Yet, discordance has been associated with poorer prognosis. Methods: Single-centre retrospective study of patient and physician assessment of five chemotherapy-induced toxicities (mucositis, nausea, vomiting, peripheral neuropathy, diarrhoea) in routine care. Electronic PRO (e-PRO)-Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (CTCAE) questionnaires were administered between outpatient chemotherapy sessions, using an online telehealth program. PRO-CTCAE grades were converted to CTCAE scale using the published composite grade of PRO-CTCAE, and compared with CTCAE grading of toxicities by physicians. We calculated Cohen's weighted Kappa and counted discordances on severe (CTCAE grade >2) and milder (grade 2) toxicities. Results: A total of 122 patients filled electronically 519 PRO-CTCAE e-questionnaires for which physicians had rated at least one corresponding CTCAE item. Agreement between patients' composite grades of PRO-CTCAE and clinicians CTCAE grades was moderate for four symptoms, and fair for one (κ between 0.23 and 0.43). The incidence of serious toxicity varied across symptoms, from 0.22% to 2.50% of questionnaires. Both patient and clinician scored a severe toxicity in only one case. Among 2076 symptom assessments, we counted 27 disagreements on severe toxicities (1.30%). Conclusion: Patient-physician agreement is imperfect, but severe toxicities are rare, including in PROs. PRO-CTCAE and CTCAE remain complementary, and e-PRO-CTCAE tools help monitor symptoms.
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.