Patient-reported outcomes of non-pharmacological interventions for endometrial cancer survivors: a systematic review.

PURPOSE

The objective of this review was to assess the efficacy of non-pharmacological interventions on endometrial cancer (EC) survivors' QOL, and their use of patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs).

METHODS

We conducted a systematic review of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of non-pharmacological interventions that assessed the impact of intervention on EC survivors' general and domain-specific QOL (i.e., physical, psychological, and social well-being) using PROMs.

RESULTS

Of the 3178 studies identified, 28 full-text articles were reviewed, and 10 were included in the review. Nine RCTs assessed at least one PROM as a primary outcome and six assessed a PROM as a secondary outcome, but few studies used validated PROMs. Significant improvements in general QOL were found in two studies, domain-specific QOL in three studies, and both general and domain-specific QOL in three studies; however, effect sizes ranged from small to large and no significant effects were found for social well-being and few were found for psychological well-being.

CONCLUSIONS

Few non-pharmacological interventions for EC survivors targeted QOL, even though QOL was assessed as either a primary or secondary outcome of the RCT. Despite this, findings suggest that non-pharmacological interventions for EC survivors hold promise for improving general and domain-specific QOL. Use of validated PROMs would greatly enhance outcome reporting and facilitate comparisons across studies. More interventions are also needed that address social and psychological functioning in this population.

IMPLICATIONS FOR CANCER SURVIVORS

Our review highlights a need to (1) expand non-pharmacological RCTs for EC survivors, (2) increase the use of validated PROMs measuring QOL, and (3) address psychosocial domains of QOL when developing interventions for this population.