Performance status score: do patients and their oncologists agree?
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT:
SUBMITTER: Blagden SP
PROVIDER: S-EPMC2376959 | biostudies-other | 2003 Sep
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-other
Similar Datasets
Project description:PurposeThere is limited information on treatment recommendations for glioblastoma patients with poor performance status. Here, we aim to evaluate the association of radiotherapy on survival in glioblastoma patients presenting with poor postoperative performance status in first-line setting.MethodsWe retrospectively analyzed data of 93 glioblastoma patients presenting with poor postoperative performance status (ECOG 2-4) at the University Hospital Zurich, Switzerland, in the years 2005-2019. A total of 43 patients received radiotherapy with or without systemic therapy in the first-line setting, whereas 50 patients received no additive local or systemic treatment after initial biopsy or resection. Overall survival was calculated from primary diagnosis and from the end of radiotherapy. In addition, factors influencing survival were analyzed.ResultsMedian overall survival from primary diagnosis was 6.2 months in the radiotherapy group (95% CI 6.2-14.8 weeks, range 2-149 weeks) and 2.3 months in the group without additive treatment (95% CI 1.3-7.4 weeks, range 0-28 weeks) (p < 0.001). This survival benefit was confirmed by landmark analyses. Factors associated with overall survival were extent of resection and administration of radiotherapy with or without systemic treatment. Median survival from end of radiotherapy was 3 months (95% CI 4.3-21.7 weeks, range 0-72 weeks), with 25.6% (n = 11) early termination of treatment and 83.7% (n = 36) requiring radiotherapy as in-patients. Performance status improved in 27.9% (n = 12) of patients after radiotherapy.ConclusionIn this retrospective single-institution analysis, radiotherapy improved overall survival in patients with poor performance status, especially in patients who were amendable to neurosurgical resection.
| S-EPMC9293860 | biostudies-literature
Project description:When musicians improvise freely together-not following any sort of script, predetermined harmonic structure, or "referent"-to what extent do they understand what they are doing in the same way as each other? And to what extent is their understanding privileged relative to outside listeners with similar levels of performing experience in free improvisation? In this exploratory case study, a saxophonist and a pianist of international renown who knew each other's work but who had never performed together before were recorded while improvising freely for 40 min. Immediately afterwards the performers were interviewed separately about the just-completed improvisation, first from memory and then while listening to two 5 min excerpts of the recording in order to prompt specific and detailed commentary. Two commenting listeners from the same performance community (a saxophonist and drummer) listened to, and were interviewed about, these excerpts. Some months later, all four participants rated the extent to which they endorsed 302 statements that had been extracted from the four interviews and anonymized. The findings demonstrate that these free jazz improvisers characterized the improvisation quite differently, selecting different moments to comment about and with little overlap in the content of their characterizations. The performers were not more likely to endorse statements by their performing partner than by a commenting listener from the same performance community, and their patterns of agreement with each other (endorsing or dissenting with statements) across multiple ratings-their interrater reliability as measured with Cohen's kappa-was only moderate, and not consistently higher than their agreement with the commenting listeners. These performers were more likely to endorse statements about performers' thoughts and actions than statements about the music itself, and more likely to endorse evaluatively positive than negative statements. But these kinds of statements were polarizing; the performers were more likely to agree with each other in their ratings of statements about the music itself and negative statements. As in Schober and Spiro (2014), the evidence supports a view that fully shared understanding is not needed for joint improvisation by professional musicians in this genre and that performing partners can agree with an outside listener more than with each other.
| S-EPMC5483471 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundWe undertook research to improve the AGREE instrument, a tool used to evaluate guidelines. We tested a new seven-point scale, evaluated the usefulness of the original items in the instrument, investigated evidence to support shorter, tailored versions of the tool, and identified areas for improvement.MethodWe report on one component of a larger study that used a mixed design with four factors (user type, clinical topic, guideline and condition). For the analysis reported in this article, we asked participants to read a guideline and use the AGREE items to evaluate it based on a seven-point scale, to complete three outcome measures related to adoption of the guideline, and to provide feedback on the instrument's usefulness and how to improve it.ResultsGuideline developers gave lower-quality ratings than did clinicians or policy-makers. Five of six domains were significant predictors of participants' outcome measures (p < 0.05). All domains and items were rated as useful by stakeholders (mean scores > 4.0) with no significant differences by user type (p > 0.05). Internal consistency ranged between 0.64 and 0.89. Inter-rater reliability was satisfactory. We received feedback on how to improve the instrument.InterpretationQuality ratings of the AGREE domains were significant predictors of outcome measures associated with guideline adoption: guideline endorsements, overall intentions to use guidelines, and overall quality of guidelines. All AGREE items were assessed as useful in determining whether a participant would use a guideline. No clusters of items were found more useful by some users than others. The measurement properties of the seven-point scale were promising. These data contributed to the refinements and release of the AGREE II.
| S-EPMC2900328 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ObjectiveThe aim of the present study was to acquire information on brachytherapy resources in Korea through a national survey of radiation oncologists.MethodsBetween October 2014 and January 2015, a questionnaire on the current status of brachytherapy was distributed to all 86 radiation oncology departments in Korea. The questionnaire was divided into sections querying general information on human resources, brachytherapy equipment, and suggestions for future directions of brachytherapy policy in Korea.ResultsThe response rate of the survey was 88.3%. The average number of radiation oncologists per center was 2.3. At the time of survey, 28 centers (36.8%) provided brachytherapy to patients. Among the 28 brachytherapy centers, 15 (53.5%) were located in in the capital Seoul and its surrounding metropolitan areas. All brachytherapy centers had a high-dose rate system using (192)Ir (26 centers) or (60)Co (two centers). Among the 26 centers using (192)Ir sources, 11 treated fewer than 40 patients per year. In the two centers using (60)Co sources, the number of patients per year was 16 and 120, respectively. The most frequently cited difficulties in performing brachytherapy were cost related. A total of 21 centers had a plan to sustain the current brachytherapy system, and four centers noted plans to upgrade their brachytherapy system. Two centers stated that they were considering discontinuation of brachytherapy due to cost burdens of radioisotope source replacement.ConclusionThe present study illustrated the current status of brachytherapy in Korea. Financial difficulties were the major barriers to the practice of brachytherapy.
| S-EPMC4864511 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BACKGROUND: In primary esophageal cancer, studies have frequently focused on surgical patients in an effort to link outcome to hospital- or surgeon-related experience, with operative mortality used as the main outcome measure. Many studies have found an inverse relationship between operative mortality and hospital volume and surgical expertise. This study aims to assess the influence of surgeon-related expertise and hospital volume on the relative survival of operated esophageal cancer patients. METHODS: From January 1994 to January 2002, a total of 1149 consecutive patients with primary esophageal cancer were diagnosed in the region of the Comprehensive Cancer Center North-Netherlands. As a proxy for surgeon-related expertise, hospitals in this region were categorized into three types: university, teaching nonuniversity, and nonteaching hospitals. The influence of hospital type on the relative survival of operated patients was studied by a multivariate Poisson regression model. RESULTS: Of the 1149 patients, 18.5% underwent surgery. There was no evidence of selective referral for surgery between the three hospital types with regard to age, tumor stage, and location. For operated patients, the 5-year relative survival was 49.2% for the university hospital versus 32.6% and 27.3% for teaching nonuniversity and nonteaching hospitals, respectively (P = .0039). When adjusted for age, tumor stage, hospital volume and referral frequency, the relative excess risk of death for the university hospital was considerably lower at .57 (95% confidence interval, .29-1.12) compared with nonteaching hospitals and .43 (95% confidence interval, .24-.76) compared with teaching nonuniversity hospitals (P = .0126). CONCLUSIONS: In our region, patients with esophageal cancer who underwent esophagectomy in the university hospital had a markedly better relative survival compared with those who underwent surgery at teaching nonuniversity and nonteaching hospitals, emphasizing the need for referral of esophageal surgery to centers with a greater experience.
| S-EPMC1914254 | biostudies-other
Project description:Early prognosis in comatose survivors after cardiac arrest due to ventricular fibrillation (VF) is unreliable, especially in patients undergoing mild hypothermia. We aimed at developing a reliable risk-score to enable early prediction of cerebral performance and survival.Sixty-one out of 239 consecutive patients undergoing mild hypothermia after cardiac arrest, with eventual return of spontaneous circulation (ROSC), and comatose status on admission fulfilled the inclusion criteria. Background clinical variables, VF time and frequency domain fundamental variables were considered. The primary and secondary outcomes were a favorable neurological performance (FNP) during hospitalization and survival to hospital discharge, respectively. The predictive model was developed in a retrospective cohort (n = 32; September 2006-September 2011, 48.5 ± 10.5 months of follow-up) and further validated in a prospective cohort (n = 29; October 2011-July 2013, 5 ± 1.8 months of follow-up).FNP was present in 16 (50.0%) and 21 patients (72.4%) in the retrospective and prospective cohorts, respectively. Seventeen (53.1%) and 21 patients (72.4%), respectively, survived to hospital discharge. Both outcomes were significantly associated (p < 0.001). Retrospective multivariate analysis provided a prediction model (sensitivity = 0.94, specificity = 1) that included spectral dominant frequency, derived power density and peak ratios between high and low frequency bands, and the number of shocks delivered before ROSC. Validation on the prospective cohort showed sensitivity = 0.88 and specificity = 0.91. A model-derived risk-score properly predicted 93% of FNP. Testing the model on follow-up showed a c-statistic ? 0.89.A spectral analysis-based model reliably correlates time-dependent VF spectral changes with acute cerebral injury in comatose survivors undergoing mild hypothermia after cardiac arrest.
| S-EPMC5568426 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Processing of the dataset of synthetic phosphopeptides by Savitzki et al. (MCP, 2011) using multiple search engines. Establishment of the D-score: a search engine independent MD-score.
2013-01-23 | PXD000021 | Pride
Project description:Protein-energy wasting (PEW) is common in patients with chronic kidney disease (CKD), and affects their prognosis. The Controlling Nutritional Status (CONUT) score is a nutritional screening tool calculated using only blood test data. This study aimed to investigate the prognostic value of CONUT score in patients just initiating dialysis. A total of 311 CKD patients who stably initiated dialysis were enrolled. Only 27 (8.7%) patients were classified as having normal nutritional status. The CONUT score was also independently correlated with elevated C-reactive protein levels (β = 0.485, p < 0.0001). During the median follow-up of 37 months, 100 patients (32.2%) died. The CONUT score was an independent predictor of all-cause mortality (adjusted hazard ratio 1.13, 95% confidence interval 1.04-1.22, p < 0.0024). As model discrimination, the addition of the CONUT score to a prediction model based on established risk factors significantly improved net reclassification improvement (0.285, p = 0.028) and integrated discrimination improvement (0.025, p = 0.023). The CONUT score might be a simplified surrogate marker of the PEW with clinical utility and could predict all-cause mortality, in addition to improving the predictability in CKD patients just initiating dialysis. The CONUT score also could predict infectious-disease mortality.
| S-EPMC9182995 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Expert judgements are essential when time and resources are stretched or we face novel dilemmas requiring fast solutions. Good advice can save lives and large sums of money. Typically, experts are defined by their qualifications, track record and experience. The social expectation hypothesis argues that more highly regarded and more experienced experts will give better advice. We asked experts to predict how they will perform, and how their peers will perform, on sets of questions. The results indicate that the way experts regard each other is consistent, but unfortunately, ranks are a poor guide to actual performance. Expert advice will be more accurate if technical decisions routinely use broadly-defined expert groups, structured question protocols and feedback.
| S-EPMC3146531 | biostudies-literature
Project description:AimsRandomized controlled trials (RCTs) are the gold standard for assessing the efficacy of therapeutic interventions because randomization protects from biases inherent in observational studies. Propensity score (PS) methods, proposed as a potential solution to confounding of the treatment-outcome association, are widely used in observational studies of therapeutic interventions for acute coronary syndromes (ACS). We aimed to systematically assess agreement between observational studies using PS methods and RCTs on therapeutic interventions for ACS.Methods and resultsWe searched for observational studies of interventions for ACS that used PS methods to estimate treatment effects on short- or long-term mortality. Using a standardized algorithm, we matched observational studies to RCTs based on patients' characteristics, interventions, and outcomes ('topics'), and we compared estimates of treatment effect between the two designs. When multiple observational studies or RCTs were identified for the same topic, we performed a meta-analysis and used the summary relative risk for comparisons. We matched 21 observational studies investigating 17 distinct clinical topics to 63 RCTs (median = 3 RCTs per observational study) for short-term (7 topics) and long-term (10 topics) mortality. Estimates from PS analyses differed statistically significantly from randomized evidence in two instances; however, observational studies reported more extreme beneficial treatment effects compared with RCTs in 13 of 17 instances (P = 0.049). Sensitivity analyses limited to large RCTs, and using alternative meta-analysis models yielded similar results.ConclusionFor the treatment of ACS, observational studies using PS methods produce treatment effect estimates that are of more extreme magnitude compared with those from RCTs, although the differences are rarely statistically significant.
| S-EPMC3409422 | biostudies-literature