Table 6 A list of quality of life studies that covered measurement issues in breast cancer patients (1974–2007)
Author(s) [Ref.] | Year | Main focus | Conclusion(s)/Recommendation |
|---|---|---|---|
Baum et al. [60] | 1990 | The issue of measuring QOL in advanced breast cancer | Efforts are being made to find out ways to measure QOL in advanced breast cancer patients. |
Sutherland et al. [61] | 1990 | Ratings of the importance of QOL variables | Breast cancer patients give different weights to different QOL variables. |
Gelber et al. [62] | 1992 | Explaining about the QOL adjusted Time Without Symptom and Toxicity | Integration of two methods (QOL and symptom free duration) could provide a new tool. |
Ganz et al. [63] | 1992 | The influence of multiple variables on the relationship of age to QOL | The casement plot methodology should be employed for simultaneous evaluation of multiple variables. |
Gelber et al. [64] | 1993 | Description of survival estimates with applications to QOL evaluation (Quality adjusted Time Without Symptoms of disease and Toxicity of treatment) | Estimation showed that patients continued to benefit greatly from long-term-duration chemotherapy between 5 and 10 years following treatment. |
Hyden et al. [65] | 1993 | Pitfalls in collecting QOL data | Several recommendations were made: (a) build support for QOL assessment among the group's leadership, (b) involve physicians and oncology nurses in the study design, (c) identify a QOL liaison at each participating institution, and (d) aggressively monitor the quality and timeliness of data submission. |
Fallowfield [66] | 1993 | Measurement issues | Some recommendations for selecting well validated measures. |
Gerard et al. [67] | 1993 | Framing and labeling effects in measuring quality adjusted life years | A significant difference was found in the particular values of descriptions that were written in the third person that differed in terms of whether the word "cancer" was used. |
Hurny et al. [68] | 1994 | Timing of baseline QOL assessment | Timing is an important consideration in QOL assessment. |
Fallowfield [69] | 1995 | Discussion on some instruments used to measure QOL | Monitoring QOL in breast cancer should be a mandatory part of follow-up in clinical trials. |
Hietanen [70] | 1996 | Measurement and practical aspects of QOL assessment | Main factors affecting QOL in the treatment of breast cancer. |
Bernhard et al. [71] | 1997 | The International Breast Cancer Study Group (IBCSG) approach | Confirmation of the feasibility, validity and clinical relevance of quality of life assessment. |
Bernhard et al. [72] | 1998 | Factors affecting baseline QOL assessment | Cultural and biomedical factors are influencing baseline QOL data and should be considered when evaluating the impact of treatment. |
Bernhard et al. [73] | 1998 | Practical issues and factors associated with missing data | The factors most highly associated with missing data were institution and chemotherapy compliance. |
Ganz et al. [74] | 1998 | Compliance with QOL data collection | Educational level of a trial participants might contribute to it compliance. |
Coates and Gebski [75] | 1998 | Approaches to missing data | Missing data cannot be assumed to be similar to those available. Optimal assessment requires careful prospective attention to complete data collection. |
Jansen et al. [76] | 2000 | Response shift | Significant recalibration effects were observed. |
Curran et al. [77] | 2000 | Summary measures and statistics | Different techniques in analysis might result in different conclusions. |
Perez et al. [78] | 2001 | The application of a time trade-off utility measure | The utility measure and a QOL measure showed fair to moderate concordance. |
Nagel et al. [79] | 2001 | A cluster analytic approach to analyze quality of life data | QOL scores could identify clinically meaningful subgroups of patients. |
Mosconi et al. [80] | 2001 | A general introduction to the debate on the methodological issues involved in QOL evaluation | Open questions regarding the use of QOL measures in surgical, adjuvant therapy and metastatic studies. |
Efficace et al. [81] | 2002 | Evaluating reliability, validity and cultural relevance of QOL measures in clinical trials | Suggestions for selecting future measures for use in breast cancer population of patients. |
Wilson et al. [82] | 2005 | Comparing two QOL measures (the Rand 36-item and the Functional Living Index-Cancer) | Neither questionnaire can be replaced by each other in studies of QOL in breast cancer patients. |
Carver et al. [83] | 2006 | Assessment of demographic, medical and psychological variables on outcome | Different aspects of QOL at long-term follow-up had different antecedents. |
Perry et al. [84] | 2007 | Benefits, acceptability and utilization of QOL assessment in women with breast cancer | Summarized the benefits, challenges, and barriers of QOL measurement for female breast cancer patients. |