4.7 Article

Self-reported health-related quality of life is an independent predictor of chemotherapy treatment benefit and toxicity in women with advanced breast cancer

期刊

BRITISH JOURNAL OF CANCER
卷 102, 期 9, 页码 1341-1347

出版社

NATURE PUBLISHING GROUP
DOI: 10.1038/sj.bjc.6605649

关键词

quality of life; advanced breast cancer; treatment benefits; treatment toxicity

类别

向作者/读者索取更多资源

BACKGROUND: Baseline health-related quality of life (QL) is associated with survival in advanced breast cancer. We sought to identify patients who were less likely to respond to chemotherapy and at greater risk of toxicity on the basis of their QL. METHODS: We used data from three advanced breast cancer trials in which patients (n = 378) were treated with cyclophosphamide, methotrexate and 5-fluouracil. Patients self-rated their QL using LASA scales for physical well-being (PWB), mood, pain, nausea/vomiting, appetite and overall QL. Multivariable regression models were constructed to compare overall survival (OS), objective tumour response (OTR), adverse events (AEs) and weight loss according to grouped QL scores. RESULTS: Physical well-being, mood, appetite and overall QL were significant univariable predictors of OS. Physical well-being and appetite remained significant after adjustment for baseline biomedical factors. Poor PWB was associated with lower OTR (odds ratio (OR) = 0.21, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.09-0.51), higher risk of non-haematological AEs (OR = 3.26, 95% CI 1.49-7.15) and greater risk of weight loss (OR 2.37, 95% CI 1.12-5.01) compared with good PWB. CONCLUSIONS: In women with advanced breast cancer, PWB and appetite are predictors of chemotherapy response and toxicity as well as survival. Quality of life should be a routine clinical assessment to guide patient selection for chemotherapy and for stratification of patients in clinical trials. British Journal of Cancer (2010) 102, 1341-1347. doi:10.1038/sj.bjc.6605649 www.bjcancer.com Published online 13 April 2010 (C) 2010 Cancer Research UK

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

4.7
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