Exploring the patient experience of locally advanced or metastatic pancreatic cancer to inform patient-reported outcomes assessment.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT: PURPOSE:Pancreatic cancer and its treatments impact patients' symptoms, functioning, and quality of life. Content-valid patient-reported outcome (PRO) instruments are required to assess outcomes in clinical trials. This study aimed to: (a) conceptualise the patient experience of pancreatic cancer; (b) identify relevant PRO instruments; (c) review the content validity of mapped instruments to guide PRO measurement in clinical trials. METHODS:Qualitative literature and interviews with clinicians and patients were analysed thematically to develop a conceptual model of patient experience. PRO instruments were reviewed against the conceptual model to identify gaps in measurement. Cognitive debriefing explored PRO conceptual relevance and patients' understanding. RESULTS:Patients in the USA (N?=?24, aged 35-84) and six clinicians (from US and Europe) were interviewed. Pre-diagnosis, pain was the most frequently reported symptom (N?=?21). Treatments included surgery, radiation, chemotherapy, and immunotherapy. Surgery was associated with acute pain and gastrointestinal symptoms. Chemotherapy/chemoradiation side effects were cyclical and included fatigue/tiredness (N?=?21), appetite loss (N?=?15), bowel problems (N?=?15), and nausea/vomiting (N?=?15). Patients' functioning and well-being were impaired. The literature review identified 49 PRO measures; the EORTC QLQ-C30/PAN26 were used most frequently and mapped with interview concepts. Patients found the EORTC QLQ-C30/PAN26 to be understandable and relevant; neuropathic side effects were suggested additions. CONCLUSIONS:This is the first study to develop a conceptual model of patients' experience of metastatic/recurrent pancreatic cancer and explore the content validity of the EORTC QLQ-C30/PAN26 following therapeutic advances. The EORTC QLQ-C30/PAN26 appears conceptually relevant; additional items to assess neuropathic side effects are recommended. A recall period should be stated throughout to standardise responses.
SUBMITTER: Herman JM
PROVIDER: S-EPMC6803577 | biostudies-literature | 2019 Nov
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
ACCESS DATA