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
. 2024 May 15;130(10):1826-1835.
doi: 10.1002/cncr.35189. Epub 2024 Jan 10.

Incorporating patient-reported outcome data into a predictive calculator for allogeneic hematopoietic cell transplantation recipients

Affiliations

Incorporating patient-reported outcome data into a predictive calculator for allogeneic hematopoietic cell transplantation recipients

Bronwen E Shaw et al. Cancer. .

Abstract

Background: The Center for International Blood and Marrow Transplant Research (CIBMTR) provides a 1-year overall survival calculator to estimate outcomes for individual patients before they undergo allogeneic hematopoietic cell transplantation (HCT) to inform risk. The calculator considers pre-HCT clinical and demographic characteristics, but not patient-reported outcomes (PROs). Because pre-HCT PRO scores have been associated with post-HCT outcomes, the authors hypothesized that adding PRO scores to the calculator would enhance its predictive power.

Methods: Clinical data were obtained from the CIBMTR and the Blood and Marrow Transplant Clinical Trials Network. The PRO measures used were the 36-Item Short Form Survey (SF-36) and the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-Bone Marrow Transplantation. One thousand thirty-three adult patients were included.

Results: When adjusted for clinical characteristics, the SF-36 physical component score was significantly predictive of 1-year survival (hazard ratio [HR], 0.88; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.81-0.95; p = .0015), whereas the mental component score was not (HR, 1.02; 95% CI, 0.95-1.10; p = 0.6396). The baseline single general health question on the SF-36 was also significantly associated with mortality (HR, 1.91 for those reporting fair/poor health vs. good, very good, or excellent health; 95% CI, 1.33-2.76; p = .0005). The addition of PRO scores to the calculator did not result in a significant change in the model's predictive ability. Self-reported pre-HCT scores were strongly predictive of self-reported health status (odds ratio, 3.35; 95% CI, 1.66-6.75; p = .0007) and quality of life (odds ratio, 3.24; 95% CI, 1.93-5.41; p < .0001) after HCT.

Conclusions: The authors confirmed the significant, independent association of pre-HCT PRO scores with overall survival, although adding PRO scores to the survival calculator did not improve its performance. They also demonstrated that a single general health question was as accurate as the full measure for predicting survival, an important finding that may reduce respondent burden and promote its inclusion in routine clinical practice. Validation of these findings should be performed.

Keywords: hematopoietic cell transplantation (HCT); patient‐reported outcome (PRO); single‐item health question; tools.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

Dr. Shaw reports OrcaBio and Mallinkrodt.

Dr. Flynn reports research funding compensation to her institution from Novartis.

Dr. D’Souza reports Institutional research funding: Abbvie, Caelum, Janssen, Novartis, Prothena, Sorrento, Takeda, TeneoBio Ad Board/Consulting- BMS, Pfizer, Janssen, Prothena.

Dr. Hamilton reports compensation from Nkarta ad hoc advisory board; Angiocrine data safety monitoring committee; Therakos/Mallinkrodt speaker fees; Kadmon/Sanofi ad hoc advisory board; Incyte consultancy; Equilium ad hoc advisory board.

Dr. Phelan reports institutional research funding from Amgen and advisory board fees from bluebird bio.

Dr. Lee reports compensation from research funding: Amgen, AstraZeneca, Incyte, Kadmon, Pfizer, Syndax; Steering committee: Incyte; Drug supply: Janssen; Consulting: Mallinckrodt, Equillium, Kadmon.

Figures

Figure 1:
Figure 1:
Association of baseline SF-36 single general health question with 1 year OS

Similar articles

Cited by

References

    1. Karnofsky DA, Abelmann WH, Craver LF, Burchenal JH. The use of the nitrogen mustards in the palliative treatment of carcinoma. With particular reference to bronchogenic carcinoma. . Cancer 1948;1:634–656.
    1. Bradburn N “Respondent burden.” Proceedings of the Survey Research Methods Section of the American Statistical Association Alexandria, VA, USA: American Statistical Association, 1978 1978;35:40.
    1. Health USDo, Human Services FDACfDE, Research, et al. Guidance for industry: patient-reported outcome measures: use in medical product development to support labeling claims: draft guidance. Health Qual Life Outcomes 2006;4:79. DOI: 10.1186/1477-7525-4-79. - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Rolstad S, Adler J, Ryden A. Response burden and questionnaire length: is shorter better? A review and meta-analysis. Value Health 2011;14(8):1101–8. DOI: 10.1016/j.jval.2011.06.003. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Giri S, Mir N, Al-Obaidi M, et al. Use of Single-Item Self-Rated Health Measure to Identify Frailty and Geriatric Assessment-Identified Impairments Among Older Adults with Cancer. The Oncologist 2022;27(1):e45–e52. - PMC - PubMed

Publication types

LinkOut - more resources