1
40
6
-
Text
A resource consisting primarily of words for reading. Examples include books, letters, dissertations, poems, newspapers, articles, archives of mailing lists. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre Text.
URL Address
<a href="http://doi.org/10.1200/JCO.2014.57.6264" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer noopener">http://doi.org/10.1200/JCO.2014.57.6264</a>
Pages
3867–3873
Issue
34
Volume
32
Dublin Core
The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/.
Title
A name given to the resource
Impact of reirradiation of painful osseous metastases on quality of life and function: a secondary analysis of the NCIC CTG SC.20 randomized trial.
Publisher
An entity responsible for making the resource available
Journal of clinical oncology : official journal of the American Society of Clinical Oncology
Date
A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource
2014
2014-12
Subject
The topic of the resource
*Quality of Life; 80 and over; Adult; Aged; Bone Neoplasms/complications/psychology/*radiotherapy/*secondary; Dose Fractionation; Emotions; Female; Health Status; Humans; Male; Mental Health; Middle Aged; Pain Measurement; Pain/diagnosis/etiology/*prevention & control/psychology; Radiation; Retreatment; Surveys and Questionnaires; Time Factors; Treatment Outcome; Young Adult
Creator
An entity primarily responsible for making the resource
Chow Edward; Meyer Ralph M; Chen Bingshu E; van der Linden Yvette M; Roos Daniel; Hartsell William F; Hoskin Peter; Wu Jackson S Y; Nabid Abdenour; Tissing-Tan Caroline J A; Oei Bing; Babington Scott; Demas William F; Wilson Carolyn F; Wong Rebecca K S; Brundage Michael
Description
An account of the resource
PURPOSE: We previously demonstrated that 48% of patients with pain at sites of previously irradiated bone metastases benefit from reirradiation. It is unknown whether alleviating pain also improves patient perception of quality of life (QOL). PATIENTS AND METHODS: We used the database of a randomized trial comparing radiation treatment dose fractionation schedules to evaluate whether response, determined using the International Consensus Endpoint (ICE) and Brief Pain Inventory pain score (BPI-PS), is associated with patient perception of benefit, as measured using the European Organisation for Resesarch and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) Quality of Life Questionnaire Core 30 (QLQ-C30) and functional interference scale of the BPI (BPI-FI). Evaluable patients completed baseline and
Identifier
An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context
<a href="http://doi.org/10.1200/JCO.2014.57.6264" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer noopener">10.1200/JCO.2014.57.6264</a>
Rights
Information about rights held in and over the resource
Article information provided for research and reference use only. All rights are retained by the journal listed under publisher and/or the creator(s).
*Quality of Life
2014
80 and over
Adult
Aged
Babington Scott
Bone Neoplasms/complications/psychology/*radiotherapy/*secondary
Brundage Michael
Chen Bingshu E
Chow Edward
Demas William F
Dose Fractionation
Emotions
Female
Hartsell William F
Health Status
Hoskin Peter
Humans
Journal of clinical oncology : official journal of the American Society of Clinical Oncology
Male
Mental Health
Meyer Ralph M
Middle Aged
Nabid Abdenour
Oei Bing
Pain Measurement
Pain/diagnosis/etiology/*prevention & control/psychology
Radiation
Retreatment
Roos Daniel
Surveys and Questionnaires
Time Factors
Tissing-Tan Caroline J A
Treatment Outcome
van der Linden Yvette M
Wilson Carolyn F
Wong Rebecca K S
Wu Jackson S Y
Young Adult
-
Text
A resource consisting primarily of words for reading. Examples include books, letters, dissertations, poems, newspapers, articles, archives of mailing lists. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre Text.
URL Address
<a href="http://doi.org/10.1016/S1470-2045(13)70556-4" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer noopener">http://doi.org/10.1016/S1470-2045(13)70556-4</a>
Pages
164–171
Issue
2
Volume
15
Dublin Core
The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/.
Title
A name given to the resource
Single versus multiple fractions of repeat radiation for painful bone metastases: a randomised, controlled, non-inferiority trial.
Publisher
An entity responsible for making the resource available
The Lancet. Oncology
Date
A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource
2014
2014-02
Subject
The topic of the resource
*Dose Fractionation; *Radiotherapy; Aged; Analgesics – Therapeutic Use; Analgesics/therapeutic use; Australia; Bone Neoplasms; Bone Neoplasms – Complications; Bone Neoplasms – Radiotherapy; Bone Neoplasms/complications/*radiotherapy/*secondary; Brief Pain Inventory; Canada; Cauda Equina; Chi Square Test; Chi-Square Distribution; Clinical Assessment Tools; Clinical Trials; Computer-Assisted; Computer-Assisted – Adverse Effects; Computer-Assisted/adverse effects; Europe; Female; Fractures; Funding Source; Human; Humans; Intention to Treat Analysis; Israel; Logistic Models; Logistic Regression; Male; Middle Age; Middle Aged; New Zealand; Odds Ratio; Pain – Diagnosis; Pain – Drug Therapy; Pain – Etiology; Pain – Radiotherapy; Pain Measurement; Pain/diagnosis/drug therapy/*etiology/*radiotherapy; Questionnaires; Radiation; Radiation Dosage; Radiotherapy; Radiotherapy Planning; Risk Factors; Scales; Spinal Cord Compression – Etiology; Spinal Cord Compression/etiology; Spontaneous – Etiology; Spontaneous/etiology; Surveys and Questionnaires; Time Factors; Treatment Outcome; Treatment Outcomes
Creator
An entity primarily responsible for making the resource
Chow Edward; van der Linden Yvette M; Roos Daniel; Hartsell William F; Hoskin Peter; Wu Jackson S Y; Brundage Michael D; Nabid Abdenour; Tissing-Tan Caroline J A; Oei Bing; Babington Scott; Demas William F; Wilson Carolyn F; Meyer Ralph M; Chen Bingshu E; Wong Rebecca K S
Description
An account of the resource
BACKGROUND: Although repeat radiation treatment has been shown to palliate pain in patients with bone metastases from multiple primary origin sites, data for the best possible dose fractionation schedules are lacking. We aimed to assess two dose fractionation schedules in patients with painful bone metastases needing repeat radiation therapy. METHODS: We did a multicentre, non-blinded, randomised, controlled trial in nine countries worldwide. We enrolled patients 18 years or older who had radiologically confirmed, painful (ie, pain measured as \textgreater/=2 points using the Brief Pain Inventory) bone metastases, had received previous radiation therapy, and were taking a stable dose and schedule of pain-relieving drugs (if prescribed). Patients were randomly assigned (1:1) to receive either 8 Gy in a single fraction or 20 Gy in multiple fractions by a central computer-generated allocation sequence using dynamic minimisation to conceal assignment, stratified by previous radiation fraction schedule, response to initial radiation, and treatment centre. Patients, caregivers, and investigators were not masked to treatment allocation. The primary endpoint was overall pain response at 2 months, which was defined as the sum of complete and partial pain responses to treatment, assessed using both Brief Pain Inventory scores and changes in analgesic consumption. Analysis was done by intention to treat. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT00080912. FINDINGS: Between Jan 7, 2004, and May 24, 2012, we randomly assigned 425 patients to each treatment group. 19 (4%) patients in the 8 Gy group and 12 (3%) in the 20 Gy group were found to be ineligible after randomisation, and 140 (33%) and 132 (31%) patients, respectively, were not assessable at 2 months and were counted as missing data in the intention-to-treat analysis. In the intention-to-treat population, 118 (28%) patients allocated to 8 Gy treatment and 135 (32%) allocated to 20 Gy treatment had an overall pain response to treatment (p=0.21; response difference of 4.00% [upper limit of the 95% CI 9.2, less than the prespecified non-inferiority margin of 10%]). In the per-protocol population, 116 (45%) of 258 patients and 134 (51%) of 263 patients, respectively, had an overall pain response to treatment (p=0.17; response difference 6.00% [upper limit of the 95% CI 13.2, greater than the prespecified non-inferiority margin of 10%]). The most frequently reported acute radiation-related toxicities at 14 days were lack of appetite (201 [56%] of 358 assessable patients who received 8 Gy vs 229 [66%] of 349 assessable patients who received 20 Gy; p=0.011) and diarrhoea (81 [23%] of 357 vs 108 [31%] of 349; p=0.018). Pathological fractures occurred in 30 (7%) of 425 patients assigned to 8 Gy and 20 (5%) of 425 assigned to 20 Gy (odds ratio [OR] 1.54, 95% CI 0.85-2.75; p=0.15), and spinal cord or cauda equina compressions were reported in seven (2%) of 425 versus two (\textless1%) of 425, respectively (OR 3.54, 95% CI 0.73-17.15; p=0.094). INTERPRETATION: In patients with painful bone metastases requiring repeat radiation therapy, treatment with 8 Gy in a single fraction seems to be non-inferior and less toxic than 20 Gy in multiple fractions; however, as findings were not robust in a per-protocol analysis, trade-offs between efficacy and toxicity might exist. FUNDING: Canadian Cancer Society Research Institute, US National Cancer Institute, Cancer Council Australia, Royal Adelaide Hospital, Dutch Cancer Society, and Assistance Publique-Hopitaux de Paris.
Identifier
An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context
<a href="http://doi.org/10.1016/S1470-2045(13)70556-4" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer noopener">10.1016/S1470-2045(13)70556-4</a>
Rights
Information about rights held in and over the resource
Article information provided for research and reference use only. All rights are retained by the journal listed under publisher and/or the creator(s).
*Dose Fractionation
*Radiotherapy
2014
Aged
Analgesics – Therapeutic Use
Analgesics/therapeutic use
Australia
Babington Scott
Bone Neoplasms
Bone Neoplasms – Complications
Bone Neoplasms – Radiotherapy
Bone Neoplasms/complications/*radiotherapy/*secondary
Brief pain inventory
Brundage Michael D
Canada
Cauda Equina
Chen Bingshu E
Chi Square Test
Chi-Square Distribution
Chow Edward
Clinical Assessment Tools
Clinical Trials
Computer-Assisted
Computer-Assisted – Adverse Effects
Computer-Assisted/adverse effects
Demas William F
Europe
Female
Fractures
Funding Source
Hartsell William F
Hoskin Peter
Human
Humans
Intention to Treat Analysis
Israel
Logistic Models
Logistic Regression
Male
Meyer Ralph M
Middle Age
Middle Aged
Nabid Abdenour
New Zealand
Odds Ratio
Oei Bing
Pain – Diagnosis
Pain – Drug Therapy
Pain – Etiology
Pain – Radiotherapy
Pain Measurement
Pain/diagnosis/drug therapy/*etiology/*radiotherapy
Questionnaires
Radiation
Radiation Dosage
Radiotherapy
Radiotherapy Planning
Risk Factors
Roos Daniel
Scales
Spinal Cord Compression – Etiology
Spinal Cord Compression/etiology
Spontaneous – Etiology
Spontaneous/etiology
Surveys and Questionnaires
The Lancet. Oncology
Time Factors
Tissing-Tan Caroline J A
Treatment Outcome
Treatment Outcomes
van der Linden Yvette M
Wilson Carolyn F
Wong Rebecca K S
Wu Jackson S Y
-
Text
A resource consisting primarily of words for reading. Examples include books, letters, dissertations, poems, newspapers, articles, archives of mailing lists. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre Text.
URL Address
<a href="http://doi.org/10.1016/j.radonc.2017.10.006" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer noopener">http://doi.org/10.1016/j.radonc.2017.10.006</a>
Pages
541–546
Issue
3
Volume
126
Dublin Core
The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/.
Title
A name given to the resource
Gender and age make no difference in the re-irradiation of painful bone metastases: A secondary analysis of the NCIC CTG SC.20 randomized trial.
Publisher
An entity responsible for making the resource available
Radiotherapy and oncology : journal of the European Society for Therapeutic Radiology and Oncology
Date
A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource
2018
2018-03
Subject
The topic of the resource
*Age; *Bone metastases; *Gender; *Pain response; *Quality of life; *Radiotherapy; *Re-irradiation; Age Factors; Aged; Bone Neoplasms/physiopathology/*radiotherapy/*secondary; Cancer Pain/etiology/*radiotherapy; Female; Humans; Male; Middle Aged; Pain Measurement; Palliative Care/methods/statistics & numerical data; Patient Reported Outcome Measures; Physicians'/*statistics & numerical data; Practice Patterns; Quality of Life; Re-Irradiation; Sex Factors
Creator
An entity primarily responsible for making the resource
Chow Ronald; Ding Keyue; Ganesh Vithusha; Meyer Ralph M; van der Linden Yvette M; Roos Daniel; Hartsell William F; Hoskin Peter; Wu Jackson S Y; Nabid Abdenour; van Acht Manouk; Wanders Rinus; Babington Scott; Demas William F; Wilson Carolyn F; Wong Rebecca K S; Brundage Michael; Zhu Liting; Chow Edward
Description
An account of the resource
BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Patient's gender and age may influence physicians in prescribing palliative radiotherapy. The purpose of this secondary analysis of the National Cancer Institute of Canada Clinical Trials Group Symptom Control Trial SC.20 was to explore the gender and age differences in pain and patient reported outcomes in cancer patients with bone metastases undergoing re-irradiation. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Response to radiation was evaluated using the International Bone Metastases Consensus Endpoint Definitions. Patients completed the Brief Pain Inventory (BPI) and European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Questionnaire Core 30 (C30) before and 2months after re-irradiation. RESULTS: A total of 847 patients were analyzed. At baseline, men had more dyspnea, and mild pain. Older patients consumed less analgesic. More women reported clinically significant improvement in mood and enjoyment of life in the BPI after radiation. Similarly, younger patients reported better improvement in enjoyment of life. There were no significant gender or age differences in overall survival, response to radiation, or in C30 scores at 2months. CONCLUSION: Similar benefit in terms of pain relief was observed across all patient groups. Cancer patients with bone metastases should be offered palliative re-irradiation irrespective of gender or age. TRIAL REGISTRATION: NCT00080912; https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT00080912.
Identifier
An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context
<a href="http://doi.org/10.1016/j.radonc.2017.10.006" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer noopener">10.1016/j.radonc.2017.10.006</a>
Rights
Information about rights held in and over the resource
Article information provided for research and reference use only. All rights are retained by the journal listed under publisher and/or the creator(s).
*Age
*Bone metastases
*Gender
*Pain response
*Quality of Life
*Radiotherapy
*Re-irradiation
2018
Age Factors
Aged
Babington Scott
Bone Neoplasms/physiopathology/*radiotherapy/*secondary
Brundage Michael
Cancer Pain/etiology/*radiotherapy
Chow Edward
Chow Ronald
Demas William F
Ding Keyue
Female
Ganesh Vithusha
Hartsell William F
Hoskin Peter
Humans
Male
Meyer Ralph M
Middle Aged
Nabid Abdenour
Pain Measurement
Palliative Care/methods/statistics & numerical data
Patient Reported Outcome Measures
Physicians'/*statistics & numerical data
Practice Patterns
Quality of Life
Radiotherapy and oncology : journal of the European Society for Therapeutic Radiology and Oncology
Re-irradiation
Roos Daniel
Sex Factors
van Acht Manouk
van der Linden Yvette M
Wanders Rinus
Wilson Carolyn F
Wong Rebecca K S
Wu Jackson S Y
Zhu Liting
-
Text
A resource consisting primarily of words for reading. Examples include books, letters, dissertations, poems, newspapers, articles, archives of mailing lists. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre Text.
URL Address
<a href="http://doi.org/10.1016/j.radonc.2015.10.018" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer noopener">http://doi.org/10.1016/j.radonc.2015.10.018</a>
Pages
547–551
Issue
3
Volume
118
Dublin Core
The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/.
Title
A name given to the resource
Predictive model for survival in patients having repeat radiation treatment for painful bone metastases.
Publisher
An entity responsible for making the resource available
Radiotherapy and oncology : journal of the European Society for Therapeutic Radiology and Oncology
Date
A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource
2016
2016-03
Subject
The topic of the resource
*Models; Aged; Bone metastases; Bone Neoplasms/*mortality/*radiotherapy/secondary; Dose Fractionation; Female; Humans; Male; Middle Aged; Predictive model; Predictive Value of Tests; Proportional Hazards Models; Radiation; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic/methods; Re-irradiation; Statistical; Survival; Survival Analysis; Survival Rate
Creator
An entity primarily responsible for making the resource
Chow Edward; Ding Keyue; Parulekar Wendy R; Wong Rebecca K S; van der Linden Yvette M; Roos Daniel; Hartsell William F; Hoskin Peter; Wu Jackson S Y; Nabid Abdenour; Leer Jan Willem; Vonk Ernest; Babington Scott; Demas William F; Wilson Carolyn F; Brundage Michael; Zhu Liting; Meyer Ralph M
Description
An account of the resource
PURPOSE: To establish a survival prediction model in the setting of a randomized trial of re-irradiation for painful bone metastases. METHODS: Data were randomly divided into training and testing sets with an approximately 3:2 ratio. Baseline factors of gender, primary cancer site, KPS, worst-pain score and age were included with backward variable selection to derive a model using the training set. A partial score was assigned by dividing the value of each statistically significant regression coefficient by the smallest statistically significant regression coefficient. The survival prediction score (SPS) was obtained by adding together partial scores for the variables that were statistically significant. Three risk groups were modelled. RESULTS: The training set included 460 patients and the testing set 351 patients. Only KPS and primary cancer site reached the 5%-significance level. Summing up the partial scores assigned to KPS (90-100, 0; 70-80, 1; 50-60, 2) and primary cancer site (breast, 0; prostate, 1.3; other, 2.6; lung, 3) totalled the SPS. The 1/3 and 2/3 percentiles of the SPS were 2 and 3.6. For the testing set, the median survival of the 3 groups was not reached, 11.3 (95% C.I. 8.5 - not reached) and 5.2 months (95% C.I. 3.7-6.5). The 3, 6 and 12 month survival rates for the worst group were 64.4% (95% C.I. 55.3-72.1%), 43.0% (95% C.I. 34.0-51.8%) and 19.7% (95% C.I. 12.4-28.1%) respectively, similar to that in the training set. CONCLUSION: This survival prediction model will assist in choosing dose fractionation. We recommend a single 8 Gy in the worst group identified.
Identifier
An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context
<a href="http://doi.org/10.1016/j.radonc.2015.10.018" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer noopener">10.1016/j.radonc.2015.10.018</a>
Rights
Information about rights held in and over the resource
Article information provided for research and reference use only. All rights are retained by the journal listed under publisher and/or the creator(s).
*Models
2016
Aged
Babington Scott
Bone metastases
Bone Neoplasms/*mortality/*radiotherapy/secondary
Brundage Michael
Chow Edward
Demas William F
Ding Keyue
Dose Fractionation
Female
Hartsell William F
Hoskin Peter
Humans
Leer Jan Willem
Male
Meyer Ralph M
Middle Aged
Nabid Abdenour
Parulekar Wendy R
Predictive model
Predictive Value of Tests
Proportional Hazards Models
Radiation
Radiotherapy and oncology : journal of the European Society for Therapeutic Radiology and Oncology
Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic/methods
Re-irradiation
Roos Daniel
Statistical
Survival
Survival Analysis
Survival Rate
van der Linden Yvette M
Vonk Ernest
Wilson Carolyn F
Wong Rebecca K S
Wu Jackson S Y
Zhu Liting
-
Text
A resource consisting primarily of words for reading. Examples include books, letters, dissertations, poems, newspapers, articles, archives of mailing lists. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre Text.
URL Address
<a href="http://doi.org/10.1007/s11136-017-1745-8" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer noopener">http://doi.org/10.1007/s11136-017-1745-8</a>
Pages
1089–1098
Issue
4
Volume
27
Dublin Core
The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/.
Title
A name given to the resource
Minimal clinically important differences in the EORTC QLQ-C30 and brief pain inventory in patients undergoing re-irradiation for painful bone metastases.
Publisher
An entity responsible for making the resource available
Quality of life research : an international journal of quality of life aspects of treatment, care and rehabilitation
Date
A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource
2018
2018-04
Subject
The topic of the resource
*Bone metastases; *Brief pain inventory; *EORTC QLQ-C30; *Minimal Clinically Important Difference; *Minimal clinically important differences; *Radiation; 80 and over; 80 and Over; Adolescence; Adolescent; Adult; Aged; Bone Metastases – Radiotherapy; BONE metastasis; BONE metastasis – Treatment; Bone Neoplasms/*complications/radiotherapy/secondary; Brief Pain Inventory; BRIEF Pain Inventory; Cancer Patients; CANCER patients; CANCER radiotherapy; Clinical Assessment Tools; Female; Funding Source; Human; Humans; Instrument Scaling; LONGITUDINAL method; Male; Middle Age; Middle Aged; Pain Management; PAIN management; Pain/*diagnosis; Prospective Studies; Quality of Life/*psychology; Questionnaires; QUESTIONNAIRES; RANDOMIZED controlled trials; Re-Irradiation/*adverse effects; REOPERATION; Repeat Procedures; RESEARCH funding; SCALING (Social sciences); Secondary Analysis; SECONDARY analysis; Surveys and Questionnaires; Young Adult
Creator
An entity primarily responsible for making the resource
Raman Srinivas; Ding Keyue; Chow Edward; Meyer Ralph M; van der Linden Yvette M; Roos Daniel; Hartsell William F; Hoskin Peter; Wu Jackson S Y; Nabid Abdenour; Haas Rick; Wiggenraad Ruud; Babington Scott; Demas William F; Wilson Carolyn F; Wong Rebecca K S; Zhu Liting; Brundage Michael
Description
An account of the resource
PURPOSE: The EORTC QLQ-C30 and the Brief Pain Inventory (BPI) are validated tools for measuring quality of life (QOL) and the impact of pain in patients with advanced cancer. Interpretation of these instrument scores can be challenging and it is difficult to know what numerical changes translate to clinically significant impact in patients' lives. To address this issue, our study sought to establish the minimal clinically important differences (MCID) for these two instruments in a prospective cohort of patients with advanced cancer and painful bone metastases. METHODS: Both anchor-based and distribution-based methods were used to estimate the MCID scores from patients enrolled in a randomized phase III trial evaluating two different re-irradiation treatment schedules. For the anchor-based method, the global QOL item from the QLQ-C30 was chosen as the anchor. Spearman correlation coefficients were calculated for all items and only those items with moderate or better correlation (\textbarr\textbar \textgreater/= 0.30) with the anchor were used for subsequent analysis. A 10-point difference in the global QOL score was used to classify improvement and deterioration, and the MCID scores were calculated for each of these categories. These results were compared with scores obtained by the distribution-method, which estimates the MCID purely from the statistical characteristics of the sample population. RESULTS: A total of 375 patients were included in this study with documented pain responses and completed QOL questionnaires at 2 months. 9/14 items in the QLQ-C30 and 6/10 items in the BPI were found to have moderate or better correlation with the anchor. For deterioration, statistically significant MCID scores were found in all items of the QLQ-C30 and BPI. For improvement, statistically significant MCID scores were found in 7/9 items of the QLQ-C30 and 2/6 items of the BPI. The MCID scores for deterioration were uniformly higher than the MCIDs for improvement. Using the distribution-based method, there was good agreement between the 0.5 standard deviation (SD) values and anchor-based scores for deterioration. For improvement, there was less agreement and the anchor-based scores were lower than the 0.5 SD values obtained from the distribution-based method. CONCLUSION: We present MCID scores for the QLQ-C30 and BPI instruments obtained from a large cohort of patients with advanced cancer undergoing re-irradiation for painful bone metastases. The results from this study were compared to other similar studies which showed larger MCID scores for improvement compared to deterioration. We hypothesize that disease trajectory and patient expectations are important factors in understanding the contrasting results. The results of this study can guide clinicians and researchers in the interpretation of these instruments.
Identifier
An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context
<a href="http://doi.org/10.1007/s11136-017-1745-8" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer noopener">10.1007/s11136-017-1745-8</a>
Rights
Information about rights held in and over the resource
Article information provided for research and reference use only. All rights are retained by the journal listed under publisher and/or the creator(s).
*Bone metastases
*Brief pain inventory
*EORTC QLQ-C30
*Minimal Clinically Important Difference
*Minimal clinically important differences
*Radiation
2018
80 and over
Adolescence
Adolescent
Adult
Aged
Babington Scott
Bone Metastases – Radiotherapy
BONE metastasis
BONE metastasis – Treatment
Bone Neoplasms/*complications/radiotherapy/secondary
Brief pain inventory
Brundage Michael
Cancer Patients
CANCER radiotherapy
Chow Edward
Clinical Assessment Tools
Demas William F
Ding Keyue
Female
Funding Source
Haas Rick
Hartsell William F
Hoskin Peter
Human
Humans
Instrument Scaling
LONGITUDINAL method
Male
Meyer Ralph M
Middle Age
Middle Aged
Nabid Abdenour
Pain Management
Pain/*diagnosis
Prospective Studies
Quality of life research : an international journal of quality of life aspects of treatment, care and rehabilitation
Quality of Life/*psychology
Questionnaires
Raman Srinivas
RANDOMIZED controlled trials
Re-Irradiation/*adverse effects
Reoperation
Repeat Procedures
RESEARCH funding
Roos Daniel
SCALING (Social sciences)
Secondary Analysis
Surveys and Questionnaires
van der Linden Yvette M
Wiggenraad Ruud
Wilson Carolyn F
Wong Rebecca K S
Wu Jackson S Y
Young Adult
Zhu Liting
-
Text
A resource consisting primarily of words for reading. Examples include books, letters, dissertations, poems, newspapers, articles, archives of mailing lists. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre Text.
URL Address
<a href="http://doi.org/10.1007/s00520-015-2957-5" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer noopener">http://doi.org/10.1007/s00520-015-2957-5</a>
Pages
1617–1623
Issue
4
Volume
24
Dublin Core
The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/.
Title
A name given to the resource
Revisiting classification of pain from bone metastases as mild, moderate, or severe based on correlation with function and quality of life.
Publisher
An entity responsible for making the resource available
Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer
Date
A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource
2016
2016-04
Subject
The topic of the resource
*Quality of Life; *Severity of Illness Index; 80 and over; 80 and Over; Adolescence; Adolescent; Adult; Aged; Bone metastases; Bone Neoplasms; Bone Neoplasms – Complications; Bone Neoplasms/*complications/secondary; Brief Pain Inventory; Female; Functional interference; Funding Source; Human; Humans; Male; Middle Age; Middle Aged; Pain – Classification; Pain – Etiology; Pain Measurement – Methods; Pain Measurement/*methods; Pain severity; Pain/*classification/etiology; Quality of life; Quality of Life; Questionnaires; Re-irradiation; Severity of Illness Indices; Survival; Young Adult
Creator
An entity primarily responsible for making the resource
Chow Edward; Ding Keyue; Parulekar Wendy R; Wong Rebecca K S; van der Linden Yvette M; Roos Daniel; Hartsell William F; Hoskin Peter; Wu Jackson S Y; Nabid Abdenour; Ong Francisca; van Tienhoven Geertjan; Babington Scott; Demas William F; Wilson Carolyn F; Brundage Michael; Zhu Liting; Meyer Ralph M
Description
An account of the resource
PURPOSE: The objective of our study was to determine the optimal cut points for classification of pain scores as mild, moderate, and severe based on interference with function and quality of life (QOL). METHODS: We evaluated 822 patients who completed the Brief Pain Inventory (BPI) and/or the European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) QOL Questionnaire Core 30 (QLQ-C30) prior to receiving repeat radiation therapy for previously irradiated painful bone metastases. Optimal cut points for mild, moderate, and severe pain were determined by the MANOVA that yielded the largest F ratio for the between category effect on the seven interference items of BPI and the six functional domains of QOL (physical, role, emotional, cognitive, social functioning, and global QOL) as indicated by Pillai's Trace, Wilk's lambda, and Hostelling's Trace F statistics. RESULTS: For BPI and for QOL domains separately, the two largest F ratios for Wilk's lambda, Pillai's Trace, and Hotelling's Trace F statistics were from the cut points 4, 8 and 6, 8. When combining both, the optimal cut points were 4, 8 with 1-4 (mild), 5-8 (moderate), and 9-10 (severe). With this classification, the mean scores of all the seven interference items in BPI and the six functional domains were all highly statistically different. Patients with severe pain survived significantly shorter than those with mild and moderate pain (p \textless 0.0001). CONCLUSION: Our analysis supports the classification of pain scores as follows: 1-4 as mild pain, 5-8 as moderate pain, and 9-10 as severe pain. This may facilitate conduct of future clinical trials.
Identifier
An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context
<a href="http://doi.org/10.1007/s00520-015-2957-5" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer noopener">10.1007/s00520-015-2957-5</a>
Rights
Information about rights held in and over the resource
Article information provided for research and reference use only. All rights are retained by the journal listed under publisher and/or the creator(s).
*Quality of Life
*Severity of Illness Index
2016
80 and over
Adolescence
Adolescent
Adult
Aged
Babington Scott
Bone metastases
Bone Neoplasms
Bone Neoplasms – Complications
Bone Neoplasms/*complications/secondary
Brief pain inventory
Brundage Michael
Chow Edward
Demas William F
Ding Keyue
Female
Functional interference
Funding Source
Hartsell William F
Hoskin Peter
Human
Humans
Male
Meyer Ralph M
Middle Age
Middle Aged
Nabid Abdenour
Ong Francisca
Pain – Classification
Pain – Etiology
Pain Measurement – Methods
Pain Measurement/*methods
Pain severity
Pain/*classification/etiology
Parulekar Wendy R
Quality of Life
Questionnaires
Re-irradiation
Roos Daniel
Severity of Illness Indices
Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer
Survival
van der Linden Yvette M
van Tienhoven Geertjan
Wilson Carolyn F
Wong Rebecca K S
Wu Jackson S Y
Young Adult
Zhu Liting