Search

Simple Summary: The Sarcoma Assessment Measure (SAM) is a special questionnaire for patients with sarcomas, a type of cancer. It was created with input from both patients and healthcare professionals and is meant to be used by professionals to better understand how sarcoma affects a patient's life. We tested the SAM on 762 patients who had different types of sarcomas and ranged in age from 13 to 82. We found that the SAM could be a useful tool for both researchers and healthcare professionals to assess how sarcoma symptoms impact a patient's life. However, more testing with a larger and more diverse group of patients is needed to be sure it is a good outcome measure in drug trials. The Sarcoma Assessment Measure (SAM) was developed as a sarcoma-specific patient-reported outcome measure to be used in clinical practice. We have reported in detail how SAM has been developed in collaboration with patients and healthcare professionals. The aim of this paper is to report the preliminary validation of SAM. The 22-item SAM was administered alongside a validated quality of life questionnaire and measure of activities of daily living. Linear modelling was used to build a measure, which had predictive validity in comparison to more established outcome measures. Of the 762 patients who participated in the study, 44.1% identified as male, and participant age ranged from 13 to 82 years. Clinically, participants presented with a range of soft tissue (82.2%) and bone (21.8%) sarcomas. Our preliminary analysis indicates that SAM accounts for 35% of the global quality of life scale and 18% of the Toronto Extremity Salvage Scale (TESS); so psychometrically, it overlaps with quality of life and activities of daily living, but also measures distinct concerns. This demonstrates that this measure picks up issues that are important to patients with sarcoma that are not reflected in other measures. We have established the preliminary validity of SAM and believe it has utility as a patient-reported outcome measure both as a research tool and for assessing the impact of symptoms and dysfunction related to sarcoma as part of clinical care. Further validation using a larger and more clinically diverse sample is now needed. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Quality of life (QoL) assessments are integral to cancer care, yet their effectiveness in providing essential information for supporting survivors varies. This study aimed to elucidate key indicators of QoL among colorectal cancer survivors from the perspective of healthcare professionals, and to evaluate existing QoL questionnaires in relation to these indicators. Two studies were conducted: a Delphi study to identify key QoL indicators and a scoping review of questionnaires suitable for colorectal cancer survivors. Fifty-four healthcare professionals participated in the Delphi study's first round, with 25 in the second. The study identified two primary QoL domains (physical and psychological) and 17 subdomains deemed most critical. Additionally, a review of 12 questionnaires revealed two instruments assessing the most important general domains. The findings underscored a misalignment between existing assessment tools and healthcare professionals' clinical priorities in working with colorectal cancer survivors. To enhance support for survivors' QoL, efforts are needed to develop instruments that better align with the demands of routine QoL assessment in clinical practice. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Simple Summary: Most cancer patients are older and have concomitant diseases because the incidence of most cancer types increases with age. This leads to patients taking a variety of medications that can cause drug-related problems (DRPs). DRPs can cause harm, including increased illness, avoidable hospital stays, and even death. Common DRPs are drug–drug interactions, not taking medication as prescribed, and adverse drug reactions. In our study, we aimed to assess these medication risks in hospitalized cancer patients and to identify factors that influence their health-related quality of life (HRQOL) as a patient-relevant outcome. The results of the pharmacist-led medication reviews show that DRPs are common in hospitalized cancer patients. Therefore, patient questionnaires about therapy-related symptoms could improve the detection of DRPs. While drug-related factors had no effect on HRQOL during the hospital stay, our analysis revealed other influencing factors, such as relapse status of the cancer disease and length of hospital stay. Background: We aimed to assess medication risks and determine factors influencing the health-related quality of life (HRQOL) in cancer inpatients. Methods: A retrospective analysis was conducted to identify drug-related problems (DRPs) based on medication reviews, including patient-reported outcomes (PROs). Multiple linear regression analyses were performed to identify sociodemographic, disease-related, and drug therapy-related factors influencing changes from hospital admission to discharge in the scales of the EORTC QLQ-C30 questionnaire. Results: A total of 162 inpatients with various hematological and solid cancer diseases was analyzed. Patients received a mean of 11.6 drugs and 92.6% of patients exhibited polymedication resulting in a mean of 4.0 DRPs per patient. Based on PRO data, 21.5% of DRPs were identified. Multiple linear regression models described the variance of the changes in global HRQOL and physical function in a weak-to-moderate way. While drug therapy-related factors had no influence, relapse status and duration of hospital stay were identified as significant covariates for global HRQOL and physical function, respectively. Conclusion: This analysis describes underlying DRPs in a German cancer inpatient population. PROs provided valuable information for performing medication reviews. The multiple linear regression models for global HRQOL and physical function provided explanations for changes during hospital stay. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Simple Summary: In the USA and Europe, questionnaires that allow patients to directly report chemotherapy side effects can improve their quality of life and clinical outcomes. No similar tools exist for Africa, so we aimed to design and validate a paper-based tool for use in oncology clinics in South Africa: The Patient Reported Symptoms-South Africa (PRS-SA) survey. The PRS-SA included questions on overall feelings of distress and severity of 11 common chemotherapy side effects. By comparing responses to the PRS-SA to responses to other quality of life questionnaires and to patients' performance status, we found the PRS-SA to be valid and responsive for measuring all included symptoms. Compared to a standard instrument for measuring depression and anxiety, the PRS-SA's distress thermometer had 88% sensitivity and 55% specificity for identifying distress. The PRS-SA may be a useful tool for efficiently assessing distress and chemotherapy symptoms in South Africa's overburdened public oncology clinics. Patient-reported outcome measures (PROM) for monitoring treatment toxicity improve quality of life (QoL) and clinical outcomes. However, no such PROMs exist for sub-Saharan African cancer patients. We aimed to validate the Patient Reported Symptoms-South Africa (PRS-SA) survey, a novel PROM for measuring distress and chemotherapy-related symptoms in South African cancer patients. We enrolled patients at the oncology clinic at Charlotte Maxeke Hospital, Johannesburg. At three separate visits, participants simultaneously completed the PRS-SA survey and several previously validated questionnaires. We constructed a receiver operator characteristics curve for distress levels predicting a Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS) score ≥15. We evaluated construct validity for symptom items by comparing severity to the EORTC Core Quality of Life Questionnaire (QLQ-C30) summary score (Pearson correlation tests) and ECOG performance status (Mann–Whitney U tests). We assessed symptom item responsiveness by comparing change in severity to change in QLQ-C30 summary score and comparing standardized mean scores with negative, no, or positive change on the Global Impression of Change (GIC) questionnaire (Jockheere–Terpstra trend test). Overall, 196 participants with solid tumors completed instruments. A distress score of 4 had 82% sensitivity and 55% specificity for clinical depression/anxiety. All symptom items showed construct validity by association with either QLQ-C30 score or performance status (highest p = 0.03). All but cough showed responsiveness to change in QLQ-C30 score (highest p = 0.045). In South African cancer patients, the PRS-SA's stress scale behaves similarly to the distress thermometer in other populations, and the symptom items demonstrated construct validity and responsiveness. Of note, 46% and 74% of participants who completed the PRS-SA in English or isiZulu, respectively, required assistance reading half or more of the instrument. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: The population of individuals affected by breast cancer is growing, and with advances in cancer treatment implemented into usual care, there is an urgent need to improve the recognition, monitoring and treatment of therapy-induced adverse effects. This study aims to explore the use of an in-app electronic questionnaire to assess and monitor chemotherapy-related symptoms in early breast cancer patients treated with perioperative chemotherapy. Method: Between December 2019 and June 2021, 72 female study participants used the mobile app Centrum Chorób Piersi UCK and completed an in-app questionnaire about the 14 most common chemotherapy-related symptoms. Replies including symptoms with a critical value triggered automatic email alerts to the nursing team. Results: Acceptance of the study was higher among younger women and patients originating from rural areas, while possible digital exclusion among patients >60 years was observed during the enrolment process. A total of 55 participants completed the electronic questionnaire at least once and generated 553 responses with 1808 specific problems reported. Fatigue (n = 428) was the most common problem, and fever (n = 5) the least reported problem. A total of 21 participants triggered alerts with responses containing symptoms with critical value assessment (n = 89). Significant negative correlation was observed between the number of responses and time from the first chemotherapy administration; however, the number of responses was not determined by any sociodemographic or medical factors. Significant positive correlations were identified between the number of communicated problems and participants' age. The usage of our electronic symptom assessment questionnaire decreased substantially after the period of active encouragement during the study enrolment. Conclusions: Not all societies are ready for innovative eHealth solutions. Patients' age should be carefully considered when app-based interventions are introduced to usual cancer care. Additional support is suggested for older patients to improve their awareness and participation in eHealth interventions. More research involving older participants is needed to explore and address their particular needs and perspectives on eHealth solutions. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

To evaluate the adoption of an integrated eHealth platform for televisit/monitoring/consultation during the COVID-19 pandemic. Methods: During the lockdown imposed by the Italian government during the COVID19 pandemic spread, a dedicated multi-professional working group was set up in the Radiation Oncology Department with the primary aim of reducing patients' exposure to COVID-19 by adopting de-centralized/remote consultation methodologies. Each patient's clinical history was screened before the visit to assess if a traditional clinical visit would be recommended or if a remote evaluation was to be preferred. Real world data (RWD) in the form of patient-reported outcomes (PROMs) and patient reported experiences (PREMs) were collected from patients who underwent televisit/teleconsultation through the eHealth platform. Results: During the lockdown period (from 8 March to 4 May 2020) a total of 1956 visits were managed. A total of 983 (50.26%) of these visits were performed via email (to apply for and to upload of documents) and phone call management; 31 visits (1.58%) were performed using the eHealth system. Substantially, all patients found the eHealth platform useful and user-friendly, consistently indicating that this type of service would also be useful after the pandemic. Conclusions: The rapid implementation of an eHealth system was feasible and well-accepted by the patients during the pandemic. However, we believe that further evidence is to be generated to further support large-scale adoption. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Simple Summary: Despite the fact that self-rated health is an established and independent predictor for future health outcomes, patient-reported outcomes (PROs) are rarely utilized in clinical decisions. Such an approach can be a disadvantage for patients who might benefit from the early detection of subtle signs of deterioration in the quality of life. The present study explored the determinants of various quality-of-life trajectories during the first year after breast cancer treatment. We recognized three distinct trajectories of global quality of life: 'high', 'U-shape' and 'low'. Our results indicate that taking PROs into account allows for a more accurate prediction of a given quality-of-life trajectory than considering only medical and sociodemographic characteristics. Concentrating on the patient's perspective in the clinical interview is recommended, especially for patients with permanent or fluctuating lower quality of life. Despite the current shift in medicine towards patient-centered care, clinicians rarely utilize patient-reported outcomes (PROs) in everyday practice. We examined the predictors of quality- of-life (QoL) trajectories in breast cancer (BC) patients during the first year after primary treatment. A total of 185 BC patients referred for postoperative radiotherapy (RT) filled in the EORTC QLQ-C30 Questionnaire assessing global QoL, functioning and cancer-related symptoms before starting RT; directly after RT; and 3, 6 and 12 months after RT. We used decision tree analyses to examine which baseline factors best allowed for predicting the one-year trajectory of the global QoL after BC treatment. We tested two models: 'basic', including medical and sociodemographic characteristics, and 'enriched', additionally including PROs. We recognized three distinct trajectories of global QoL: 'high', 'U-shape' and 'low'. Of the two compared models, the 'enriched' model allowed for a more accurate prediction of a given QoL trajectory, with all indicators of model validation being better. In this model, baseline global QoL and functioning measures were the key discriminators of QoL trajectory. Taking PROs into account increases the accuracy of the prediction model. Collecting this information in the clinical interview is recommended, especially for patients with lower QoL. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Simple Summary: The EuroQol 5-Dimension 5-level (EQ-5D-5L) questionnaire is a globally used and multiply validated tool to assess health-related quality of life (HRQoL), but data on its use for patients with myeloid neoplasias is scarce. The aim of this prospective cohort study was to alleviate this knowledge gap. Our data show in a homogenous population of azacitidine-treated patients for the first time that (1) myeloid patients have significantly worse HRQoL than a population norm (i.e., a representative sample of the German general adult population) from a similar geographic region, matched by age, sex and number of comorbidities; (2) The EQ-5D-5L questionnaire response provides added prognostic value to the International Prognostic Scoring System (IPSS) and the revised IPSS (R-IPSS), which are longstanding gold standards of prognostication in these diseases; (3) the multivariate-adjusted significant predictive value of the EQ-5D-5L response parameters on patient outcomes including response to azacitidine, time to next treatment and overall survival; (4) longitudinal assessment of the EQ-5D-5L response/clinical parameter pairs revealed significant additional, independent associations. In this prospective study (NCT01595295), 272 patients treated with azacitidine completed 1456 EuroQol 5-Dimension (EQ-5D) questionnaires. Linear mixed-effect modelling was used to incorporate longitudinal data. When compared with a matched reference population, myeloid patients reported more pronounced restrictions in usual activities (+28%, p < 0.0001), anxiety/depression (+21%, p < 0.0001), selfcare (+18%, p < 0.0001) and mobility (+15%, p < 0.0001), as well as lower mean EQ-5D-5L indices (0.81 vs. 0.88, p < 0.0001), and lower self-rated health on the EuroQol Visual Analogue Scale (EQ-VAS) (64 vs. 72%, p < 0.0001). After multivariate-adjustment, (i) the EQ-5D-5L index assessed at azacitidine start the predicted time with clinical benefit (TCB) (9.6 vs. 6.6 months; p = 0.0258; HR = 1.43), time to next treatment (TTNT) (12.8 vs. 9.8 months; p = 0.0332; HR = 1.42) and overall survival (OS) (17.9 vs. 12.9 months; p = 0.0143; HR = 1.52); (ii) Level Sum Score (LSS) predicted azacitidine response (p = 0.0160; OR = 0.451) and the EQ-5D-5L index showed a trend (p = 0.0627; OR = 0.522); (iii) up to 1432 longitudinally assessed EQ-5D-5L response/clinical parameter pairs revealed significant associations of EQ-5D-5L response parameters with haemoglobin level, transfusion dependence and hematologic improvement. Significant increases of the likelihood ratios were observed after addition of LSS, EQ-VAS or EQ-5D-5L-index to the International Prognostic Scoring System (IPSS) or the revised IPSS (R-IPSS), indicating that they provide added value to these scores. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Simple Summary: Radiotherapy is widely used as treatment for localized prostate cancer. Due to a high incidence and a good survival after treatment, a large number of prostate cancer survivors are at risk of developing late radiation toxicity. Symptoms may significantly affect quality of life; therefore, the monitoring of toxicities and evaluating their impact are increasingly important matters. Toxicities have always been assessed by physicians, but there is a growing interest in the use of questionnaires to be completed by patients themselves, so-called patient-reported outcome measures. The aim of this study was to compare both outcomes in long-term prostate cancer survivors, and to determine which outcome correlates best with a biological predictor of late radiation toxicity. In symptomatic patients, we found a low agreement; patients assigned greater severity to symptoms than the trial physician assistant did. Neither outcome correlated with the biological predictor. Consideration of both perspectives seems warranted to provide the best care. Patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) are advocated for the monitoring of toxicity after radiotherapy. However, studies comparing physician- and patient-reported toxicity show low concordance. In this study, we compared physician- and patient-reported toxicity in long-term prostate cancer survivors after radiotherapy, and we determined the correlation with a presumable risk factor for late toxicity: γ-H2AX foci decay ratio (FDR). Patients formerly included in a prospective study were invited to participate in this new study, comprising one questionnaire and one call with a trial physician assistant. Concordance was calculated for seven symptoms. Gamma-H2AX FDRs were determined in ex vivo irradiated lymphocytes in a previous analysis. Associations between FDR and long-term prevalence of toxicity were assessed using univariable logistic regression analyses. The 101 participants had a median follow-up period of 9 years. Outcomes were discordant in 71% of symptomatic patients; in 21%, the physician-assessed toxicity (using CTCAE) was higher, and, in 50%, the patients reported higher toxicity. We did not find a correlation between presence of toxicity at long-term follow-up and FDR. In conclusion, patients assigned greater severity to symptoms than the trial physician assistant did. Consideration of both perspectives may be warranted to provide the best care. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Simple Summary: Moderate hypofractionated radiotherapy (HF) has become the standard fractionation scheme for most breast cancer patients. Despite comprehensive data from large, randomized trials, standardized assessment of patient reported outcome (PRO) and physiological changes after HF are largely missing. In this prospective trial focusing on radiodermatitis, HF and conventional normofractionated radiotherapy (CF) were compared using standardized Skindex-16 questionnaire in addition to CTCAE assessment and ultrasound measurement of the skin. The results of the current study complement and confirm existing evidence that HF leads to a lower degree of acute radiodermatitis and better patient reported outcome compared to CF. The current study aims to determine whether hypofractionated radiotherapy (HF) leads to lower rates of acute radiodermatitis compared to conventional normofractionated radiotherapy (CF). A total of 166 patients with invasive breast cancer or DCIS were included in a prospective cohort study. Evaluation of acute radiodermatitis was obtained before radiotherapy, at the end of the treatment (T1), and 6 weeks after the treatment (T2) using CTCAE (v5.0) scores, the Skindex-16 questionnaire, and ultrasound measurement of the skin. CTCAE and Skindex-16 scores in the CF-group were significantly higher compared to the HF group indicating more pronounced side effects at the end of the treatment (CTCAE: CF-RT 1.0 (IQR: 0.0) vs. HF-RT 0.0 (0.25); p = 0.03; Skindex-16: CF: 20.8 (IQR: 25.8); HF: 8.3 (27.1); p = 0.04). At 6 weeks after the treatment, no significant differences between the two fractionation schemes were observed. Ultrasound based assessment showed that the skin thickness in the treated breast was higher compared to the healthy breast at all time-points. However, no significant difference between HF and CF was seen either at T1 or T2. The current study complements and confirms pre-existing evidence that HF leads to a lower degree of acute radiodermatitis and better patient reported outcome compared to CF at the end of treatment. This should be considered whenever fractionation of adjuvant breast cancer treatment is being discussed. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Simple Summary: Desmoid-type fibromatosis (DTF) is an uncommon soft tissue tumour with a high recurrence rate after resection. DTF does not metastasise, but its locally aggressive tumour growth and chronic character can cause significant morbidity. Although overall mortality is low, patients can experience a high symptom burden, making assessment of health-related quality of life (HRQoL) highly relevant. At present, data on HRQoL in DTF patients are limited. The QUALIFIED study aims to (1) pre-test a previously developed DTF-specific HRQoL tool (the DTF-QoL); (2) evaluate prevalence of HRQoL issues in adult DTF patients; and (3) identify subgroups at risk of impaired HRQoL. An international, multicentre, cross-sectional, observational cohort study will be conducted to validate the DTF-specific HRQoL questionnaire and to gain more insight into the issues experienced by DTF patients. This information will help to improve clinical practice, symptom control and patient satisfaction. When validated, the DTF-QoL can be used in both clinical and research settings to evaluate HRQoL of DTF patients. Sporadic desmoid-type fibromatosis (DTF) is a rare soft tissue tumour with an unpredictable clinical course. These tumours are incapable of metastasising, but their local aggressive tumour growth and tendency to recur locally can result in a substantial symptom burden. Measuring the impact of DTF on health-related quality of life (HRQoL) can be challenging due to the variable clinical presentation of the disease. Therefore, a HRQoL instrument assessing DTF-specific issues is needed. The QUALIFIED study aims to (1) pre-test a previously developed DTF-specific HRQoL tool (the DTF-QoL); (2) evaluate prevalence of HRQoL issues in adult DTF patients; and (3) identify subgroups at risk of impaired HRQoL. This study (NCT04289077) is an international, multicentre, cross-sectional, observational cohort study. Patients ≥ 18 years with sporadic DTF from the Netherlands and the United Kingdom will be invited to complete a set of questionnaires specifically composed for this patient group. Questionnaires will be completed using PROFILES (Patient Reported Outcomes Following Initial treatment and Long-term Evaluation of Survivorship). Analyses will include testing the psychometric properties of the DTF-QoL and evaluating the prevalence of HRQoL issues using the DTF-QoL, EORTC QOL-C30 and EQ-5D-5L, among other questionnaires. This study will provide insight into HRQoL issues experienced by patients with DTF. Awareness of these issues and the implementation of the DTF-QoL in research and clinical practice can help to improve overall HRQoL and to provide personalised care. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Simple Summary: Metastatic breast cancer (MBC) remains incurable despite treatment improvements. The health-related quality of life is a multidimensional entity which covers physical, psychological and social dimensions. It is an important outcome particularly in patients with metastatic disease, as the primary goal of therapy is no longer curation, but to provide the best possible quality of life weighted against treatment risks and adverse symptoms. Patient-reported outcomes reflecting the quality of life are usually measured with validated questionnaires to evaluate treatment strategies based on symptom burden and to improve care delivery. This review shares insights into the role of patient-reported outcome measurements in MBC patients and describes the heterogeneity of current questionnaires. We conclude that an up-to-date and standardized outcome set is needed, containing relevant domains referring to individual needs to improve the quality of life assessment among MBC patients. This is a prerequisite to learn about how they could impact the clinical care pathway. Metastatic breast cancer (MBC) patients are almost always treated to minimize the symptom burden, and to prolong life without a curative intent. Although the prognosis of MBC patients has improved in recent years, the median survival after diagnosis is still only 3 years. Therefore, the health-related quality of life (HRQoL) should play a leading role in making treatment decisions. Heterogeneity in questionnaires used to evaluate the HRQoL in MBC patients complicates the interpretability and comparability of patient-reported outcomes (PROs) globally. In this review, we aimed to provide an overview of PRO instruments used in real-world MBC patients and to discuss important issues in measuring HRQoL. Routinely collecting symptom information using PROs could enhance treatment evaluation and shared decision-making. Standardizing these measures might help to improve the implementation of PROs, and facilitates collecting and sharing data to establish valid comparisons in research. This is a prerequisite to learn about how they could impact the clinical care pathway. In addition, the prognostic value of intensified PRO collection throughout therapy on survival and disease progression is promising. Future perspectives in the field of PROs and MBC are described. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Simple Summary: Sarcomas are a rare group of heterogenous tumors that can develop anywhere in the body. Currently, studies on health-related quality of life (HRQoL) focus on sarcomas of the arm and leg or have too small sample sizes to examine the heterogeneity between different sarcoma locations, leading to limited insight into HRQoL of survivors with specific sarcoma locations. The aim of this study was to assess differences in HRQoL and examine treatment-specific HRQoL issues per sarcoma location. We found, in a population of 1099 sarcoma survivors, different patterns of HRQoL according to primary sarcoma location and a high number of additional, unique treatment-specific HRQoL issues per location, which were not captured with the general HRQoL questionnaire used in cancer patients. This indicates that the currently used HRQoL measures are too generic to capture all sarcoma-related issues, emphasizing the necessity for a comprehensive sarcoma-specific HRQoL measurement strategy. Sarcoma patients experience physical and psychological symptoms, depending on age of onset, subtype, treatment, stage, and location of the sarcoma, which can adversely affect patients' health-related quality of life (HRQoL). This study aimed to unravel the heterogeneity of sarcoma survivors' HRQoL regarding primary sarcoma location. A cross-sectional study was conducted among Dutch sarcoma survivors (N = 1099) aged ≥18, diagnosed 2–10 years ago. Primary sarcoma locations were head and neck, chest, abdominal including retroperitoneal, pelvis including urogenital organs, axial skeleton, extremities (upper and lower), breast, skin and other locations. The European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer—Quality of Life Questionnaire (EORTC QLQ)-C30 was used to measure HRQoL accompanied by treatment-specific HRQoL questions. Sociodemographic and clinical characteristics were collected from the Netherlands Cancer Registry. Axial skeleton sarcomas had the lowest functioning levels and highest symptoms compared to other locations. Skin sarcomas had the highest functioning levels and lowest symptoms on most scales. Bone sarcomas scored worse on several HRQoL domains compared to soft tissue sarcomas. High prevalence of treatment-specific HRQoL issues were found per location. In conclusion, sarcomas can present everywhere, which is reflected by different HRQoL outcomes according to primary sarcoma location. The currently used HRQoL measure lacks treatment-specific questions and is too generic to capture all sarcoma-related issues, emphasizing the necessity for a comprehensive sarcoma-specific HRQoL measurement strategy. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Simple Summary: Cancer therapies should improve patient survival or at least improve the quality of their life as they receive treatment for their disease. This is particularly important in pancreatic cancer, where current treatments often have to balance between limiting tumor growth and minimizing patient toxicity. There has been an increasing appreciation among physicians to capture the patient's voice using tools called patient-reported outcome measures (PROM). In this article, we describe the available PROMs and their relative strengths and weaknesses to help oncologists make sense of this rapidly growing field. Finally, we present a decision-making tool that can help researchers and clinicians select the ideal PROM that fits their needs. Pancreatic cancer and its treatment often dramatically impact patients' quality of life (QoL). Given this, as well as increased focus on QoL measures in clinical oncology, there has been a rise in the number of instruments that measure patient-reported outcomes (PROs). In this review, we describe the landscape of different PRO instruments pertaining to pancreatic cancer, with specific emphasis on PRO findings related to pancreatic cancer patients receiving radiotherapy (RT). Twenty-five of the most commonly utilized PROs are compared in detail. Notably, most of the PRO tools discussed are not specific to pancreatic cancer but are generic and have been used in various malignancies. Published findings concerning PROs in pancreatic cancer involving RT are also extracted and summarized. Among the measures used, the European Organization for Research and Treatment Cancer QLQ-C30 was the most commonly utilized. We recommend a careful selection of PRO measures in clinical pancreatic cancer research and care and encourage the use of a combination of symptom-specific and global QoL tools to more fully capture patients' perspectives. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]