Search

Objectives: Patient-reported outcomes (PRO) help patients, caretakers, clinicians, and policy makers make informed decisions regarding treatment effectiveness. Our objective was to assess the quality of PRO reporting and methodological strengths and weaknesses in randomized controlled trials (RCT) in bladder cancer., Methods: A systematic literature search of bladder cancer RCT published between January 2004 and March 2014 was performed. Relevant studies were evaluated using a predetermined extraction form that included trial demographics, clinical and PRO characteristics, and standards of PRO reporting based on recommendations of the International Society for Quality of Life Research., Results: In total, 9 RCTs enrolling 1,237 patients were evaluated. All studies were in patients with nonmetastatic disease. In 5 RCTs, a PRO was the primary end point. Most RCTs did not report the mode of administration of the PRO instrument or the methods of collecting data. No RCT addressed the statistical approaches for missing data., Conclusions: We found that few RCTs in bladder cancer report PRO as an outcome. Efforts to expand PRO reporting to more RCTs and improve the quality of PRO reporting according to recognized standards are necessary for facilitating clinical decision making., (Copyright © 2015 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Objective: To review the development of nomograms and consortia efforts applying these tools to model outcome predictions associated with radical cystectomy., Findings: Nomograms have been developed that provide individualized prediction of recurrence and survival following radical cystectomy, which provide significant improvement in predictive accuracy over tradition TNM staging., Conclusions: Nomograms provide individualized risk assessment and outperform expert physician and conventional models used to predict outcome. Addition of biologic markers may improve predictive capability and improve the clinical utility of these valuable tools.