4.6 Article

Redefining chemotherapy-induced peripheral neuropathy through symptom cluster analysis and patient-reported outcome data over time

期刊

BMC CANCER
卷 19, 期 1, 页码 -

出版社

BMC
DOI: 10.1186/s12885-019-6352-3

关键词

Cancer; Chemotherapy-induced peripheral neuropathy; Patient-reported outcome; Symptom clusters

类别

资金

  1. Departmental General Research Funding of School of Nursing in the Hong Kong Polytechnic University
  2. NCIS Seed Funding Grant, National Medical Research Council (Singapore)

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Background Chemotherapy-induced peripheral neuropathy (CIPN) is common among cancer patients treated with neurotoxic chemotherapy agents. Better knowledge on symptom clusters of CIPN may help improve symptom management in clinical practice. This study aimed to identify symptom clusters of CIPN and to map their trajectories before initiation of chemotherapy to 12-month follow-up. Methods A secondary analysis of a longitudinal dataset was conducted using principal component approach. The European Organization for the Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Questionnaires Core 30 and CIPN 20 were used to measure symptom clusters of CIPN in patients with mixed cancer diagnosis across 10 time points over 12 months. Results Sample size in each assessment point ranged from 118 to 343 participants. Four CIPN symptom clusters were identified, including a clear sensory neuropathy symptom cluster, a mixed motor-sensory neuropathy symptom cluster, a mixed sensorimotor neuropathy symptom cluster, and a less clear autonomic neuropathy symptom cluster. The core symptoms in each symptom cluster were mostly stable while the secondary symptoms changed over time. Conclusions The analysis suggests that CIPN is predominantly a sensory neuropathy with no evidence of a pure motor dysfunction but with mixed motor-related and autonomic changes accompanying sensory dysfunctions over time. Future symptom management strategies can be designed based on the morphology of CIPN.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据