Search

Background: The OVHIPEC-1 trial previously showed that the addition of hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC) to interval cytoreductive surgery resulted in improved progression-free and overall survival compared with cytoreductive surgery alone at 4·7 years of follow-up in patients with stage III epithelial ovarian cancer who were ineligible for primary cytoreduction. We report the final survival outcomes after 10 years of follow-up., Methods: In this open-label, randomised, controlled, phase 3 trial, patients with primary epithelial stage III ovarian cancer were recruited at eight HIPEC centres in the Netherlands and Belgium. Patients were eligible if they were aged 18-76 years, had not progressed during at least three cycles of neoadjuvant carboplatin plus paclitaxel, had a WHO performance status score of 0-2, normal blood counts, and adequate renal function. Patients were randomly assigned (1:1) to undergo interval cytoreductive surgery without HIPEC (surgery group) or with HIPEC (100 mg/m 2 cisplatin; surgery-plus-HIPEC group). Randomisation was done centrally by minimisation with a masked web-based allocation procedure at the time of surgery when residual disease smaller than 10 mm diameter was anticipated, and was stratified by institution, previous suboptimal cytoreductive surgery, and number of abdominal regions involved. The primary endpoint was progression-free survival and a secondary endpoint was overall survival, analysed in the intention-to-treat population (ie, all randomly assigned patients). This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT00426257, and is closed., Findings: Between April 1, 2007, and April 30, 2016, 245 patients were enrolled and followed up for a median of 10·1 years (95% CI 8·4-12·9) in the surgery group (n=123) and 10·4 years (95% CI 9·5-13·3) in the surgery-plus-HIPEC group (n=122). Recurrence, progression, or death occurred in 114 (93%) patients in the surgery group (median progression-free survival 10·7 months [95% CI 9·6-12·0]) and 109 (89%) patients in the surgery-plus-HIPEC group (14·3 months [12·0-18·5]; hazard ratio [HR] 0·63 [95% CI 0·48-0·83], stratified log-rank p=0·0008). Death occurred in 108 (88%) patients in the surgery group (median overall survival 33·3 months [95% CI 29·0-39·1]) and 100 (82%) patients in the surgery-plus-HIPEC group (44·9 months [95% CI 38·6-55·1]; HR 0·70 [95% CI 0·53-0·92], stratified log-rank p=0·011)., Interpretation: These updated survival results confirm the long-term survival benefit of HIPEC in patients with primary stage III epithelial ovarian cancer undergoing interval cytoreductive surgery., Funding: Dutch Cancer Foundation (KWF Kankerbestrijding)., Competing Interests: Declaration of interests IHJTdH has received institutional research support from Roche and Quality in Products & Service/RanD. PV has received conference fees and travel expenses from Roche and honoraria from Roche (Genentech), Novartis, and MSD Oncology. KKVdV has served on advisory boards for Exact Sciences and AstraZeneca. GSS has received institutional research support from Merck Sharp & Dohme, Agendia, AstraZeneca, Roche, and Novartis, and consulting fees from Biovica and Seagen. All other authors declare no competing interests., (Copyright © 2023 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Purpose: The European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) quality of life core questionnaire (QLQ-C30) is a validated and widely-used Patient-Reported Outcome Measure for measuring the health-related quality of life (HRQoL) of cancer patients. To facilitate interpretation of results obtained in studies using the EORTC QLQ-C30, we generated normative data for the Dutch general population, stratified by age and sex., Methods: Dutch participants were selected from a larger cross-sectional online panel research study collecting EORTC QLQ-C30 general population normative data across 15 countries. EORTC QLQ-C30 raw scores based on a 4-point response scale were transformed to linear scores ranging from 0 to 100. Transformed scores were weighted based on the United Nations population distribution statistics and presented by age and sex/age. Differences in scale scores of ≥ 10 points in HRQoL were applied to indicate clinical relevance., Results: One thousand respondents completed the online survey. Stratified by age, clinically meaningful differences were observed, with worse physical functioning scores and better emotional functioning scores with increased age. Symptom scores remained stable across age groups, except for small age differences observed for fatigue, nausea/vomiting, diarrhoea, and financial difficulties. Stratified by sex/age, men generally scored better for both functioning and symptoms. However, these differences were not clinically meaningful., Conclusions: These updated normative EORTC QLQ-C30 for the Dutch general population can be used to better interpret HRQoL data obtained from Dutch cancer patients. Being part of a larger international study, these data can further be used for inter-country comparisons in multi-national studies., (© 2023. The Author(s).)

Purpose: The purpose of this study is to develop a European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Group (EORTC QLG) questionnaire that captures the full range of physical, mental, and social health-related quality of life (HRQOL) issues relevant to disease-free cancer survivors. In this phase III study, we pretested the provisional core questionnaire (QLQ-SURV111) and aimed to identify essential and optional scales., Methods: We pretested the QLQ-SURV111 in 492 cancer survivors from 17 countries with one of 11 cancer diagnoses. We applied the EORTC QLG decision rules and employed factor analysis and item response theory (IRT) analysis to assess and, where necessary, modify the hypothesized questionnaire scales. We calculated correlations between the survivorship scales and the QLQ-C30 summary score and carried out a Delphi survey among healthcare professionals, patient representatives, and cancer researchers to distinguish between essential and optional scales., Results: Fifty-four percent of the sample was male, mean age was 60 years, and, on average, time since completion of treatment was 3.8 years. Eleven items were excluded, resulting in the QLQ-SURV100, with 12 functional and 9 symptom scales, a symptom checklist, 4 single items, and 10 conditional items. The essential survivorship scales consist of 73 items., Conclusions: The QLQ-SURV100 has been developed to assess comprehensively the HRQOL of disease-free cancer survivors. It includes essential and optional scales and will be validated further in an international phase IV study., Implications for Cancer Survivors: The availability of this questionnaire will facilitate a standardized and robust assessment of the HRQOL of disease-free cancer survivors., (© 2022. The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, part of Springer Nature.)

Purpose: Investigating the use of the EORTC bladder cancer (BC) modules by evaluating: (a) study contexts/designs; (b) languages/countries in which the modules were administered; (c) their acceptance by patients/investigators; and (d) their psychometric properties., Methods: A systematic review was performed with studies from 1998 until 20/10/2021 in five databases. Articles/conference abstracts using the EORTC-QLQBLM30 (muscle invasive BC) and the EORTC-QLQNMIBC24 (previously referred to as QLQ-BLS24; non-muscle invasive BC) were included. Two authors independently screened titles/abstracts/full-texts and performed data extraction., Results: A total of 76 eligible studies were identified. Most studies included the BLM30 (n = 53), were in a urological surgery context (n = 41) and were cross-sectional (n = 35) or prospective (n = 30) in design. The BC modules were administered in 14 languages across 19 countries. Missing data were low-moderate for all non-sex related questions (< 1% to 15%). Sex-related questions had higher rates of missing data (ranging from 6.9% to 84%). Most investigators did not use all scales of the questionnaires. One validation study for the original BLS24 led to the development of the NMIBC24, which adopted a new scale structure for which good structural validity was confirmed (n = 3). Good reliability and validity was shown for the NMIBC24 module, except for malaise and bloating/flatulence scales. Psychometric evidence for BLM30 is lacking., Conclusion: These results provide insight into how the EORTC BC quality of life modules could be further improved. Current work is ongoing to update the modules and to determine if the two modules can be combined into a single questionnaire that works well in both the NMIBC and MIBC settings., (© 2023. The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer Nature Switzerland AG.)

Objectives: Adaptive designs may reduce trial sample sizes and costs. This study illustrates a Bayesian-adaptive decision-theoretic design applied to a multiarm exercise oncology trial., Study Design and Setting: In the Physical exercise during Adjuvant Chemotherapy Effectiveness Study (PACES) trial, 230 breast cancer patients receiving chemotherapy were randomized to supervised resistance and aerobic exercise (OnTrack), home-based physical activity (OncoMove) or usual care (UC). Data were reanalyzed as an adaptive trial using both Bayesian decision-theoretic and a frequentist group-sequential approach incorporating interim analyses after every 36 patients. Endpoint was chemotherapy treatment modifications (any vs. none). Bayesian analyses were performed for different continuation thresholds and settings with and without arm dropping and both in a 'pick-the-winner' and a 'pick-all-treatments-superior-to-control' setting., Results: Treatment modifications occurred in 34% of patients in UC and OncoMove vs. 12% in OnTrack (P = 0.002). Using a Bayesian-adaptive decision-theoretic design, OnTrack was identified as most effective after 72 patients in the 'pick-the-winner' setting and after 72-180 patients in the 'pick-all-treatments-superior-to-control' setting. In a frequentist setting, the trial would have been stopped after 180 patients, and the proportion of patients with treatment modifications was significantly lower for OnTrack than UC., Conclusion: A Bayesian-adaptive decision-theoretic approach substantially reduced the sample size required for this three-arm exercise trial, especially in the 'pick-the-winner' setting., Competing Interests: Declaration of Competing Interest Disclosures of G.S.: Consulting or Advisory Role - Novartis (Inst); Research Funding - AstraZeneca (Inst); Merck Sharp & Dohme (Inst); Novartis (Inst); Roche (Inst); Agendia; Eagen., (Copyright © 2023 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Objective: The current research examined the effect of Emotionally Focused Couples Therapy (EFCT) on perceived intimacy, affect, and dyadic connection in cancer survivor couples with relationship challenges., Method: In this longitudinal replicated single-case study, positive and negative affect, intimacy, partner responsiveness, and expression of attachment-based emotional needs were reported every 3 days before and during treatment. Thirteen couples, with one partner having survived colorectal cancer or breast cancer, participated for the full duration of the study. Statistical analysis of the data was performed using randomization tests, piecewise regression, and multilevel analyses., Results: Adherence to the therapeutic protocol was tested and found adequate. Compared with baseline, significant positive effects on affect variables were found during the therapeutic process. Positive affect increased and negative affect decreased. Partner responsiveness, perceived intimacy, and the expression of attachment-based emotional needs improved, but only in the later phase of treatment. Results at the group level were statistically significant, whereas effects at the individual level were not., Discussion: This study found positive group-level effects of EFCT on affect and dyadic outcome measures in cancer survivors. The positive results warrant further research, including randomized clinical trials, to replicate these effects of EFCT in cancer survivor couples experiencing marital and sexual problems., Competing Interests: The authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest., (Copyright © 2023 van Diest, den Oudsten, Aaronson, Beaulen, Verboon, Aarnoudse and van Lankveld.)

Purpose: Supervised exercise is a potentially promising supportive care intervention for people with metastatic breast cancer (MBC), but research on the patients' perspective is limited. The aim of the current focus group study was to gain an in-depth understanding of MBC patients' perceived barriers, facilitators, and preferences for supervised exercise programs., Methods: Eleven online focus groups with, in total, 44 MBC patients were conducted in four European countries (Germany, Poland, Spain, Sweden). Main topics of the semi-structured discussions covered attitudes towards participation in supervised exercise programs, perceived facilitators, experienced barriers, and exercise preferences. Interviews were transcribed verbatim, translated into English, and coded based on a preliminary coding framework, supplemented by themes emerging during the sessions. The codes were subsequently examined for interrelations and re-organized into overarching clusters., Results: Participants had positive attitudes towards exercise, but experienced physical limitations and insecurities that inhibited their participation. They expressed a strong desire for exercise tailored to their needs, and supervision by an exercise professional. Participants also highlighted the social nature of group training as an important facilitator. They had no clear preference for exercise type, but rather favored a mixture of different activities. Flexible training modules were considered helpful to increase exercise program adherence., Conclusions: MBC patients were generally interested in supervised exercise programs. They preferred group exercise that facilitates social interaction, but also expressed a need for individualized exercise programs. This suggests the relevance to develop flexible exercise programs that are adjusted to the individual's needs, abilities, and preferences., (© 2023. The Author(s).)

Background: Women with a BRCA1/2 pathogenic variant are advised to undergo premenopausal risk-reducing salpingo-oophorectomy after completion of childbearing, to reduce their risk of ovarian cancer. Several studies reported less sexual pleasure 1 to 3 years after a premenopausal oophorectomy. However, the long-term effects of premenopausal oophorectomy on sexual functioning are unknown., Objective: This study aimed to study long-term sexual functioning in women at increased familial risk of breast or ovarian cancer who underwent a risk-reducing salpingo-oophorectomy either before the age of 46 years (premenopausal group) or after the age of 54 years (postmenopausal group). Subgroup analyses were performed in the premenopausal group, comparing early (before the age of 41 years) and later (at ages 41-45 years) premenopausal risk-reducing salpingo-oophorectomy., Study Design: Between 2018 and 2021, 817 women with a high familial risk of breast or ovarian cancer from an ongoing cohort study were invited to participate in our study. Because of a large difference in age in the study between the premenopausal and postmenopausal salpingo-oophorectomy groups, we restricted the comparison of sexual functioning between the groups to 368 women who were 60 to 70 years old at completion of the questionnaire (226 in the premenopausal group and 142 in the postmenopausal group). In 496 women with a premenopausal risk-reducing salpingo-oophorectomy, we compared the sexual functioning between women in the early premenopausal group (n=151) and women in the later premenopausal group (n=345). Differences between groups were analyzed using multiple regression analyses, adjusting for current age, breast cancer history, use of hormone replacement therapy, body mass index, chronic medication use (yes or no), and body image., Results: Mean times since risk-reducing salpingo-oophorectomy were 20.6 years in the premenopausal group and 10.6 years in the postmenopausal group (P<.001). The mean age at questionnaire completion was 62.7 years in the premenopausal group, compared with 67.0 years in the postmenopausal group (P<.001). Compared with 48.9% of women in the postmenopausal group, 47.4% of women in the premenopausal group were still sexually active (P=.80). Current sexual pleasure scores were the same for women in the premenopausal group and women in the postmenopausal group (mean pleasure score, 8.6; P=.99). However, women in the premenopausal group more often reported substantial discomfort than women in the postmenopausal group (35.6% vs 20.9%; P=.04). After adjusting for confounders, premenopausal risk-reducing salpingo-oophorectomy was associated with substantially more discomfort during sexual intercourse than postmenopausal risk-reducing salpingo-oophorectomy (odds ratio, 3.1; 95% confidence interval, 1.04-9.4). Moreover, after premenopausal risk-reducing salpingo-oophorectomy, more severe complaints of vaginal dryness were observed (odds ratio, 2.6; 95% confidence interval, 1.4-4.7). Women with a risk-reducing salpingo-oophorectomy before the age of 41 years reported similar pleasure and discomfort scores as women with a risk-reducing salpingo-oophorectomy between ages 41 and 45 years., Conclusion: More than 15 years after premenopausal risk-reducing salpingo-oophorectomy, the proportion of sexually active women was comparable with the proportion of sexually active women with a postmenopausal risk-reducing salpingo-oophorectomy. However, after a premenopausal risk-reducing salpingo-oophorectomy, women experienced more vaginal dryness and more often had substantial sexual discomfort during sexual intercourse. This did not lead to less pleasure with sexual activity., (Copyright © 2022 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Aim: The European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Questionnaire Core 30 (QLQ-C30) is among the most widely used patient-reported outcome measures in cancer research and practice. It was developed prior to guidance that content should be established directly from patients to confirm it measures concepts of interest and is appropriate and comprehensive for the intended population. This study evaluated the content validity of the QLQ-C30 for use with cancer patients., Methods: Adults undergoing cancer treatment in Europe and the USA participated in open-ended concept elicitation interviews regarding their functional health, symptoms, side-effects and impacts on health-related quality of life. Thematic analysis was conducted, and similarities across cancer types, disease stages and countries or languages were explored., Results: Interviews with 113 patients with cancer (85 European, 28 USA) including breast, lung, prostate, colorectal and other cancers were conducted between 2016 and 2020. Conceptual saturation was achieved. The most frequently reported concepts were included in the QLQ-C30 conceptual framework. QLQ-C30 items were widely understood across language versions and were relevant to patients across cancer types and disease stages. While several new concepts were elicited such as difficulty climbing steps or stairs, weight loss, skin problems and numbness, many were not widely experienced and/or could be considered sub-concepts of existing concepts., Conclusions: The QLQ-C30 demonstrates good evidence of content validity for the assessment of functional health, symptom burden and health-related quality of life in patients with localised-to-advanced cancer., Competing Interests: Conflict of interest statement The authors declare the following financial interests/personal relationships which may be considered as potential competing interests: The following authors declare no competing interests: Andrew Bottomley, Neil K Aaronson, Deborah Fitzsimmons, Mogens Groenvold, and Sally Wheelwright. Colin Johnson, Krzysztof Tomaszewski, Michael Koller, Monica Pinto, Simone Oerlemans, and Heike Schmidt's respective institutions were provided funding from the EORTC Quality of Life Group to conduct the research described in this manuscript. Jane R Wells, Chelsea Finbow, Elizabeth Exall, Chloe Tolley, and Laura Grant are or were at the time of the study employees of Adelphi Values Ltd. Adelphi Values Ltd was provided a grant from the EORTC Quality of Life Group to conduct the research described in this manuscript and to develop this manuscript. Adelphi Values Ltd provides consultancy for a variety of pharmaceutical companies. Kim Cocks is an employee of Adelphi Values Ltd. However, the role of Principal Investigator on this study was not funded through the EORTC Quality of Life Group grant. Kim Cocks has received consulting fees from Endomag Ltd. Galina Velikova's institution was provided funding from the EORTC Quality of Life Group to conduct the research described in this manuscript and other research. Galina Velikova also declares that her institution has grants/contracts with Breast Cancer Now, Pfizer, and IQVIA. Galina Velikova discloses relationships with Novartis, Eisai, Seattle Genetics, Sanofi Advisory Board, and Roche Ester Steering Committee., (Copyright © 2022 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Ltd.. All rights reserved.)

Background: Quality of Life (QoL) of bladder cancer patients has been largely neglected. This is partly due to the lack of well-validated QoL questionnaires. The aim of this study is to examine the structural validity, reliability (i.e., internal consistency and test-retest reliability), construct validity (i.e., divergent validity and known group validity) and responsiveness of the Dutch version of the European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer QoL questionnaire for muscle invasive bladder cancer (EORTC-QLQ-BLM30)., Methods: Patients with newly diagnosed muscle invasive bladder cancer (MIBC) participating in the population-based 'Blaaskankerzorg In Beeld' (BlaZIB) study who completed the EORTC-QLQ-BLM30 at baseline were included. BlaZIB is a Dutch nationwide population-based prospective cohort study collecting clinical data and QoL data of bladder cancer patients. QoL is assessed with a self-administered questionnaire at four points in time: 6 weeks (baseline), 6 months, 12 months and 24 months after diagnosis. Confirmatory factor analysis and multitrait scaling analysis were used to investigate and adapt the scale structure. Reliability, construct validity and responsiveness of the revised scales were evaluated., Results: Of the 1542 patients invited to participate, 650 patients (42.2%) completed the QLQ-BLM30 at baseline. The questionnaire's scale structure was revised into seven scales and eight single items. Internal consistency and test-reliability were adequate for most scales (Cronbach's α ≥0.70 and intraclass correlation coefficient ≥ 0.70, respectively), with the exception of the revised urostomy problem scale and abdominal bloating and flatulence scale. The questionnaire exhibited little overlap with the EORTC-QLQ-C30: all correlations were < 0.40, except for the correlation between emotional function (QLQ-C30) and future worries (QLQ-BLM30). The questionnaire was able to distinguish between patient subgroups formed on the basis of physical function, but not - as hypothesized- based on stage. Changes in health due to treatment were captured by the questionnaire, indicating that the questionnaire is responsive to change., Conclusions: This study shows that the adapted scale structure of the EORTC-QLQ-BLM30 generally exhibits good measurement properties in Dutch patients, but needs to be validated in other languages and settings., Trial Registration: BlaZIB, NL8106, www.trialregister.nl., (© 2022. The Author(s).)

Purpose: To develop optimal cancer survivorship care programs, this study assessed the quality of prostate cancer follow-up care as experienced by patients shortly after completion of primary treatment., Methods: We surveyed 402 patients with localized prostate cancer participating in a randomized controlled trial comparing specialist versus primary care-based follow-up. For the current study, we used patient-reported data at the time of the first follow-up visit at the hospital, prior to randomization. We assessed patients' ratings of the quality of follow-up care using the Assessment of Patient Experiences of Cancer Care survey. This survey includes 13 scales about different aspects of care and an overall rating of care. Multivariable linear regression analysis was used to identify factors associated with perceived follow-up quality., Results: Patients reported positive experiences at first follow-up for 9 of 13 scales, with mean (M) scores ranging from 79 to 97 (on a 0-100 response scale). Patients reported most frequently (over 70%) suboptimal care regarding symptom management (84%; M = 44, SD = 37), health promotion (75%; M = 45, SD = 39), and physician's knowledge about patients' life (84%; M = 65, SD = 23). Overall, patients' lower quality of follow-up ratings were associated with younger age, higher education level, having more than one comorbid condition, having undergone primary surgery, and experiencing significant symptoms., Conclusion: Patients with prostate cancer are generally positive about their initial, hospital-based follow-up care. However, efforts should be made to improve symptom management, health promotion, and physician's knowledge about patients' life. These findings point to areas where prostate cancer follow-up care can be improved., (© 2022. The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature.)

Objective: To investigate the construct validity of the Steep Ramp Test (SRT) by longitudinally comparing the correlation between maximum short exercise capacity of the SRT and direct measurements of peak oxygen consumption (Vo 2 peak) during or shortly after treatment in patients with breast cancer and the potential effect of chemotherapy-induced symptom burden., Design: Cross-sectional., Setting: Multicenter., Participants: We used data from 2 studies that included women with breast cancer treated with chemotherapy, resulting in 274 observations. A total of 161 patients (N=161) performed the cardiopulmonary exercise test and the SRT in 2 test sessions on different time points around chemotherapy treatment., Interventions: Not applicable., Main Outcome Measures: Fatigue was assessed with the Multidimensional Fatigue Inventory, and nausea and vomiting and pain by the European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Questionnaire-Core 30. The longitudinal correlation between the maximum short exercise capacity and Vo 2 peak was investigated using a linear mixed model. Interaction terms were added to the model to investigate whether the correlation varied by symptom burden., Results: We found a statistically significant moderate correlation between Vo 2 peak and maximum short exercise capacity (0.61; 95% confidence interval, 0.51-0.70; P<.01) over time. This correlation was slightly attenuated (-0.07; 95% confidence interval, -0.13 to 0.00; P=.04) in patients with chemotherapy-related nausea and vomiting, indicating smaller correlations of Vo 2 peak with the maximum short exercise capacity with increasing symptom burden. Pain and fatigue did not significantly modify the correlation., Conclusions: The SRT can only be used as a proxy for changes in aerobic capacity with great caution and with attention for the level of nausea and vomiting., (Copyright © 2022 American Congress of Rehabilitation Medicine. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: Many patients with metastatic breast cancer experience cancer- and treatment-related side effects that impair activities of daily living and negatively affect the quality of life. There is a need for interventions that improve quality of life by alleviating fatigue and other side effects during palliative cancer treatment. Beneficial effects of exercise have been observed in the curative setting, but, to date, comparable evidence in patients with metastatic breast cancer is lacking. The aim of this study is to assess the effects of a structured and individualized 9-month exercise intervention in patients with metastatic breast cancer on quality of life, fatigue, and other cancer- and treatment-related side effects., Methods: The EFFECT study is a multinational, randomized controlled trial including 350 patients with metastatic breast cancer. Participants are randomly allocated (1:1) to an exercise or control group. The exercise group participates in a 9-month multimodal exercise program, starting with a 6-month period where participants exercise twice a week under the supervision of an exercise professional. After completing this 6-month period, one supervised session is replaced by one unsupervised session for 3 months. In addition, participants are instructed to be physically active for ≥30 min/day on all remaining days of the week, while being supported by an activity tracker and exercise app. Participants allocated to the control group receive standard medical care, general written physical activity advice, and an activity tracker, but no structured exercise program. The primary outcomes are quality of life (EORTC QLQ-C30, summary score) and fatigue (EORTC QLQ-FA12), assessed at baseline, 3, 6 (primary endpoint), and 9 months post-baseline. Secondary outcomes include physical fitness, physical performance, physical activity, anxiety, depression, pain, sleep problems, anthropometric data, body composition, and blood markers. Exploratory outcomes include quality of working life, muscle thickness, urinary incontinence, disease progression, and survival. Additionally, the cost-effectiveness of the exercise program is assessed. Adherence and safety are monitored throughout the intervention period., Discussion: This large randomized controlled trial will provide evidence regarding the (cost-) effectiveness of exercise during treatment of metastatic breast cancer. If proven (cost-)effective, exercise should be offered to patients with metastatic breast cancer as part of standard care., Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT04120298 . Registered on October 9, 2019., (© 2022. The Author(s).)

Background: A randomized controlled trial (RCT) is currently comparing the effectiveness of specialist- versus primary care-based prostate cancer follow-up. This process evaluation assesses the reach and identified constructs for the implementation of primary care-based follow-up. Methods: A mixed-methods approach is used to assess the reach and the implementation through the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research. We use quantitative data to evaluate the reach of the RCT and qualitative data (interviews) to indicate the perspectives of patients ( n = 15), general practitioners (GPs) ( n = 10), and specialists ( n = 8). Thematic analysis is used to analyze the interview transcripts. Results: In total, we reached 402 (67%) patients from 12 hospitals and randomized them to specialist- ( n = 201) or to primary care-based ( n = 201) follow-up. From the interviews, we identify several advantages of primary care- versus specialist-based follow-up: it is closer to home, more accessible, and the relationship is more personal. Nevertheless, participants also identified challenges: guidelines should be implemented, communication and collaboration between primary and secondary care should be improved, quality indicators should be collected, and GPs should be compensated. Conclusion: Within an RCT context, 402 (67%) patients and their GPs were willing to receive/provide primary care-based follow-up. If the RCT shows that primary care is equally as effective as specialist-based follow-up, the challenges identified in this study need to be addressed to enable a smooth transition of prostate cancer follow-up to primary care.

Background: Higher levels of physical activity are associated with a lower risk of cardiovascular disease in the general population. Whether the same holds for women who underwent treatment for breast cancer is unclear., Objectives: The aim of this study was to evaluate the association between physical activity in a typical week in the past 12 months and cardiac dysfunction in breast cancer survivors., Methods: We used data from a cohort of breast cancer survivors who were treated at ages 40 to 50 years (N = 559). The association between physical activity and global longitudinal strain (GLS) and left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) was evaluated using both linear and modified Poisson regression analyses adjusted for relevant confounders., Results: In total, 559 breast cancer survivors were included, with median age of 55.5 years and a median time since treatment of 10.2 years. GLS was less favorable in inactive survivors (-17.1%) than in moderately inactive (-18.4%), moderately active (-18.2%), and active survivors (-18.5%), with an adjusted significant difference for active versus inactive survivors (β = -1.31; 95% CI: -2.55 to -0.06)). Moderately active (n = 57/130) and active survivors (n = 87/124) had significantly lower risks of abnormal GLS (defined as >-18%) compared with inactive survivors (n = 17/26) (RR: 0.65 [95% CI: 0.45-0.94] and RR: 0.61 [95% CI: 0.43-0.87], respectively). LVEF, in normal ranges in all activity categories, was not associated with physical activity., Conclusions: In long-term breast cancer survivors, higher physical activity levels were associated with improved GLS but not LVEF, with the relatively largest benefit for doing any activity versus none. This finding suggests that increasing physical activity may contribute to cardiovascular health benefits, especially in inactive survivors., Competing Interests: This work was financially supported by Pink Ribbon/Dutch Cancer Society (grant 2012.WO39.C143). Dr Sonke has received institutional research support from AstraZeneca, Merck, Novarits, Roche, and Seagen; and is a consultant for Biovica. Dr Gietema has received grants from Roche, Siemens, and Abbvie paid to his institution. All other authors have reported that they have no relationships relevant to the contents of this paper to disclose., (© 2022 The Authors.)

Introduction: An optimal relative dose intensity (RDI) of adjuvant chemotherapy is associated with better survival in patients with breast cancer. Little is known about the role of physical fitness in attaining an adequate RDI in patients with early-stage breast cancer. We investigated the association between pretreatment physical fitness and RDI in this population., Methods: We pooled individual patient data from two randomized exercise trials that studied exercise programs in early breast cancer: the Physical Exercise During Adjuvant Chemotherapy Effectiveness Study (n = 230) and the Physical Activity during Chemotherapy Treatment (n = 204) study. Logistic regression models were used to evaluate the association between pretreatment fitness and achieving an optimal RDI (≥85%). In addition, we added an interaction term to the model to explore the potential moderating effect of participating in an exercise program., Results: Data were available for 419 patients (mean age at diagnosis, 50.0 ± 8.6 yr). In the total sample, lower pretreatment physical fitness was associated with significantly lower odds of achieving ≥85% RDI: age-adjusted odds ratio (OR) of 0.66 (95% confidence interval (CI), 0.46-0.94). In patients allocated to the supervised exercise intervention during chemotherapy (n = 173), the association between pretreatment physical fitness and RDI was almost completely mitigated (OR, 0.95 (95% CI, 0.54-1.56)), whereas it was more pronounced in patients who received care as usual (n = 172; OR, 0.31 (95% CI, 0.13-0.63); Pinteraction = 0.022)., Conclusions: Early-stage breast cancer patients with relatively lower levels of pretreatment physical fitness have lower odds of achieving an optimal dose of chemotherapy. Given that physical fitness is modifiable and our results suggest that following a moderate-to-high intensity exercise training during chemotherapy could improve treatment completion, clinicians should not refrain from referring patients to supportive exercise programs because of low fitness., (Copyright © 2021 The Author(s). Published by Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. on behalf of the American College of Sports Medicine.)

Some concerns have been raised about potential bias in patient-reported outcome (PRO) results from open-label cancer randomized controlled trials (RCTs). We investigated if open-label trials favor the experimental treatment over the standard treatment more frequently than blinded trials. We also examined if the effect of blinding differs for distal vs more proximal PROs. We assessed 538 RCTs with a PRO endpoint conducted in the most prevalent cancers, of which 366 (68.0%) were open-label, 148 (27.5%) were blinded, and 24 (4.5%) were categorized as unclear. In our multivariable logistic regression model, we did not observe a statistically significant association of the independent variable treatment concealment (blinded vs open-label) on the dependent variable measuring the proportion of trials favoring the experimental treatment (adjusted odds ratio = 1.19, 95% confidence interval = 0.79 to 1.79; 2-sided P = .40). This was also the case when comparing distal and proximal PROs. Our findings provide novel evidence-based data that support the validity of PRO results from open-label cancer RCTs., (© The Author(s) 2021. Published by Oxford University Press. All rights reserved. For permissions, please email: journals.permissions@oup.com.)

Background: The evaluation of health-related quality of life (HRQoL) in clinical trials has become increasingly important because it addresses the impact of treatment from the patient's perspective. The primary aim of this study was to investigate the effect of postoperative chemotherapy and chemoradiotherapy (CRT) after neoadjuvant chemotherapy and surgery with extended (D2) lymphadenectomy on HRQoL in the CRITICS trial. Second, we investigated the potential prognostic value of pretreatment HRQoL on event-free survival (EFS) and overall survival (OS)., Patients and Methods: Patients in the CRITICS trial were asked to complete HRQoL questionnaires (EORTC Quality-of-Life Questionnaire-Core 30 and Quality-of-Life Questionnaire gastric cancer-specific module) at baseline, after preoperative chemotherapy, after surgery, after postoperative chemotherapy or CRT, and at 12 months follow-up. Patients with at least 1 evaluable questionnaire (645 of 788 randomized patients) were included in the HRQoL analyses. The predefined endpoints included dysphagia, pain, physical functioning, fatigue, and Quality-of-Life Questionnaire-Core 30 summary score. Linear mixed modeling was used to assess differences over time and at each time point. Associations of baseline HRQoL with EFS and OS were investigated using multivariate Cox proportional hazards analyses., Results: At completion of postoperative chemo(radio)therapy, the chemotherapy group had significantly better physical functioning (P=.02; Cohen's effect size = 0.42) and less dysphagia (P=.01; Cohen's effect size = 0.38) compared with the CRT group. At baseline, worse social functioning (hazard ratio [HR], 2.20; 95% CI, 1.36-3.55; P=.001), nausea (HR, 1.89; 95% CI, 1.39-2.56; P<.001), worse WHO performance status (HR, 1.55; 95% CI, 1.13-2.13; P=.007), and histologic subtype (diffuse vs intestinal: HR, 1.94; 95% CI, 1.42-2.67; P<.001; mixed vs intestinal: HR, 2.35; 95% CI, 1.35-4.12; P=.003) were significantly associated with worse EFS and OS., Conclusions: In the CRITICS trial, the chemotherapy group had significantly better physical functioning and less dysphagia after postoperative treatment. HRQoL scales at baseline were significantly associated with EFS and OS.

Purpose: Cancer care team attitudes towards distress screening are key to its success and sustainability. Previous qualitative research has interviewed staff mostly around the startup phase. We evaluate oncology teams' perspectives on psychosocial distress screening, including perceived strengths and challenges, in settings where it has been operational for years., Methods: We conducted, transcribed, and analyzed semi-structured interviews with 71 cancer care team members (e.g., MDs, RNs, MSWs) at 18 Commission on Cancer-accredited cancer programs including those serving underrepresented populations., Results: Strengths of distress screening identified by participants included identifying patient needs and testing provider assumptions. Staff indicated it improved patient-provider communication and other aspects of care. Challenges to distress screening included patient barriers (e.g., respondent burden) and lack of electronic system interoperability. Participants expressed the strengths of distress screening (n = 291) more than challenges (n = 86). Suggested improvements included use of technology to collect data, report results, and make referrals; complete screenings prior to appointments; longitudinal assessment; additional staff training; and improve resources to address patient needs., Conclusion: Cancer care team members' perspectives on well-established distress screening programs largely replicate findings of previous studies focusing on the startup phase, but there are important differences: team members expressed more strengths than challenges, suggesting a positive attitude. While our sample described many challenges described previously, they did not indicate challenges with scoring and interpreting the distress screening questionnaire. The differences in attitudes expressed in response to mature versus startup implementations provide important insights to inform efforts to sustain and optimize distress screening., (© 2021. The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature.)

Objectives: Incomplete reporting of key information on patient-reported outcomes (PROs) in randomized controlled trials (RCTs) in oncology has been highlighted repeatedly as a major barrier to the use of study findings in clinical practice. We investigated whether the quality of reporting of PRO data in cancer RCTs has improved over the last 15 years., Methods: We identified all cancer RCTs with PRO endpoints conducted across the most prevalent solid tumor types worldwide published between 2004 and 2019. The quality of PRO reporting was assessed using the International Society for Quality of Life Research recommended standards, which include important aspects related to assessment methodology, statistical analyses, and interpretation of data., Results: We assessed a total of 631 cancer RCTs in breast (n = 187), lung (n = 131), prostate (n = 120), colorectal (n = 107), and gynecological (n = 86) cancer. We observed a higher adherence to the International Society for Quality of Life Research reporting criteria in the more recently published studies. In a multivariable linear regression analysis, we observed a statistically significant improvement in the quality of PRO reporting over time (P<.001), and this relationship was independent of other measured confounding factors, such as sample size and study sponsorship. Overall, the quality of PRO reporting was higher for studies published after the publication of the Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials-PRO Extension., Conclusions: The quality of PRO reporting in cancer RCTs published in the last 15 years has improved significantly. Our findings are encouraging because better reporting of PRO results may translate into a greater impact of study findings on real-world practice., (Copyright © 2021 ISPOR–The Professional Society for Health Economics and Outcomes Research. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: Lynch syndrome is a rare familial cancer syndrome caused by pathogenic variants in the mismatch repair genes MLH1, MSH2, MSH6, or PMS2, that cause predisposition to various cancers, predominantly colorectal and endometrial cancer. Data are emerging that pathogenic variants in mismatch repair genes increase the risk of early-onset aggressive prostate cancer. The IMPACT study is prospectively assessing prostate-specific antigen (PSA) screening in men with germline mismatch repair pathogenic variants. Here, we report the usefulness of PSA screening, prostate cancer incidence, and tumour characteristics after the first screening round in men with and without these germline pathogenic variants., Methods: The IMPACT study is an international, prospective study. Men aged 40-69 years without a previous prostate cancer diagnosis and with a known germline pathogenic variant in the MLH1, MSH2, or MSH6 gene, and age-matched male controls who tested negative for a familial pathogenic variant in these genes were recruited from 34 genetic and urology clinics in eight countries, and underwent a baseline PSA screening. Men who had a PSA level higher than 3·0 ng/mL were offered a transrectal, ultrasound-guided, prostate biopsy and a histopathological analysis was done. All participants are undergoing a minimum of 5 years' annual screening. The primary endpoint was to determine the incidence, stage, and pathology of screening-detected prostate cancer in carriers of pathogenic variants compared with non-carrier controls. We used Fisher's exact test to compare the number of cases, cancer incidence, and positive predictive values of the PSA cutoff and biopsy between carriers and non-carriers and the differences between disease types (ie, cancer vs no cancer, clinically significant cancer vs no cancer). We assessed screening outcomes and tumour characteristics by pathogenic variant status. Here we present results from the first round of PSA screening in the IMPACT study. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT00261456, and is now closed to accrual., Findings: Between Sept 28, 2012, and March 1, 2020, 828 men were recruited (644 carriers of mismatch repair pathogenic variants [204 carriers of MLH1, 305 carriers of MSH2, and 135 carriers of MSH6] and 184 non-carrier controls [65 non-carriers of MLH1, 76 non-carriers of MSH2, and 43 non-carriers of MSH6]), and in order to boost the sample size for the non-carrier control groups, we randomly selected 134 non-carriers from the BRCA1 and BRCA2 cohort of the IMPACT study, who were included in all three non-carrier cohorts. Men were predominantly of European ancestry (899 [93%] of 953 with available data), with a mean age of 52·8 years (SD 8·3). Within the first screening round, 56 (6%) men had a PSA concentration of more than 3·0 ng/mL and 35 (4%) biopsies were done. The overall incidence of prostate cancer was 1·9% (18 of 962; 95% CI 1·1-2·9). The incidence among MSH2 carriers was 4·3% (13 of 305; 95% CI 2·3-7·2), MSH2 non-carrier controls was 0·5% (one of 210; 0·0-2·6), MSH6 carriers was 3·0% (four of 135; 0·8-7·4), and none were detected among the MLH1 carriers, MLH1 non-carrier controls, and MSH6 non-carrier controls. Prostate cancer incidence, using a PSA threshold of higher than 3·0 ng/mL, was higher in MSH2 carriers than in MSH2 non-carrier controls (4·3% vs 0·5%; p=0·011) and MSH6 carriers than MSH6 non-carrier controls (3·0% vs 0%; p=0·034). The overall positive predictive value of biopsy using a PSA threshold of 3·0 ng/mL was 51·4% (95% CI 34·0-68·6), and the overall positive predictive value of a PSA threshold of 3·0 ng/mL was 32·1% (20·3-46·0)., Interpretation: After the first screening round, carriers of MSH2 and MSH6 pathogenic variants had a higher incidence of prostate cancer compared with age-matched non-carrier controls. These findings support the use of targeted PSA screening in these men to identify those with clinically significant prostate cancer. Further annual screening rounds will need to confirm these findings., Funding: Cancer Research UK, The Ronald and Rita McAulay Foundation, the National Institute for Health Research support to Biomedical Research Centres (The Institute of Cancer Research and Royal Marsden NHS Foundation Trust; Oxford; Manchester and the Cambridge Clinical Research Centre), Mr and Mrs Jack Baker, the Cancer Council of Tasmania, Cancer Australia, Prostate Cancer Foundation of Australia, Cancer Council of Victoria, Cancer Council of South Australia, the Victorian Cancer Agency, Cancer Australia, Prostate Cancer Foundation of Australia, Asociación Española Contra el Cáncer (AECC), the Instituto de Salud Carlos III, Fondo Europeo de Desarrollo Regional (FEDER), the Institut Català de la Salut, Autonomous Government of Catalonia, Fundação para a Ciência e a Tecnologia, National Institutes of Health National Cancer Institute, Swedish Cancer Society, General Hospital in Malmö Foundation for Combating Cancer., Competing Interests: Declaration of interests HL holds patents on intact PSA assays and is named on a patent for a statistical method to detect prostate cancer licensed to Arctic Partners and commercialised by OPKO Health, and has stock in Arctic Partners and OPKO Health and receives royalties from sales of the 4Kscore test. RAE has received speaker honoraria from Genitourinary-American Society of Clinical Oncology, The University of Chicago, European Society for Medical Oncology (paid by Bayer and Ipsen), and The Royal Marsden NHS Foundation Trust (with support from Janssen), and is a member of the AstraZeneca UK Limited Prostate Dx Advisory Panel external expert committee. No organisation had any role in the decision to publish or in the writing of the manuscript. All other authors declare no competing interests., (Copyright © 2021 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier Ltd. This is an Open Access article under the CC BY 4.0 license. Published by Elsevier Ltd.. All rights reserved.)

Background: As the number of cancer survivors is increasing, it is important to be able to offer exercise and physical activity (PA)-promoting interventions that are both effective and reasonably accessible. Internet-based interventions are typically less expensive and more accessible alternatives to on-site supervised interventions. Currently, little is known about the characteristics of nonparticipants in PA promotion trials in the cancer survivorship setting, both in general and specifically in trials using internet-supported interventions., Objective: This study aims to gain insight into the characteristics associated with nonparticipation in a blended internet-based supported intervention trial to promote PA., Methods: Breast and prostate cancer survivors, 3-36 months after primary curative treatment, were invited to participate in the PABLO trial; this trial compared an internet-based intervention to enhance PA levels, with or without additional support from a physical therapist, to usual care. Participants and nonparticipants were asked to complete a comprehensive questionnaire assessing sociodemographics, fatigue, and health-related quality of life. Baseline data for participants and nonparticipants were compared using the independent Student t test and chi-square test., Results: The inclusion rate in the trial was 11.03% (137/1242). Of the nonparticipants, 13.95% (154/1104) completed the questionnaire. Participants were more highly educated (P=.04), had a paid job less often (P=.03), and were on sick leave more often (P=.03). They reported less PA per week, both moderate (P=.03) and vigorous (P<.01), before diagnosis and during leisure time (P<.01, effect size [ES]=0.44). They reported a significantly lower stage of change (P≤.01), lower self-efficacy (P<.01, ES=0.61), perceived barriers to PA (P<.01, ES=0.54), and more general fatigue (P<.01, ES=0.60). Participants reported lower health-related quality of life for most domains (ES ranging from 0.34 for mental health to 0.48 for social functioning). No significant differences were found for other sociodemographics, mood state, or attitudes toward or perceived social support for PA., Conclusions: The participants who self-selected for trial participation reported lower PA levels before diagnosis and a stronger need for support compared with nonparticipants. The trial thus included those patients who might benefit the most from internet-based supportive PA interventions., Trial Registration: Netherlands trial register NTR6911; https://www.trialregister.nl/trial/6733., (©Hester J vd Wiel, Martijn M Stuiver, Anne M May, Susan van Grinsven, Marlou F A Benink, Neil K Aaronson, Hester S A Oldenburg, Henk G van der Poel, Wim H van Harten, Wim G Groen. Originally published in JMIR Cancer (https://cancer.jmir.org), 05.10.2021.)

Background: The European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) quality of life questionnaire for non-muscle invasive bladder cancer (QLQ-NMIBC24) has been available and applied for some years now, but has yet to undergo a full comprehensive psychometric evaluation. The aim of this study was to investigate the psychometric properties of the Dutch version of the EORTC QLQ-NMIBC24 questionnaire in patients with low, intermediate and high risk NMIBC., Methods: We included patients newly diagnosed with NMIBC participating in the multicenter, population-based prospective cohort studies UroLife or BlaZIB. Psychometric evaluation included examination of the structural validity, reliability (i.e. internal consistency and test-retest reliability), construct validity (i.e. divergent validity and known-groups validity), responsiveness and interpretability., Results: A total of 1463 patients who completed the baseline questionnaire of UroLife (n = 541, response rate 50%) or BlaZIB (n = 922, response rate 58%) were included. The percentage of missing responses were low for all non-sex related scales (< 1%) and ranged between 6.9% to 50.0% for sex-related scales. More than 15% of the patients obtained the lowest possible scores on nearly each scale (floor effect). The structural validity was adequate; the confirmatory factor analysis showed satisfactory results and all items of multiple items scales had higher within- than between-scale correlations. Reliability of the questionnaire was adequate for most multiple item scales (Cronbach's α ≥ 0.70 and intraclass correlation coefficient ≥ 0.70), with exception of the scales 'malaise' and 'bloating and flatulence'. The questionnaire also showed good construct validity; it showed low correlations with the items of the EORTC core questionnaire and was able to measure differences between risk-based subgroups. The responsiveness of the questionnaire was good, but the interpretability, i.e. minimal important change, could not be determined., Conclusions: This study shows that the measurement properties of the EORTC QLQL-NMIBC24 are good; it has a good structural validity, reliability (i.e. internal consistency and test-retest reliability), construct validity (i.e. divergent validity and known-group validity), and responsiveness. Interpretability could not be assessed. This questionnaire can be used to measure and monitor health-related quality of life of patients with NMIBC., (© 2021. The Author(s).)

Introduction: Lung cancer and its treatment cause a wide range of symptoms impacting the patients' health-related quality of life (HRQoL). The use of patient-reported outcomes (PRO) to monitor symptoms during and after cancer treatment has been shown not only to improve symptom management but also to improve HRQoL and overall survival (OS). Collectively, these results favour implementation of PRO-symptom monitoring in daily clinical care. However, these promising outcomes have been obtained under trial conditions in which patients were selected based on stringent inclusion criteria, and in countries with a dissimilar healthcare system than in the Netherlands.The primary aim of the SYMptom monitoring with Patient-Reported Outcomes using a web application among patients with Lung cancer in the Netherlands (SYMPRO-Lung) study is to evaluate the effect of PRO-symptom monitoring during and after lung cancer treatment on HRQoL in daily clinical practice. Secondary objectives include assessing the effect of PRO-symptom monitoring on progression-free survival, OS, the incidence and grade of PRO symptoms, medication adherence, implementation fidelity and cost-effectiveness., Methods and Analysis: The SYMPRO-Lung study is a prospective, multicentre trial with a stepped wedge cluster randomised design. Study participants (n=292 intervention, n=292 controls) include patients with lung cancer (stages I-IV) starting treatment with surgery, systemic treatment, targeted treatment and/or radiotherapy.Every participating centre will consecutively switch from the control period to the intervention period, in which patients report their symptoms weekly via an online tool. In the intervention group, we evaluate two alert approaches: the active and reactive approach. If the symptoms exceed a predefined threshold, an alert is sent to the healthcare provider (active approach) or to the patient (reactive approach). Both the control and intervention group complete HRQoL questionnaires at 4 time points: at baseline, 15 weeks, 6 months and 1-year post treatment). Differences in HRQoL between the groups will be compared using linear mixed modelling analyses, accounting for within-centre clustering, potential time effects and confounding., Ethics and Dissemination: The study protocol was approved by the Institutional Review Board and the Medical Ethics Committee of the Amsterdam UMC (under number NL 68440.029.18) and the institutional review boards of the participating study sites. The dissemination of the results will be conducted through publication in peer-reviewed journals and through scientific conferences., Trial Registration Number: Trial register identifier: Netherlands Trial register Trial NL7897. Date of registration: 24 July 2019. https://www.trialregister.nl/trial/7897., Competing Interests: Competing interests: None declared., (© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2021. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.)

Background Physical exercise is an intervention that might protect against doxorubicin-induced cardiotoxicity. In this meta-analysis and systematic review, we aimed to estimate the effect of exercise on doxorubicin-induced cardiotoxicity and to evaluate mechanisms underlying exercise-mediated cardioprotection using (pre)clinical evidence. Methods and Results We conducted a systematic search in PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) databases. Cochrane's and Systematic Review Centre for Laboratory Animal Experimentation (SYRCLE) risk-of-bias tools were used to assess the validity of human and animal studies, respectively. Cardiotoxicity outcomes reported by ≥3 studies were pooled and structured around the type of exercise intervention. Forty articles were included, of which 3 were clinical studies. Overall, in humans (sample sizes ranging from 24 to 61), results were indicative of exercise-mediated cardioprotection, yet they were not sufficient to establish whether physical exercise protects against doxorubicin-induced cardiotoxicity. In animal studies (n=37), a pooled analysis demonstrated that forced exercise interventions significantly mitigated in vivo and ex vivo doxorubicin-induced cardiotoxicity compared with nonexercised controls. Similar yet slightly smaller effects were found for voluntary exercise interventions. We identified oxidative stress and related pathways, and less doxorubicin accumulation as mechanisms underlying exercise-induced cardioprotection, of which the latter could act as an overarching mechanism. Conclusions Animal studies indicate that various exercise interventions can protect against doxorubicin-induced cardiotoxicity in rodents. Less doxorubicin accumulation in cardiac tissue could be a key underlying mechanism. Given the preclinical evidence and limited availability of clinical data, larger and methodologically rigorous clinical studies are needed to clarify the role of physical exercise in preventing cardiotoxicity in patients with cancer. Registration URL: https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero; Unique identifier: CRD42019118218.

Background: We developed an Internet-based physical activity (PA) support program (IPAS), which is embedded in a patient portal. We evaluated the effectiveness and costs of IPAS alone (online only) or IPAS combined with physiotherapist telephone counselling (blended care), compared to a control group., Methods: Breast or prostate cancer survivors, 3-36 months after completing primary treatment, were randomized to 6-months access to online only, blended care, or a control group. At baseline and 6-month post-baseline, minutes of moderate-to-vigorous PA (MVPA) were measured by accelerometers. Secondary outcomes were self-reported PA, fatigue, mood, health-related quality of life, attitude toward PA, and costs. (Generalized) linear models were used to compare the outcomes between groups., Results: We recruited 137 survivors (participation rate 11%). We did not observe any significant between-group differences in MVPA or secondary outcomes. Adherence was rather low and satisfaction scores were low to moderate, with better scores for blended care. Costs for both interventions were low., Conclusions: Recruitment to the study was challenging and the interventions were less efficacious than anticipated, which led to lessons learned for future trials. Suggestions for future research are as follows: improved accessibility of the support program, increased frequency of support, and use of activity trackers.

Purpose: To evaluate the feasibility and outcomes of a tailored, goal-directed, and exercise-based physical therapy program for patients with metastatic breast cancer (MBC)., Methods: This was an observational, uncontrolled feasibility study. The physical therapy intervention was highly tailored to the individual patient's goals, abilities, and preferences and could include functional, strength, aerobic, and relaxation exercises. Feasibility outcomes were participation rate (expected: 25%), safety, and adherence (percentage of attended sessions relative to scheduled sessions). Additional outcomes were goal attainment, self-reported physical functioning, fatigue, health-related quality of life, and patient and physical therapist satisfaction with the program., Results: Fifty-five patients (estimated participation rate: 34%) were enrolled. Three patients did not start the intervention due to early disease progression. An additional 22 patients discontinued the program prematurely, mainly due to disease progression. Median intervention adherence was 90% and no major intervention-related adverse events occurred. A goal attainment score was available for 42 patients (of whom 29 had completed the program and 13 had prematurely dropped out). Twenty-two (52%) of these patients achieved their main goal fully or largely and an additional 15 patients (36%) partially. Eighty-five percent would "definitely recommend" the program to other patients with MBC. We observed a modest improvement in patient satisfaction with physical activities (Cohen's d z 0.33)., Conclusion: The tailored intervention program was feasible in terms of uptake, safety, and outcomes and was highly valued by patients and physical therapists. However, disease progression interfered with the program, leading to substantial dropout., Trial Registration: NTR register: NTR6475.

Exercise during cancer treatment improves cancer-related fatigue (CRF), but the importance of exercise intensity for CRF is unclear. We compared the effects of high- vs low-to-moderate-intensity exercise with or without additional behavior change support (BCS) on CRF in patients undergoing (neo-)adjuvant cancer treatment. This was a multicenter, 2x2 factorial design randomized controlled trial (Clinical Trials NCT02473003) in Sweden. Participants recently diagnosed with breast (n = 457), prostate (n = 97) or colorectal (n = 23) cancer undergoing (neo-)adjuvant treatment were randomized to high intensity (n = 144), low-to-moderate intensity (n = 144), high intensity with BCS (n = 144) or low-to-moderate intensity with BCS (n = 145). The 6-month exercise intervention included supervised resistance training and home-based endurance training. CRF was assessed by Multidimensional Fatigue Inventory (MFI, five subscales score range 4-20), and Functional Assessment of Chronic Illness Therapy-Fatigue scale (FACIT-F, score range 0-52). Multiple linear regression for main factorial effects was performed according to intention-to-treat, with post-intervention CRF as primary endpoint. Overall, 577 participants (mean age 58.7 years) were randomized. Participants randomized to high- vs low-to-moderate-intensity exercise had lower physical fatigue (MFI Physical Fatigue subscale; mean difference -1.05 [95% CI: -1.85, -0.25]), but the difference was not clinically important (ie <2). We found no differences in other CRF dimensions and no effect of additional BCS. There were few minor adverse events. For CRF, patients undergoing (neo-)adjuvant treatment for breast, prostate or colorectal cancer can safely exercise at high- or low-to-moderate intensity, according to their own preferences. Additional BCS does not provide extra benefit for CRF in supervised, well-controlled exercise interventions., (© 2021 The Authors. Scandinavian Journal of Medicine & Science In Sports published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.)

Background: The EORTC QLQ-C15-PAL is a shortened version of the widely used EORTC QLQ-C30. This questionnaire was developed to measure the symptoms and functional health of patients receiving palliative care. Objective: To enhance clinical interpretability of the EORTC QLQ-C15-PAL, our aim was to evaluate the sensitivity and specificity of thresholds for clinical importance developed previously for the QLQ-C30 when applied to the QLQ-C15-PAL scales. Design: Cross-sectional observational study. Setting/Subjects: Patients with cancer receiving any type of palliative treatment. Measurement: Patients completed the EORTC QLQ-C15-PAL and anchor items on limitations, worries, and need for help for each of the health domains covered by the questionnaire. The anchor items were summarized in a binary criterion for clinical importance to calculate the sensitivity and specificity of the thresholds for clinical importance. Results: In total, 225 patients participated in the study (mean age 64.5 years). Patients were recruited from Austria, Italy, the Netherlands, Poland, Spain, and the United Kingdom. The thresholds for clinical importance for the QLQ-C15-PAL scales showed a median sensitivity of 0.88 (range: 0.82 for sleep disturbances to 1.00 for dyspnea) and a median specificity of 0.74 (range: 0.54 for dyspnea to 0.89 for constipation). Conclusion: The thresholds for clinical importance showed high sensitivity and mostly high specificity in identifying clinically important symptoms and functional health impairments as assessed by the QLQ-C15-PAL. These thresholds will facilitate interpretation of EORTC QLQ-C15-PAL scores in daily clinical practice and clinical research.

Maximizing participation in cancer research is important to improve the validity and generalizability of research findings. We conducted a four-arm randomized controlled trial to test the impact of a novel video invitation on participant response. We invited childhood cancer survivors and parents of survivors <16 years to complete questionnaires. We compared response rates to an invitation letter (control) vs receiving the letter plus a video invitation on a flash drive presented by a childhood cancer survivor, a pediatric oncologist or a researcher. We explored factors associated with viewing the video and examined the impact of enclosing the USB on study costs. Overall 54% (634/1176) of questionnaires were returned. Participants who received a video invitation on a USB were more likely to return the questionnaire than those who did not (58% vs 47%, P < .001). Participation rate did not significantly differ by video presenter. Forty-seven percent of participants who received a USB reported watching the video, of whom 48% reported that the video influenced their decision to participate. Participants with a lower income (OR = 0.43, 95% CI = 0.25-0.74, P = .002) were more likely to report watching the video. Participants who received a video invitation required significantly fewer reminder calls than those who only received a written invitation (mean = 1.6 vs 1.1 calls, P < .001), resulting in a 25% recruitment cost-saving for the study. Adding a USB with a video study invitation to recruitment packages is a cost-effective way of improving study participation. This is important in an era of declining study participation and underrepresentation of vulnerable populations in research., (© 2020 Union for International Cancer Control.)

Background: BRCA1/2 mutation carriers are recommended to undergo risk-reducing salpingo-oophorectomy (RRSO) at 35 to 45 years of age. RRSO substantially decreases ovarian cancer risk, but at the cost of immediate menopause. Knowledge about the potential adverse effects of premenopausal RRSO, such as increased risk of cardiovascular disease, osteoporosis, cognitive dysfunction, and reduced health-related quality of life (HRQoL), is limited., Objective: The aim of this study is to assess the long-term health effects of premenopausal RRSO on cardiovascular disease, bone health, cognitive functioning, urological complaints, sexual functioning, and HRQoL in women with high familial risk of breast or ovarian cancer., Methods: We will conduct a multicenter cross-sectional study with prospective follow-up, nested in a nationwide cohort of women at high familial risk of breast or ovarian cancer. A total of 500 women who have undergone RRSO before 45 years of age, with a follow-up period of at least 10 years, will be compared with 250 women (frequency matched on current age) who have not undergone RRSO or who have undergone RRSO at over 55 years of age. Participants will complete an online questionnaire on lifestyle, medical history, cardiovascular risk factors, osteoporosis, cognitive function, urological complaints, and HRQoL. A full cardiovascular assessment and assessment of bone mineral density will be performed. Blood samples will be obtained for marker analysis. Cognitive functioning will be assessed objectively with an online neuropsychological test battery., Results: This study was approved by the institutional review board in July 2018. In February 2019, we included our first participant. As of November 2020, we had enrolled 364 participants in our study., Conclusions: Knowledge from this study will contribute to counseling women with a high familial risk of breast/ovarian cancer about the long-term health effects of premenopausal RRSO. The results can also be used to offer health recommendations after RRSO., Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT03835793; https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT03835793., International Registered Report Identifier (irrid): DERR1-10.2196/24414., (©Lara Terra, Maartje J Hooning, Bernadette A M Heemskerk-Gerritsen, Marc van Beurden, Jeanine E Roeters van Lennep, Helena C van Doorn, Joanne A de Hullu, Constantijne Mom, Eleonora B L van Dorst, Marian J E Mourits, Brigitte F M Slangen, Katja N Gaarenstroom, M Carola Zillikens, Tim Leiner, Lizet van der Kolk, Margriet Collee, Marijke Wevers, Margreet G E M Ausems, Klaartje van Engelen, Lieke PV Berger, Christi J van Asperen, Encarna B Gomez-Garcia, Irma van de Beek, Matti A Rookus, Michael Hauptmann, Eveline M Bleiker, Sanne B Schagen, Neil K Aaronson, Angela H E M Maas, Flora E van Leeuwen. Originally published in JMIR Research Protocols (http://www.researchprotocols.org), 22.01.2021.)

Introduction: The addition of hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC) to interval cytoreductive surgery (CRS) improves recurrence-free (RFS) and overall survival (OS) in patients with FIGO stage III ovarian cancer. We evaluated the effect of HIPEC on patient's health-related quality of life (HRQoL) in the OVHIPEC trial., Materials and Methods: OVHIPEC was a multicentre, open-label, randomized phase III trial for patients with stage III ovarian cancer. Patients were randomly assigned (1:1) to receive interval CRS with or without HIPEC with cisplatin. HRQoL was assessed using the EORTC QLQ-C30, and the ovarian (QLQ-OV28) and colorectal cancer (QLQ-CR38) modules. HRQoL questionnaires were administered at baseline, after surgery, after end of treatment, and every three months thereafter. HRQoL was a secondary endpoint, with the prespecified focus on the QLQ-C30 summary score and symptom scores on fatigue, neuropathy and gastro-intestinal symptoms. HRQoL was analysed using linear and non-linear mixed effect models., Results: In total, 245 patients were randomized. One-hundred-ninety-seven patients (80%) completed at least one questionnaire. No significant difference over time in the QLQ-C30 summary scores was observed between the study arms (p-values for linear and non-linear growth: p > 0.133). The pattern over time for fatigue, neuropathy and gastro-intestinal symptoms did not significantly differ between treatment arms., Conclusion: The addition of HIPEC to interval CRS does not negatively impact HRQoL in patients with stage III ovarian cancer who are treated with interval CRS due to the extent of disease. These HRQoL results, together with the improvement in RFS and OS, support the viability of HIPEC as an important treatment option in this patient population. CLINICALTRIALS., Gov Number: NCT00426257., Eudract Number: 2006-003466-34., (Copyright © 2019 Elsevier Ltd, BASO ~ The Association for Cancer Surgery, and the European Society of Surgical Oncology. All rights reserved.)

Objectives: Major advances have recently been made in the treatments of cancer, which now also have the potential to improve patients' health-related quality of life (HRQOL). We propose the time to HRQOL improvement (TTI) and the time to sustained HRQOL improvement (TTSI) as potentially important cancer outcomes to be used in longitudinal HRQOL analyses., Study Design and Setting: As proof of principle, we defined TTI and TTSI, using the Fine-Gray model to include competing risks in estimates, in a case study in real life of a cohort of newly diagnosed patients with cancer receiving a targeted therapy. HRQOL was evaluated before and during therapy with six assessments over a 24-month period, using the well-validated European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Questionnaire-Core 30., Results: For each assessed HRQOL domain, we assessed TTI and TTSI and estimated the cumulative incidence of patients' clinically meaningful improvements, also accounting for the occurrence of competing events., Conclusion: TTI and TTSI are potentially important outcomes in the era of modern anticancer therapies. The analysis of TTI and TTSI by competing risks approach will further add to the statistical methods that can be used to inform on the impact of cancer therapies on patients' HRQOL., (Copyright © 2020 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Objective: Psychosocial interventions can reduce cancer-related fatigue effectively. However, it is still unclear if intervention effects differ across subgroups of patients. These meta-analyses aimed at evaluating moderator effects of (a) sociodemographic characteristics, (b) clinical characteristics, (c) baseline levels of fatigue and other symptoms, and (d) intervention-related characteristics on the effect of psychosocial interventions on cancer-related fatigue in patients with non-metastatic breast and prostate cancer., Methods: Data were retrieved from the Predicting OptimaL cAncer RehabIlitation and Supportive care (POLARIS) consortium. Potential moderators were studied with meta-analyses of pooled individual patient data from 14 randomized controlled trials through linear mixed-effects models with interaction tests. The analyses were conducted separately in patients with breast (n = 1091) and prostate cancer (n = 1008)., Results: Statistically significant, small overall effects of psychosocial interventions on fatigue were found (breast cancer: β = -0.19 [95% confidence interval (95%CI) = -0.30; -0.08]; prostate cancer: β = -0.11 [95%CI = -0.21; -0.00]). In both patient groups, intervention effects did not differ significantly by sociodemographic or clinical characteristics, nor by baseline levels of fatigue or pain. For intervention-related moderators (only tested among women with breast cancer), statistically significant larger effects were found for cognitive behavioral therapy as intervention strategy (β = -0.27 [95%CI = -0.40; -0.15]), fatigue-specific interventions (β = -0.48 [95%CI = -0.79; -0.18]), and interventions that only targeted patients with clinically relevant fatigue (β = -0.85 [95%CI = -1.40; -0.30])., Conclusions: Our findings did not provide evidence that any selected demographic or clinical characteristic, or baseline levels of fatigue or pain, moderated effects of psychosocial interventions on fatigue. A specific focus on decreasing fatigue seems beneficial for patients with breast cancer with clinically relevant fatigue., (© 2020 John Wiley & Sons Ltd.)

Background: Two methods combining survival and health-related quality of life (HRQoL) data in glioma trials to calculate the "net clinical benefit" were evaluated: Quality-adjusted effect sizes (QASES) and joint modeling (JM)., Methods: The net clinical benefit in two trials was calculated as proof of concept for other trials. With the QASES method, effect sizes for differences in progression-free survival (PFS) or overall survival (OS) and HRQoL between the experimental arm and standard treatment arm were calculated, while the relative emphasis placed on survival/HRQoL varied. JM allows simultaneous modeling of HRQoL and OS/PFS., Results: In the EORTC 26951 trial, combined radiochemotherapy significantly prolonged OS (difference 11.7 months), but also resulted in more patients experiencing clinically relevant worsening (≥10 points) in appetite loss and nausea/vomiting shortly after treatment. Using QASES, the survival benefit of additional procarbazine, lomustine, and vincristine (PCV) decreased from 42.3 months to 29.5 and 28.2 months when accounting for appetite loss and nausea/vomiting, respectively. JM analyses resulted in a loss of the beneficial effect of additional PCV between 13% and 24% when adjusting for different HRQoL parameters. The EORTC 22033 trial showed no significant PFS difference between radiotherapy or temozolomide alone (46 vs 39 months), nor clinically relevant differences in HRQoL. JM analyses also showed no significant association between PFS and HRQoL scales/items, whereas QASES showed that temozolomide alone was more favorable when considering symptom burden (47-49 instead of 39 months)., Conclusions: Both methods resulted in different outcomes, but adjusting for the impact of treatment on HRQoL resulted in theoretically reduced survival benefits., (© The Author(s) 2020. Published by Oxford University Press, the Society for Neuro-Oncology and the European Association of Neuro-Oncology.)

Background: The U.S. National Cancer Institute's Patient-Reported Outcomes version of the Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (PRO-CTCAE™) is a library of items for assessing symptomatic adverse events by patient self-report in oncology trials. The aim of this multi-site study was to generate and linguistically validate a Dutch language version of the U.S. PRO-CTCAE for use in the Netherlands and Dutch-speaking Belgium., Methods: All 124 items in the PRO-CTCAE item library were translated into Dutch using established translation procedures, including dual forward translations, reconciliation, back-translation, reconciliation of the source with the back-translation, and expert reviews. Harmonization of the translation for use in both the Netherlands and Belgium was achieved via an iterative review process in which the translations were discussed and reconciled by consensus of PRO experts, clinicians and bilingual Dutch translators. The translated PRO-CTCAE™ items were completed by a geographically-diverse sample of Dutch speaking patients from the Netherlands (n = 40) and Belgium (n = 60), and who were currently receiving or who had recently completed cancer-directed therapy. Patients were diverse with respect to age, sex, educational attainment, and cancer diagnosis. Cognitive debriefing, using a semi-structured interview guide, probed for comprehension and clarity of PRO-CTCAE symptom terms, attributes (e.g. frequency, severity, interference), response choices, and understanding of 'at its worst' and 'in the last 7 days'. Items for which the patient data indicated possible difficulties were considered for revision., Results: Three items underwent minor phrasing revision and retesting was not deemed necessary. The symptom term for stretch marks was poorly understood by 12.5% of participants, and this item was revised to include parenthetical phrasing. It was retested with 10 participants from Belgium (n = 5) and the Netherlands (n = 5) and demonstrated acceptable comprehension., Conclusions: The Dutch language version of PRO-CTCAE has been successfully developed and linguistically validated for use in oncology studies in the Netherlands and Dutch-speaking Belgium. Extending the availability of NCI PRO-CTCAE in languages beyond English increases international consistency in the capture of Patient-Reported outcomes in patients participating in cancer clinical trials.

Purpose: Information about prostate cancer patients' experiences with their treatment is crucial to optimize shared decision-making. This study examined unmet expectations in prostate cancer patients and their association with decision regret., Methods: We conducted a prospective, observational, multi-center study of men diagnosed with localized prostate cancer between 2014 and 2016. Questionnaires were completed at baseline (pre-treatment), and up to 12 months after treatment. Unmet expectations were reported as the proportion of patients who experienced side effects as worse than expected. Linear regression analysis was used to identify factors associated significantly (p ≤ 0.05) with unmet expectations and its association with decision regret., Results: At 1-year follow-up, the majority of the patients (71%, 210/296) reported at least one unmet expectation. The proportion of patients who reported worse than expected erectile problems was 56%, recovery period = 29%, urinary problems = 28%, fatigue = 24%, and bowel problems = 17%. Unmet expectations were comparable between treatment groups, except for fatigue. A passive role in the decision-making process (eta squared (η 2 ) = 0.02) and higher scores on the decisional conflict scale (η 2  = 0.02) were associated with more unmet expectations, and unmet expectations were associated with decision regret (η 2  = 0.08)., Conclusions: Unmet expectations are common among men treated for localized prostate cancer. Involving patients in the treatment decision-making process and offering additional counseling to patients who indicate uncertainty about their decision, may help to avoid unmet expectations., Implications for Cancer Survivors: The current study emphasizes the need for involving prostate cancer patients in the decision-making process in order to mitigate unmet expectations.

Purpose: To qualitatively investigate changes in employment status, barriers to and facilitators of (return to) work in breast cancer survivors 5-10 years after diagnosis. Materials and methods: Women were eligible to participate in the focus groups if they were younger than 55 years and were employed at time of diagnosis. Data were analysed by two independent researchers using thematic content analysis. Results: Nineteen women participated in three semi-structured focus groups, of whom 18 reported a change in employment status 5-10 years after diagnosis. Perceived barriers to (return to) work shortly after breast cancer diagnosis tended to be disease- and treatment-related, while 5-10 years later, they were personal- and work-related. Participants recommended open communication and support at the workplace, and comprehensive information from (occupational) health care professionals to facilitate dealing with breast cancer at work. Conclusions: Breast cancer survivors still experience changes in employment status 5-10 years after diagnosis. (Occupational) health care professionals should be alert that perceived barriers for returning to work change over time. Future research should focus on increasing awareness (at work) of breast cancer survivors' needs, providing adequate information and support to all involved, and developing interventions to sustain survivors' work ability at the long term.IMPLICATIONS FOR REHABILITATIONEven long after diagnosis and treatment, a sizeable number of breast cancer survivors report a change in employment status, such as job loss.(Occupational) health care professionals should be alert that barriers for returning to work and retaining work change over time.There is a lack of awareness and a shortage of interventions regarding work-related issues for breast cancer survivors at long-term follow-up.

Purpose: This study evaluated the effects of coping skills training (CST) on symptoms of depression and anxiety in cancer patients, and investigated moderators of the effects., Methods: Overall effects and intervention-related moderators were studied in meta-analyses of pooled aggregate data from 38 randomized controlled trials (RCTs). Patient-related moderators were examined using linear mixed-effect models with interaction tests on pooled individual patient data (n = 1953) from 15 of the RCTs., Results: CST had a statistically significant but small effect on depression (g = -0.31,95% confidence interval (CI) = -0.40;-0.22) and anxiety (g = -0.32,95%CI = -0.41;-0.24) symptoms. Effects on depression symptoms were significantly larger for interventions delivered face-to-face (p = .003), led by a psychologist (p = .02) and targeted to patients with psychological distress (p = .002). Significantly larger reductions in anxiety symptoms were found in younger patients (p interaction  < 0.025), with the largest reductions in patients <50 years (β = -0.31,95%CI = -0.44;-0.18) and no significant effects in patients ≥70 years. Effects of CST on depression (β = -0.16,95%CI = -0.25;-0.07) and anxiety (β = -0.24,95%CI = -0.33;-0.14) symptoms were significant in patients who received chemotherapy but not in patients who did not (p interaction  < 0.05)., Conclusions: CST significantly reduced symptoms of depression and anxiety in cancer patients, and particularly when delivered face-to-face, provided by a psychologist, targeted to patients with psychological distress, and given to patients who were younger and received chemotherapy., Competing Interests: Declaration of Competing Interest None declared., (Copyright © 2020 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

A comprehensive translational cancer research approach focused on personalized and precision medicine, and covering the entire cancer research-care-prevention continuum has the potential to achieve in 2030 a 10-year cancer-specific survival for 75% of patients diagnosed in European Union (EU) member states with a well-developed healthcare system. Concerted actions across this continuum that spans from basic and preclinical research through clinical and prevention research to outcomes research, along with the establishment of interconnected high-quality infrastructures for translational research, clinical and prevention trials and outcomes research, will ensure that science-driven and social innovations benefit patients and individuals at risk across the EU. European infrastructures involving comprehensive cancer centres (CCCs) and CCC-like entities will provide researchers with access to the required critical mass of patients, biological materials and technological resources and can bridge research with healthcare systems. Here, we prioritize research areas to ensure a balanced research portfolio and provide recommendations for achieving key targets. Meeting these targets will require harmonization of EU and national priorities and policies, improved research coordination at the national, regional and EU level and increasingly efficient and flexible funding mechanisms. Long-term support by the EU and commitment of Member States to specialized schemes are also needed for the establishment and sustainability of trans-border infrastructures and networks. In addition to effectively engaging policymakers, all relevant stakeholders within the entire continuum should consensually inform policy through evidence-based advice., (© 2020 The Authors. Published by FEBS Press and John Wiley & Sons Ltd.)

Background: In its 2006 report, From cancer patient to cancer survivor: lost in transition, the U.S. Institute of Medicine raised the need for a more coordinated and comprehensive care model for cancer survivors. Given the ever increasing number of cancer survivors, in general, and prostate cancer survivors, in particular, there is a need for a more sustainable model of follow-up care. Currently, patients who have completed primary treatment for localized prostate cancer are often included in a specialist-based follow-up care program. General practitioners already play a key role in providing continuous and comprehensive health care. Studies in breast and colorectal cancer suggest that general practitioners could also consider to provide survivorship care in prostate cancer. However, empirical data are needed to determine whether follow-up care of localized prostate cancer survivors by the general practitioner is a feasible alternative., Methods: This multicenter, randomized, non-inferiority study will compare specialist-based (usual care) versus general practitioner-based (intervention) follow-up care of prostate cancer survivors who have completed primary treatment (prostatectomy or radiotherapy) for localized prostate cancer. Patients are being recruited from hospitals in the Netherlands, and randomly (1:1) allocated to specialist-based (N = 195) or general practitioner-based (N = 195) follow-up care. This trial will evaluate the effectiveness of primary care-based follow-up, in comparison to usual care, in terms of adherence to the prostate cancer surveillance guideline for the timing and frequency of prostate-specific antigen assessments, the time from a biochemical recurrence to retreatment decision-making, the management of treatment-related side effects, health-related quality of life, prostate cancer-related anxiety, continuity of care, and cost-effectiveness. The outcome measures will be assessed at randomization (≤6 months after treatment), and 12, 18, and 24 months after treatment., Discussion: This multicenter, prospective, randomized study will provide empirical evidence regarding the (cost-) effectiveness of specialist-based follow-up care compared to general practitioner-based follow-up care for localized prostate cancer survivors., Trial Registration: Netherlands Trial Registry, Trial NL7068 (NTR7266). Prospectively registered on 11 June 2018.

Background: Different analytical methods may lead to different conclusions about the impact of treatment on health-related quality of life (HRQoL). This study aimed to examine 3 different methods to evaluate change in HRQoL and to study whether these methods result in different conclusions., Methods: HRQoL data from 15 randomized clinical trials were combined (CODAGLIO project). Change in HRQoL scores, measured with the European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Questionnaire Core 30 and BN20 questionnaires, was analyzed in 3 ways: (1) at the group level, comparing mean changes in scale/item scores between treatment arms, (2) at the patient level per scale/item, calculating the percentage of patients that deteriorated, improved, or remained stable per scale/item, and (3) at the individual patient level, combining all scales/items., Results: Baseline and first follow-up HRQoL data were available for 3727 patients. At the group scale/item level, only the item "hair loss" showed a significant and clinically relevant change (ie, ≥10 points) over time, whereas change scores on the other scales/items were statistically significant only (all P  < .001; range in change score, 0.1-6.2). Although a large proportion of patients had stable HRQoL over time (range, 27%-84%) on the patient level per scale/item, many patients deteriorated (range, 6%-43%) or improved (range, 8%-32%) on a specific scale/item. At the individual patient level, the majority of patients (86%) showed both deterioration and improvement, whereas only 1% remained stable on all scales., Conclusions: Different analytical methods of changes in HRQoL result in distinct conclusions of treatment effects, all of which may be relevant for informing clinical decision making., (© The Author(s) 2020. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the Society for Neuro-Oncology and the European Association of Neuro-Oncology.)

Objectives: Patient-reported outcome (PRO) measurements used in cancer research can assess a number of health domains. Our primary objective was to investigate which broad types of PRO domains (namely, functional health, symptoms, and global quality of life [QoL]) most frequently yielded significant differences between treatments in randomized controlled trials (RCTs)., Methods: A total of 229 RCTs published between January 2004 and February 2019, conducted on patients diagnosed with the most common solid malignancies and assessed using the European Organization for the Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) Quality of Life Questionnaire (QLQ)-C30, were considered. Studies were identified systematically using literature searches in key electronic databases. Unlike other PRO measurements typically used in RCTs, the scoring algorithm of the multidimensional EORTC QLQ-C30 allowed us to clearly distinguish the 3 broad types of PRO domains., Results: In total, 134 RCTs (58.5%) reported statistically significant differences between treatment arms for at least 1 of the QLQ-C30 domains. Most frequently, differences were reported for 2 or all 3 broad types of PRO domains (78 of 134 trials; 58.2%). In particular, 35 trials (26.1%) found significant differences for symptoms, functional health, and global QoL, 24 trials (17.9%) for symptoms and functional health, 11 trials (8.2%) for functional health and global QoL, and 8 trials (6.0%) for symptoms and global QoL. The likelihood of finding a statistically significant difference between treatment arms was not associated with key study characteristics, such as study design (ie, open-label vs blinded trials) and industry support., Conclusions: Our findings emphasize the importance of a multidimensional PRO assessment to most comprehensively capture the overall burden of therapy from the patients' standpoint., (Copyright © 2020 ISPOR–The Professional Society for Health Economics and Outcomes Research. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: The European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) Quality of Life Group (QLG) has developed computerised adaptive tests (CATs) for the 14 functional and symptom domains of the EORTC QLQ-C30 quality of life questionnaire. This is expected to optimise measurement precision, relevance to patients and flexibility. Here, we present the first international validation of the EORTC CAT Core., Methods: A heterogeneous sample of 699 cancer patients scheduled for chemotherapy and/or radiotherapy was recruited across seven European countries. The EORTC CAT Core and all QLQ-C30 items were administered to participants before and after initiating treatment. Correlations between CAT and QLQ-C30 scores and floor/ceiling effects were calculated. Using several grouping variables, relative validity (cross-sectional known groups difference), responsiveness (changes over time) and relative sample size requirements of the CAT compared to the QLQ-C30 were estimated., Results: Correlations of the CAT and QLQ-C30 ranged from 0.81 to 0.93 across domains. The mean relative reduction in floor and ceiling effects using the CAT was 42% (range 3-99%). Analyses of known groups validity and responsiveness indicated that, across domains, mean sample size requirements for the CAT were 72% and 70%, respectively, of those using the QLQ-C30., Conclusions: The EORTC CAT Core measures the same domains as the QLQ-C30 with reduced floor/ceiling effects. The CAT generally facilitated the use of smaller samples (about 30% smaller on average) without loss of power compared to the QLQ-C30. Based on this study, the EORTC QLG will release the EORTC CAT Core for general use.

Purpose: In this study, we investigated factors associated with program adherence and patient satisfaction with a home-based physical activity program (Onco-Move, N = 77) and a supervised exercise program with a home-based component (OnTrack, N = 76)., Methods: We assessed adherence via self-report (home-based program) and attendance records (supervised program). We used logistic regression analysis to identify sociodemographic, clinical and behavioural variables associated with program adherence. Patient satisfaction was assessed with self-report and is reported descriptively., Results: Fifty-one percent of Onco-Move and 62% of OnTrack participants were adherent to the home-based program, while 59% of OnTrack participants were adherent to the supervised sessions. Higher baseline physical fitness was associated with higher adherence to home-based components. Higher disease stage and having a partner were associated with adherence to OnTrack supervised sessions. Overall satisfaction with the exercise programs was high, but ratings of coaching provided by professionals for the home-based components were low. Patients offered suggestions for improving delivery of the programs., Conclusions: These findings point to factors relevant to program adherence and suggest ways in which such programs can be improved. Providing additional time and training for health care professionals could improve the quality and hopefully the effectiveness of the interventions. The use of online diaries and smartphone apps may provide additional encouragement to participants. Finally, allowing greater flexibility in the planning and availability of supervised exercise training in order to accommodate the variability in cancer treatment schedules and the (acute) side effects of the treatments could also enhance program adherence., Trial Registration: Netherlands Trial Register, NTR2159. http://www.trialregister.nl/trialreg/admin/rctview.asp?TC=2159.

Background: Health-related quality of life (HRQoL) has been shown to be a prognostic factor for cancer survival in randomized clinical trials and observational "real-world" cohort studies; however, it remains unclear which HRQoL domains are the best prognosticators. The primary aims of this population-based, observational study were to (a) investigate the association between the novel European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Questionnaire-Core30 (QLQ-C30) summary score and all-cause mortality, adjusting for the more traditional sociodemographic and clinical prognostic factors; and (b) compare the prognostic value of the QLQ-C30 summary score with the global quality of life (QoL) and physical functioning scales of the QLQ-C30., Materials and Methods: Between 2008 and 2015, patients with cancer (12 tumor types) were invited to participate in PROFILES disease-specific registry studies (response rate, 69%). In this secondary analysis of 6,895 patients, multivariate Cox proportional hazard regression models were used to investigate the association between the QLQ-C30 scores and all-cause mortality., Results: In the overall Cox regression model including sociodemographic and clinical variables, the QLQ-C30 summary score was associated significantly with all-cause mortality (hazard ratio [HR], 0.77; 99% confidence interval [CI], 0.71-0.82). In stratified analyses, significant associations between the summary score and all-cause mortality were observed for colon, rectal, and prostate cancer, non-Hodgkin lymphoma, chronic lymphocytic leukemia, and multiple myeloma. The QLQ-C30 summary score had a stronger association with all-cause mortality than the global QoL scale (HR, 0.82; 99% CI, 0.77-0.86) or the physical functioning scale (HR, 0.81; 95% CI, 0.77-0.85)., Conclusion: In a real-world setting, the QLQ-C30 summary score has a strong prognostic value for overall survival for a number of populations of patients with cancer above and beyond that provided by clinical and sociodemographic variables. The QLQ-C30 summary score appears to have more prognostic value than the global QoL, physical functioning, or any other scale within the QLQ-C30., Implications for Practice: The finding that health-related quality of life provides distinct prognostic information beyond known sociodemographic and clinical measures, not only around cancer diagnosis (baseline) but also at follow-up, has implications for clinical practice. Implementation of cancer survivorship monitoring systems for ongoing surveillance may improve post-treatment rehabilitation that leads to better outcomes., (© 2019 The Authors. The Oncologist published by Wiley Periodicals, Inc. on behalf of AlphaMed Press.)

Objective: Seventy percent of patients with colorectal cancer (CRC) are aged 65 years or older. Netherlands Comprehensive Cancer Organization (n.d.) [1] Surgery is an important treatment modality, depending on cancer stage and the resectability of the tumor. Frail older patients are at an increased risk for complications and reduced self-care capacity after surgery. Increasing physical fitness preoperatively (prehabilitation) might improve treatment outcomes, but challenges remain with regard to uptake, attrition, and non-compliance. The objectives of this study were to investigate the barriers, facilitators, and preferences for preoperative exercise programs in older patients scheduled for CRC surgery., Methods: This was a qualitative study, using in-depth interviews of fifteen patients aged 65 years and older and surgically treated for CRC, thirteen informal care givers (ICs) and nine health care providers (HCPs) with experience in prehabilitation. Data analysis was done through thematic coding analysis., Results: Limited time, not receiving or misunderstanding information, physical ailments, and emotional impact of the diagnosis are barriers to preoperative exercise. Not having physical complaints (Patients, ICs, HCPs), understandable information provided by a physician (Patients, ICs), and low cost programs (ICs, HCPs) facilitate exercise. Exercise should not be too intensive (Patients, ICs) and should be adjusted to personal preferences and be provided close to home (Patients, ICs, HCPs)., Conclusions: To engage frail older adults with CRC in preoperative exercise programs information on exercise should improve. Exercise programs should be easily accessible and take personal preferences, needs and abilities into account., (Copyright © 2019 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Background: The survival rates for patients with advanced cancer have increased over time. Many patients experience symptoms and functional limitations that impair activities of daily living and limit quality of life. A number of these health problems are amenable to physical therapist treatment. However, physical therapists caring for patients with advanced cancer require special training and skills., Objective: The study aimed to assess the educational needs and clinical uncertainties of Dutch physical therapists in relation to treatment of patients with advanced cancer., Design: This was a mixed methods study., Methods: A survey and 2 focus groups were conducted among physical therapists working in primary care who had previously received at least basic oncology training., Results: A total of 162 physical therapists completed the survey. The most frequently reported educational needs were related to effective interprofessional collaboration (61.7%), knowledge of medical treatment (49.4%), and current evidence on physical therapist interventions in this population (49.4%). In the focus groups, physical therapists (n = 17) voiced uncertainties about treating patients with bone metastases, setting realistic goals, when and how to end a treatment episode, interprofessional collaboration, finding and using evidence, and using clinimetrics., Conclusion: These results support the need for specific education programs for physical therapists working with advanced cancer patients to increase the availability of high-quality oncology rehabilitation for this population., (© 2020 American Physical Therapy Association.)

Objective: Unmet health care needs require additional care resources to achieve optimal patient well-being. In this nationwide study we examined associations between a number of risk factors and unmet needs after treatment among women with breast cancer, while taking into account their health care practices. We expected that more care use would be associated with lower levels of unmet needs., Methods: A multicenter, prospective, observational design was employed. Women with primary breast cancer completed questionnaires 6 and 15 months post-diagnosis. Medical data were retrieved from medical records. Direct and indirect associations between sociodemographic and clinical risk factors, distress, care use, and unmet needs were investigated with structural equation modeling., Results: Seven hundred forty-six participants completed both questionnaires (response rate 73.7%). The care services received were not negatively associated with the reported levels of unmet needs after treatment. Comorbidity was associated with higher physical and daily living needs. Higher age was associated with higher health system-related and informational needs. Having had chemotherapy and a mastectomy were associated with higher sexuality needs and breast cancer-specific issues, respectively. A higher level of distress was associated with higher levels of unmet need in all domains., Conclusions: Clinicians may use these results to timely identify which women are at risk of developing specific unmet needs after treatment. Evidence-based, cost-effective (online) interventions that target distress, the most influential risk factor, should be further implemented and disseminated among patients and clinicians., (© 2019 The Authors. Psycho-Oncology published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.)

Purpose: To ensure that observed differences in the scores of the European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Questionnaire Core 30 (EORTC QLQ-C30) reflect actual differences in health-related quality of life (HRQoL) rather than measurement bias, measurement invariance needs to be established. We investigated the assumption of measurement invariance of the EORTC QLQ-C30 in patients with hematological malignancies across age, sex, comorbidity, disease type, and time., Methods: We used a large database of patients with hematological malignancies, which included HRQoL data collected with the EORTC QLQ-C30. We used the structural equation modeling approach to test for measurement (metric and scalar) invariance across groups (age, sex, comorbidity, disease) and time (baseline, 1 month and 2 month follow-up). Longitudinal invariance was examined in a subgroup of patients diagnosed with myelodysplastic syndromes., Results: Confirmatory factor analyses demonstrated full measurement invariance for age and comorbidity and over time, while support for partial scalar invariance was obtained for sex and disease. Violations of invariance for sex were observed for items of the physical functioning scale and the emotional functioning scale, while for disease type, violations of invariance were observed for items of the physical functioning scale, emotional functioning scale, and the cognitive functioning scale., Conclusions: Our findings support measurement invariance of the EORTC QLQ-C30 in a large sample of patients with hematological malignancies. The results showed that the number of non-invariant items was negligible, suggesting that this questionnaire is a valid and robust measurement tool in patients with hematological malignancies, also for comparisons across groups and time.