4.5 Article

Reduced quality of life of patients with hepatocellular carcinoma

Journal

DIGESTIVE AND LIVER DISEASE
Volume 35, Issue 1, Pages 46-54

Publisher

PACINI EDITORE
DOI: 10.1016/S1590-8658(02)00011-7

Keywords

cirrhosis; hepatocellular carcinoma; quality of life

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Background. it has been shown that health-related quality of life is reduced in patients with cirrhosis and with chronic hepatitis in relation to antiviral therapy. No data are available on patients with hepatocellular carcinoma. Aim. To assess health-related quality of life in cirrhotic patients with hepatocellular carcinoma. Patients and methods. Health-related quality of life was assessed in 101 hepatocellular carcinoma patients by means of Short Form-36 and Nottingham Health Profile questionnaires. Final scores of domains for individual patients were compared to age-adjusted normative Italian values, using Z-score and with values obtained in 202 matched patients with cirrhosis, without hepatocellular carcinoma. Results. All Short Form-36 domains and 4 out of 6 Nottingham Health Profile domains were altered. When hepatocellular carcinoma patients were compared with matched cirrhotics, differences were present for Bodily Pain, Role Limitation-Physical, and the Physical Component Summary of Short Form-36, as well as Pain of Nottingham Health Profile. Perceived health status had changed significantly in the year prior to assessment. Health-related quality of life was not primarily related to tumour mass or hepatocellular failure, whereas sleep disorders were selected by logistic regression as strongly associated with poor health-related quality of life. Conclusions. The present data stress the relevance of pain in poor perceived health status of hepatocellular carcinoma patients, and the importance of minor symptoms, such as sleep disorders. (C) 2002 Editrice Gastroenerologica Italiana S.r.l. Published by Elsevier Science Ireland Ltd. All rights reserved.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.5
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available