Institute for Preventive Medicine and Public Health, Hanoi Medical University, Hanoi, 100000, Vietnam.
Institute for Global Health Innovations, Duy Tan University, 550000, Da Nang, Vietnam.
Health Qual Life Outcomes. 2023 Oct 11;21(1):112. doi: 10.1186/s12955-023-02189-9.
The impact of cancer interventions has been conducted in several research due to the significant burden of this non-communicable disease. The interventions that played an important role in the improvement of the patient's quality of life (QoL) and health-related quality of life (HRQL) can be classified into two main groups: pharmaceutical and non-pharmacological methods. However, studies so far often analyze a specific group of interventions for specific types of cancer. Thus, in this systematic review and meta-analysis, we synthesized the overall impact of cancer interventions on patients' quality of life in several cancers.In this research, we followed the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis Protocols (PRISMA-P) to search the longitudinal original research on the Web of Science (WOS) database. After that, the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale (NOS) and Jadad Scale were used to assess the quality of non-randomized control trials and randomized control trials, respectively. Then, the characteristics of the included studies were described in the six main fields table and the random effect model with robust estimation was applied to analyze the impact of interventions on the health utility of patients.From the database, 122 longitudinal original research were included in the meta-regression, with most of them having high or fair quality. The European Organization for the research and treatment of cancer scale for quality of life (EORTC-QLQ) was the most used health utility measurement at 65.15%. In the adjusted effect models, the Visual Analogue Scale (VAS) had significant statistics in all models when we compared it with the EQ-5D Scale (p < 0.05) and several types of cancer such as breast, lung, and prostate cancer had significant statistics when comparing with hematological cancer in the model types of cancer (p < 0.01). Moreover, radiotherapy, screening, and a combination of chemotherapy and best supportive care also had significant statistics (p < 0.01) in the model of interventions when compared with radiotherapy applied only. Our research can suggest a vital combination of both pharmaceutical and non-pharmacological interventions to improve the quality of life of some common types of cancer patients.
由于这种非传染性疾病的负担巨大，癌症干预措施的影响已在多项研究中进行了评估。在改善患者生活质量（QoL）和健康相关生活质量（HRQL）方面发挥重要作用的干预措施可分为两类：药物和非药物方法。然而，迄今为止的研究通常分析特定类型癌症的特定干预措施。因此，在这项系统评价和荟萃分析中，我们综合了几种癌症中癌症干预对患者生活质量的总体影响。
在这项研究中，我们遵循系统评价和荟萃分析报告的首选项目（PRISMA-P）在 Web of Science（WOS）数据库中搜索纵向原始研究。然后，使用 Newcastle-Ottawa 量表（NOS）和 Jadad 量表分别评估非随机对照试验和随机对照试验的质量。然后，在六个主要字段表中描述纳入研究的特征，并应用具有稳健估计的随机效应模型分析干预措施对患者健康效用的影响。
从数据库中，有 122 项纵向原始研究纳入荟萃回归分析，其中大多数研究质量较高或为中等。欧洲癌症研究与治疗组织生命质量量表（EORTC-QLQ）是最常用的健康效用测量方法，占 65.15%。在调整后的效应模型中，与 EQ-5D 量表相比（p<0.05），视觉模拟量表（VAS）在所有模型中均具有统计学意义，在癌症类型模型中与血液癌相比，几种类型的癌症（如乳腺癌、肺癌和前列腺癌）也具有统计学意义（p<0.01）。此外，与仅应用放射治疗相比，放射治疗、筛查以及化疗和最佳支持治疗的联合也具有统计学意义（p<0.01）在干预措施模型中。我们的研究可以为改善一些常见类型癌症患者的生活质量提供重要的药物和非药物干预措施的组合建议。
