Blood and Marrow Transplantation, Moffitt Cancer Center, Tampa, FL 33612, USA.
Haematologica. 2011 Oct;96(10):1528-35. doi: 10.3324/haematol.2011.046367. Epub 2011 Jun 17.
The 2005 National Institute of Health Chronic Graft-versus-Host Disease Consensus Conference recommended collection of patient-reported outcomes in clinical trials on chronic graft-versus-host disease. We assessed whether changes in chronic graft-versus-host disease severity, determined using National Institute of Health criteria, clinicians' assessment or patients' self-evaluation, correlated with patient-reported quality of life as measured by the Short Form-36 and Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-Bone Marrow Transplant (FACT-BMT) instruments.
Three-hundred and thirty-six adult patients (median age 52 years; range, 19-79) with chronic graft-versus-host disease from six transplant centers contributed baseline and follow-up data (from 936 visits overall).
While the majority of the patients had stable chronic graft-versus-host disease, improvement or worsening was noted in approximately 40% of follow-up visits. Multivariable analysis demonstrated no association between change in chronic graft-versus-host disease severity evaluated by National Institute of Health criteria and change in quality of life, while clinician-reported changes in severity were associated with changes in some quality of life measures. Patient-reported changes in the severity of chronic graft-versus-host disease were associated with changes in all quality of life measures. Comparison of the Short Form-36 and the FACT-BMT suggested that the data collected in the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-General (FACT-G) core survey are sufficient without the need for the Short Form-36 or the FACT-BMT subscale.
We conclude that serial National Institute of Health and clinician-reported chronic graft-versus-host disease severity assessments cannot substitute for patient-reported outcomes in clinical trials. Collection of just the FACT-G instead of the Short Form-36 and the full FACT-BMT will decrease respondent burden without compromising quality of life assessment.
2005 年,美国国立卫生研究院慢性移植物抗宿主病共识会议建议在慢性移植物抗宿主病临床试验中收集患者报告的结果。我们评估了使用美国国立卫生研究院标准、临床医生评估或患者自我评估确定的慢性移植物抗宿主病严重程度的变化是否与患者报告的生活质量相关,这些生活质量通过 Short Form-36 和癌症治疗功能评估-骨髓移植(FACT-BMT)量表来衡量。
来自六个移植中心的 336 名患有慢性移植物抗宿主病的成年患者(中位年龄 52 岁;范围,19-79 岁)提供了基线和随访数据(总体随访 936 次)。
虽然大多数患者的慢性移植物抗宿主病稳定,但约 40%的随访观察到病情改善或恶化。多变量分析表明,美国国立卫生研究院标准评估的慢性移植物抗宿主病严重程度的变化与生活质量的变化之间没有关联,而临床医生报告的严重程度变化与一些生活质量测量指标的变化有关。患者报告的慢性移植物抗宿主病严重程度的变化与所有生活质量测量指标的变化有关。Short Form-36 和 FACT-BMT 的比较表明,在不需要 Short Form-36 或 FACT-BMT 子量表的情况下,癌症治疗功能评估一般(FACT-G)核心调查中收集的数据足以评估功能评估。
我们得出结论,连续的美国国立卫生研究院和临床医生报告的慢性移植物抗宿主病严重程度评估不能替代临床试验中的患者报告结果。仅收集 FACT-G 而不是 Short Form-36 和完整的 FACT-BMT 将减轻应答者的负担,而不会影响生活质量评估。