Department of Oncology, University of Turin, at Candiolo Cancer Institute, FPO-IRCCS, Candiolo (TO), Italy.
Department of Oncology, University of Turin, at Ordine Mauriziano Hospital, Turin, Italy.
Clin Genitourin Cancer. 2019 Oct;17(5):332-347.e2. doi: 10.1016/j.clgc.2019.07.007. Epub 2019 Jul 20.
Quality of life (QoL) is not included among the end points in many studies, and QoL results are underreported in many phase 3 oncology trials. We performed a systematic review to describe QoL prevalence and heterogeneity in QoL reporting in recently published prostate cancer phase 3 trials. A PubMed search was performed to identify primary publications of randomized phase 3 trials testing anticancer drugs in prostate cancer, issued between 2012 and 2018. We analyzed QoL inclusion among end points, presence of QoL results, and methodology of QoL analysis. Seventy-two publications were identified (15 early-stage, 20 advanced hormone-sensitive, and 37 castration-resistant prostate cancer [CRPC]). QoL was not listed among study end points in 23 studies (31.9%) (40.0% early stage, 40.0% advanced hormone sensitive, and 24.3% CRPC). QoL results were absent in 15 (30.6%) of 49 primary publications of trials that included QoL among end points. Overall, as a result of absent end point or unpublished results, QoL data were lacking in 38 (52.8%) primary publications (53.3% early stage, 55.0% in advanced hormone sensitive, and 51.4% in CRPC). The most commonly used QoL tools were Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-Prostate (FACT-P) (21, 53.8%) and European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Questionnaire-Core 30 (EORTC QLQ-C30) (14, 35.9%); most common methods of analysis were mean changes or mean scores (28, 71.8%), time to deterioration (14, 35.9%), and proportion of patients with response (10, 25.6%). In conclusion, QoL data are lacking in a not negligible proportion of recently published phase 3 trials in prostate cancer, although the presence of QoL results is better in positive trials, especially in CRPC. The methodology of QoL analysis is heterogeneous for type of instruments, analysis, and presentation of results.
生活质量(QoL)并未被纳入许多研究的终点,并且许多 3 期肿瘤学试验中 QoL 结果的报告也不足。我们进行了一项系统评价,以描述最近发表的前列腺癌 3 期试验中 QoL 的流行情况和报告中的异质性。在 PubMed 上进行了搜索,以确定 2012 年至 2018 年间发表的测试前列腺癌抗癌药物的随机 3 期试验的主要出版物。我们分析了终点中纳入 QoL 的情况、存在 QoL 结果的情况以及 QoL 分析的方法学。确定了 72 篇出版物(15 篇早期,20 篇晚期激素敏感,37 篇去势抵抗性前列腺癌[CRPC])。23 项研究(31.9%)未将 QoL 列为研究终点(40.0%早期,40.0%晚期激素敏感,24.3%CRPC)。在 49 项纳入终点 QoL 的试验中,有 15 项(30.6%)主要出版物中没有 QoL 结果。总体而言,由于终点缺失或结果未公布,38 项(52.8%)主要出版物缺乏 QoL 数据(53.3%早期,55.0%晚期激素敏感,51.4%CRPC)。最常用的 QoL 工具是癌症治疗功能评估-前列腺(FACT-P)(21,53.8%)和欧洲癌症研究与治疗组织生活质量问卷-核心 30(EORTC QLQ-C30)(14,35.9%);最常用的分析方法是平均变化或平均得分(28,71.8%)、恶化时间(14,35.9%)和有反应的患者比例(10,25.6%)。总之,尽管阳性试验中 QoL 结果的存在情况更好,尤其是在 CRPC 中,但在最近发表的前列腺癌 3 期试验中,相当一部分试验缺乏 QoL 数据。QoL 分析的方法学在仪器类型、分析和结果呈现方面存在差异。