Centralized Patient-Reported Outcome Data Collection in Transplantation Is Feasible and Clinically Meaningful

被引:45
|
作者
Shaw, Bronwen E. [1 ]
Brazauskas, Ruta [1 ]
Millard, Heather R. [1 ]
Fonstad, Rachel [2 ]
Flynn, Kathryn E. [3 ]
Abernethy, Amy [4 ]
Vogel, Jenny [2 ]
Petroske, Charney [2 ]
Mattila, Deborah [2 ]
Drexler, Rebecca [2 ]
Lee, Stephanie J. [5 ]
Horowitz, Mary M. [1 ]
Rizzo, J. Douglas [1 ]
机构
[1] Med Coll Wisconsin, Ctr Int Blood & Marrow Transplant Res, Milwaukee, WI 53226 USA
[2] Ctr Int Blood & Marrow Transplant Res, Minneapolis, MN USA
[3] Med Coll Wisconsin, Ctr Patient Care & Outcomes Res, Milwaukee, WI 53226 USA
[4] Flatiron Hlth, New York, NY USA
[5] Fred Hutchinson Canc Res Ctr, Clin Res Div, Seattle, WA 98104 USA
关键词
36-Item Short Form Health Survey (SF-36); Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-Bone Marrow Transplant (FACT-BMT); patient-reported outcomes; survival; transplantation; QUALITY-OF-LIFE; HEMATOPOIETIC-CELL TRANSPLANTATION; LONG-TERM HEALTH; BMT CTN; MALIGNANCIES; FEASIBILITY; PREDICTS; CHILDREN;
D O I
10.1002/cncr.30936
中图分类号
R73 [肿瘤学];
学科分类号
100214 ;
摘要
BACKGROUND Allogeneic hematopoietic cell transplantation (HCT) cures many patients, but often with the risk of late effects and impaired quality of life. The value of quantifying patient-reported outcomes (PROs) is increasingly being recognized, but the routine collection of PROs is uncommon. This study evaluated the feasibility of prospective PRO collection by an outcome registry at multiple time points from unselected HCT patients undergoing transplantation at centers contributing clinical data to the Center for International Blood and Marrow Transplant Research (CIBMTR), and then it correlated the PRO data with clinical and demographic data. METHODS The Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-Bone Marrow Transplant (FACT-BMT), 36-Item Short Form Health Survey (SF-36), and Pediatric Quality of Life Inventory measures were administered before HCT, on day 100, and at 6 and 12 months. Patients were recruited by the transplant center, but posttransplant PRO collection was managed centrally by the CIBMTR. RESULTS There were 580 eligible patients, and 390 (67%) enrolled. Feasibility was shown by high time-specific retention rates (176 of 238 at 1 year or 74%) and participant satisfaction. Factors associated with higher response rates were an age > 50 years (odds ratio [OR], 1.58; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.03-2.41; P = .0355), white race (OR, 4.61; 95% CI, 2.66-7.99; P < .0001), and being married (OR, 2.28; 95% CI, 1.42-3.65; P = .0006) for adults and a higher family income for children (OR, 4.99; 95% CI, 2.12-11.75; P = .0002). Importantly, pre-HCT PRO scores independently predicted survival after adjustments for patient-, disease-, and transplant-related factors. The adjusted probabilities of 1-year survival were 56%, 67%, 75%, and 76% by increasing quartiles of the pre-HCT FACT-BMT score and 58%, 72%, 62%, and 82% by increasing quartiles of the pre-HCT SF-36 physical component score. CONCLUSIONS A hybrid model of local consent for centralized PRO collection is feasible, and pretransplant PROs provide critical prognostic information for HCT outcomes. (C) 2017 American Cancer Society.
引用
收藏
页码:4687 / 4700
页数:14
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [1] A mixed methods approach to establishing clinically meaningful change using patient-reported outcome and observer-reported outcome data
    Nelsen, L.
    Staunton, H.
    Sully, K.
    Arbuckle, R.
    QUALITY OF LIFE RESEARCH, 2017, 26 (01) : 4 - 4
  • [2] Adding Centralized Electronic Patient-Reported Outcome Data Collection to an Established International Clinical Outcomes Registry
    Cusatis, Rachel
    Flynn, Kathryn E.
    Vasu, Sumithira
    Pidala, Joseph
    Muffly, Lori
    Uberti, Joseph
    Tamari, Roni
    Mattila, Deborah
    Mussetter, Alisha
    Bruzauskas, Ruta
    Chen, Min
    Leckrone, Erin
    Myers, Judith
    Mau, Lih-Wen
    Rizzo, J. Douglas
    Saber, Wael
    Horowitz, Mary
    Lee, Stephanie J.
    Burns, Linda J.
    Shaw, Bronwen E.
    TRANSPLANTATION AND CELLULAR THERAPY, 2022, 28 (02): : 112.e1 - 112.e9
  • [3] A Qualitative Study in Obesity to Explore Clinically Meaningful Change on Patient-Reported Outcome (PRO) Measures
    Poon, Jiat Ling
    Marshall, Chris
    Johnson, Chloe
    Pegram, Hannah
    Hunter, Maile
    Kan, Hongjun
    Ahmad, Nadia
    DIABETES, 2020, 69
  • [4] Patient-reported data and the politics of meaningful data work
    Langstrup, Henriette
    HEALTH INFORMATICS JOURNAL, 2019, 25 (03) : 567 - 576
  • [5] Patient-Reported Outcome Measures (PROMs) for Data Collection for Pediatric Radiotherapy
    Dunlea, C.
    Holborn, C.
    Gedara, C. Kambakara
    Gains, J.
    Gaze, M.
    Lim, P.
    Soto, C.
    Chang, Y.
    INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RADIATION ONCOLOGY BIOLOGY PHYSICS, 2025, 121 (03):
  • [6] Defining Clinically Meaningful Thresholds for Patient-Reported Outcomes in Knee Arthroplasty
    Most, Jasper
    Hoelen, Thomay-Claire A.
    Spekenbrink-Spooren, Anneke
    Schotanus, Martijn G. M.
    Boonen, Bert
    JOURNAL OF ARTHROPLASTY, 2022, 37 (05): : 837 - +
  • [7] Is the Collection of Patient Reported Outcome (PRO) Data in an Emergency General Surgery Environment Feasible?
    Mason, J.
    Stevens, D.
    Blencowe, N.
    McNair, A.
    Blazeby, J.
    BRITISH JOURNAL OF SURGERY, 2015, 102 : 70 - 70
  • [8] Meaningful Clinical Applications of Patient-Reported Outcome Measures in Orthopaedics
    Makhni, Eric C.
    JOURNAL OF BONE AND JOINT SURGERY-AMERICAN VOLUME, 2021, 103 (01): : 84 - 91
  • [9] Examining the impact of different data collection modes for patient-reported outcome measures
    Tsiamis, Ellie
    Evans, Melanie
    Evans, Sue
    QUALITY OF LIFE RESEARCH, 2019, 28 : S61 - S61
  • [10] Patient-reported outcomes and patient-reported outcome measures in liver transplantation: a scoping review
    Vedadi, Ali
    Khairalla, Roula
    Che, Adrian
    Nagee, Ahsas
    Saqib, Mohammed
    Ayub, Ali
    Wasim, Aghna
    Macanovic, Sara
    Orchanian-Cheff, Ani
    Selzner-Malekkiani, Nazia
    Bartlett, Susan
    Mucsi, Istvan
    QUALITY OF LIFE RESEARCH, 2023, 32 (09) : 2435 - 2445