Search

Background: The EORTC QLQ-STO22 (QLQ-STO22) is a firmly established and validated measure of health-related quality of life (HRQoL) for people with gastric cancer (GC), developed over two decades ago. Since then there have been dramatic changes in treatment options for GC. Also, East Asian patients were not involved in the development of QLQ-STO22, where GC is most prevalent and the QLQ-STO22 is widely used. A review with appropriate updating of the measure was planned. This study aims to capture HRQoL issues associated with new treatments and the perspectives of patients and health care professionals (HCPs) from different cultural backgrounds, including East Asia. Methods: A systematic literature review and open-ended interviews were preformed to identify potential new HRQoL issues relating to GC. This was followed by structured interviews where HCPs and patients reviewed the QLQ-STO22 alongside new issues regarding relevance, importance, and acceptability. Results: The review of 267 publications and interviews with 104 patients and 18 HCPs (48 and 9 from East Asia, respectively) generated a list of 58 new issues. Three of these relating to eating small amounts, flatulence, and neuropathy were recommended for inclusion in an updated version of the QLQ-STO22 and covered by five additional questions. Conclusions: This study supports the content validity of the QLQ-STO22, suggesting its continued relevance to patients with GC, including those from East Asia. The updated version with additional questions and linguistic changes will enhance its specificity, but further testing is required. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose: To investigate unmet needs of patients with colorectal cancer (CRC) at the end of treatment and whether unmet needs improve over time. Identify predictors of need following treatment and whether unmet need is associated with worse health-related quality of life (HRQoL).Methods: As part of the UK ColoREctal Wellbeing (CREW) cohort study, patients treated for CRC completed the Supportive Care Needs Survey Short Form-34 (SCNS SF-34) 15 and 24 months following surgery, along with questionnaires measuring HRQoL, wellbeing, life events, social support, and confidence to manage their cancer before surgery, 3, 9, 15, and 24 months post-surgery.Results: The SCNS SF-34 was completed by 526 patients at 15 months and 510 patients at 24 months. About one-quarter of patients had at least one moderate or severe unmet need at both time points. Psychological and physical unmet needs were the most common and did not improve over time. Over 60% of patients who reported 5 or more moderate or severe unmet needs at 15 months experienced the same level of unmet need at 24 months. HRQoL at the beginning of treatment predicted unmet needs at the end of treatment. Unmet needs, specifically physical, psychological, and health system and information needs, were associated with poorer health and HRQoL at the end of treatment.Conclusions: Unmet needs persist over time and are associated with HRQoL. Evaluation of HRQoL at the start of treatment would help inform the identification of vulnerable patients. Assessment and care planning in response to unmet needs should be integrated into person-centred care.Implications For Cancer Survivors: Early identification of CRC patients at risk of unmet needs will help infrom personalised survivorship care plans. The implementation of personalised and tailored services are likely to confer HRQoL gains. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

We constructed a new type of global quality of life (QOL) scale deriving from the Borg symptom scales and compared four versions of this new type of scale (H scale) with four category rating (CR) scales and four visual analogue (VA) scales. Mean self-ratings and mean scenario ratings on different scales showed small but significant differences, and intercorrelations were higher amongst the H scales than amongst the CR or VA scales. H scales were on average most preferred (by undergraduates and elderly subjects) followed by CR and lastly VA scales in terms of case of use and perceived accuracy of representation. We investigated the preferred polarity of the scales: subjects preferred 'Perfect quality of life' to be indicated by 20 or 100 (with slight preference for the latter) rather than 0. The H scales have eight additional quantifiers between the end labels and there was good agreement about the perceived magnitude of these quantifiers. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]