The Ohio State University Wexner Medical Center, Columbus, OH, USA.
University College Dublin, Dublin, Ireland.
Support Care Cancer. 2024 Apr 8;32(5):275. doi: 10.1007/s00520-024-08487-2.
This review aimed to assess the measurement and reporting of time toxicity (i.e., time spent receiving care) within prospective oncologic studies.
On July 23, 2023, PubMed, Scopus, and Embase were queried for prospective or randomized controlled trials (RCT) from 1984 to 2023 that reported time toxicity as a primary or secondary outcome for oncologic treatments or interventions. Secondary analyses of RCTs were included if they reported time toxicity. The included studies were then evaluated for how they reported and defined time toxicity.
The initial query identified 883 records, with 10 studies (3 RCTs, 2 prospective cohort studies, and 5 secondary analyses of RCTs) meeting the final inclusion criteria. Treatment interventions included surgery (n = 5), systemic therapies (n = 4), and specialized palliative care (n = 1). The metric "days alive and out of the hospital" was used by 80% (n = 4) of the surgical studies. Three of the surgical studies did not include time spent receiving ambulatory care within the calculation of time toxicity. "Time spent at home" was assessed by three studies (30%), each using different definitions. The five secondary analyses from RCTs used more comprehensive metrics that included time spent receiving both inpatient and ambulatory care.
Time toxicity is infrequently reported within oncologic clinical trials, with no standardized definition, metric, or methodology. Further research is needed to identify best practices in the measurement and reporting of time toxicity to develop strategies that can be implemented to reduce its burden on patients seeking cancer care.
本综述旨在评估前瞻性肿瘤学研究中时间毒性(即接受治疗所花费的时间)的测量和报告情况。
2023 年 7 月 23 日,通过 PubMed、Scopus 和 Embase 检索了 1984 年至 2023 年期间报告时间毒性作为肿瘤治疗或干预的主要或次要结局的前瞻性或随机对照试验(RCT)。如果报告了时间毒性,则纳入 RCT 的二次分析。然后评估纳入的研究报告和定义时间毒性的方式。
最初的查询确定了 883 条记录,其中 10 项研究(3 项 RCT、2 项前瞻性队列研究和 5 项 RCT 的二次分析)符合最终纳入标准。治疗干预措施包括手术(n=5)、系统治疗(n=4)和专门的姑息治疗(n=1)。80%(n=4)的手术研究使用了“存活天数和不在院天数”这一指标。三项手术研究未将接受门诊护理的时间纳入时间毒性的计算中。三项研究(30%)评估了“在家时间”,每个研究使用了不同的定义。五项来自 RCT 的二次分析使用了更全面的指标,包括接受住院和门诊护理的时间。
时间毒性在肿瘤学临床试验中报告较少,没有标准化的定义、指标或方法。需要进一步研究以确定时间毒性测量和报告的最佳实践,制定可以实施的策略来减轻患者接受癌症治疗的负担。