Search

Objective: The prognosis for ovarian cancer patients remains poor. A key to maximizing survival rates is early detection and treatment. This requires an accurate prediction of malignancy. Our study seeks to improve the accuracy of prediction by focusing on early subjective assessment of malignancy. We therefore investigated the assessment of patients themselves in comparison to the assessment of physicians.Methods: One thousand three hundred and thirty patients participated in a prospective and multicenter study in six hospitals in Berlin. Using univariate analysis and multivariate logistic regression models, we measured the accuracy of the early subjective assessment in comparison to the final histological outcome. Moreover, we investigated factors related to the assessment of patients and physicians.Results: The patients' assessment of malignancy is remarkably accurate. With a positive predictive value of 58%, the majority of patients correctly assessed a pelvic mass as malignant. With more information available, physicians achieved only a slightly more accurate prediction of 63%.Conclusions: For the first time, our study considered subjective factors in the diagnostic process of pelvic masses. This paper demonstrates that the patients' personal assessment should be taken seriously as it can provide a significant contribution to earlier diagnosis and thus improved therapy and overall prognosis. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: One in eight women is diagnosed with breast cancer in the course of their life. As systematic palliative treatment has only a limited effect on survival rates, the concept of health-related quality of life (HRQoL) was developed for measurement of patient-centered outcomes. Various studies have already demonstrated the reliability of paper-based patient-reported outcome (pPRO) and electronic patient-reported outcome (ePRO) surveys and that the 2 means of assessment are equally valid.Objective: The aim of this study was to analyze the acceptance and evaluation of a tablet-based ePRO app for breast cancer patients and to examine its suitability, effort, and difficulty in the context of HRQoL and sociodemographic factors.Methods: Overall, 106 women with adjuvant or advanced breast cancer were included in a 2-center study at 2 major university hospitals in Germany. Patients were asked to answer HRQoL and PRO questionnaires both on a tablet on-site using a specific eHealth assessment website and on paper. The suitability, effort, and difficulty of the app and self-reported technical skills were also assessed. Only the results of the electronically acquired data are presented here. The results of the reliability of the pPRO data have already been published elsewhere.Results: Patients regarded the ePRO assessment as more suitable (80/106, 75.5%), less stressful (73/106, 68.9%), and less difficult (69/106, 65.1%) than pPRO. The majority of patients stated that ePRO assessment improves health care in hospitals (87/106, 82.1%). However, evaluation of ePROs depended on the level of education (P=.003) in the dimensions of effort and difficulty (regression analysis). The app was rated highly in all categories. HRQoL data and therapy setting did not show significant correlations with the app's evaluation parameters.Conclusions: The results indicate that ePRO surveys are feasible for measuring HRQoL in breast cancer patients and that those patients prefer ePRO assessment to pPRO assessment. It can also be seen that patients consider ePRO assessment to improve hospital health care. However, studies with larger numbers of patients are needed to develop apps that address the needs of patients with lower levels of education and technical skills. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]