Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2023 Jul;30(7):3969-3986.
doi: 10.1245/s10434-023-13388-5. Epub 2023 Apr 18.

Systematic Review of Patient-Reported Outcome Measures in Locally Recurrent Rectal Cancer

Niamh McKigney  1 , Fergus Houston  2 , Ellen Ross  3 , Galina Velikova  4   5 , Julia Brown  6 , Deena Pravin Harji  6   7
Affiliations

Systematic Review of Patient-Reported Outcome Measures in Locally Recurrent Rectal Cancer

Niamh McKigney et al. Ann Surg Oncol. 2023 Jul.

Abstract

Background: The availability of high-quality patient-reported outcome (PRO) data is crucial to guiding shared decision-making in the context of locally recurrent rectal cancer (LRRC), where potential treatment benefits must be balanced against the impact of both the disease and treatment on PROs, such as quality of life. This review aimed to identify the patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) currently being reported in LRRC and to appraise the methodological quality of studies using these measures.

Methods: PubMed, Embase and CINAHL databases were searched, including studies published up until 14th September 2022. Studies in adults with LRRC reporting PROMS as a primary or secondary outcome measure were included. Data were extracted concerning the methodological quality of the reporting of PROMs using criteria informed by the CONSORT-PRO checklist and the psychometric properties of the PROMs identified using the COSMIN Risk of Bias checklist.

Results: Thirty-five studies including 1914 patients with LRRC were identified. None of the studies included in the review met all eleven criteria for the quality of reporting of PROMs. Seventeen PROMs and two clinician-reported outcome measures were identified, none of which have been validated for use in patients with LRRC.

Conclusions: None of the PROMs which are currently being used to report PROs in LRRC have been validated for use in this cohort of patients. Future studies in this disease area should focus on utilising PROMs that have undergone a robust development process including patients with LRRC, to produce data which is high quality, accurate and relevant.

PubMed Disclaimer

Figures

Fig. 1
Fig. 1
Summary of the COSMIN Risk of Bias Checklist. *Cross-cultural validity was not assessed in this review as the search strategy was not deemed suitable for identifying all studies describing this psychometric property. **The COSMIN panel determined that no gold standard exists for PROMs and therefore criterion validity was not assessed in this review.
Fig. 2
Fig. 2
PRISMA flow diagram
Fig. 3
Fig. 3
Quality of Reporting of PROMS in LRRC
See this image and copyright information in PMC

Comment in

Similar articles

See all similar articles

Cited by

References

    1. Movsas B, Moughan J, Sarna L, et al. Quality of life supersedes the classic prognosticators for long-term survival in locally advanced non-small-cell lung cancer: an analysis of RTOG 9801. J Clin Oncol. 2009;27(34):5816–5822. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Coates A, Porzsolt F, Osoba D. Quality of life in oncology practice: Prognostic value of EORTC QLQ-C30 scores in patients with advanced malignancy. Eur J Cancer. 1997;33(7):1025–1030. - PubMed
    1. Maisey NR, Norman A, Watson M, Allen MJ, Hill ME, Cunningham D. Baseline quality of life predicts survival in patients with advanced colorectal cancer. Eur J Cancer. 2002;38(10):1351–1357. - PubMed
    1. Absolom K, Warrington L, Hudson E, et al. Phase III randomized controlled trial of eRAPID: eHealth intervention during chemotherapy. J Clin Oncol. 2021;39(7):734–747. - PubMed
    1. Denis F, Basch E, Septans A-L, et al. Two-year survival comparing web-based symptom monitoring vs routine surveillance following treatment for lung cancer. JAMA. 2019;321(3):306–307. - PMC - PubMed

Publication types