Prognostic value of performance status assessed by patients themselves, nurses and oncologists in advanced non-small cell lung cancer

Abstract

Accuracy in the assessment of performance status by oncologists has not been well evaluated. We investigated possible discrepancies in the assessment of performance status among patients, nurses, and oncologists, and evaluated the prognostic importance of each assessment. Two hundred and six inpatients with inoperable, advanced non-small cell lung cancer were investigated prospectively. Weighted Kappa statistics for inter-observer agreement were 0.53 between oncologists and patients and 0.63 between oncologists and nurses. There was a significant difference among the assessments by the three groups (P < 0.001). Oncologists gave the healthiest performance status assessment, nurses an intermediate assessment, and patients the poorest. When included separately in the Cox model, the assessment by each group was significantly correlated with survival. However, the assessment by the patients themselves failed to distinguish survival of patients with performance status 1 and 2. Among the three models including patient-, nurse-, and oncologist-assessed PS, that including oncologist-assessed PS best fitted to the observed survival data. These results showed that the assessment by the patients themselves is different from those by the nurses and the oncologists and provided additional support for the use of the assessment by oncologists in clinical oncology.

References 26

1. 1.

   Aisner J., Cirrincione C., Perloff M., Perry M., Budman D., Abrams J., Panasci L., Muss H., Citron M., Holland J. Combination chemotherapy for metastatic or recurrent carcinoma of the breast--a randomized phase III trial comparing CAF versus VATH versus VATH alternating with CMFVP: Cancer and Leukemia Group B Study 8281. J Clin Oncol. 1995;13(6):1443-1452.

   Not in our library10.1200/jco.1995.13.6.1443

2. 2.

   Bonomi P., Gale M., Rowland K., Taylor S. G., Purl S., Reddy S., Lee M. S., Phillips A., Kittle C. F., Warren W. Pre-treatment prognostic factors in stage III non-small cell lung cancer patients receiving combined modality treatment. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 1991;20(2):247-252.

   Not in our library10.1016/0360-3016(91)90099-p

3. 3.

   Brazier J. E., Harper R., Jones N. M., O'Cathain A., Thomas K. J., Usherwood T., Westlake L. Validating the SF-36 health survey questionnaire: new outcome measure for primary care. BMJ. 1992;305(6846):160-164.

   Not in our library10.1136/bmj.305.6846.160

4. 4.

   Coates A., Gebski V., Signorini D., Murray P., McNeil D., Byrne M., Forbes J. F. Prognostic value of quality-of-life scores during chemotherapy for advanced breast cancer. Australian New Zealand Breast Cancer Trials Group. J Clin Oncol. 1992;10(12):1833-1838.

   Not in our library10.1200/jco.1992.10.12.1833

5. 5.

   Conill C., Verger E., Salamero M. Performance status assessment in cancer patients. Cancer. 1990;65(8):1864-1866.

   Not in our library10.1002/1097-0142(19900415)65:8<1864::aid-cncr2820650832>3.0.co;2-u

6. 6.

   Hjermstad M. J., Fayers P. M., Bjordal K., Kaasa S. Health-related quality of life in the general Norwegian population assessed by the European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer Core Quality-of-Life Questionnaire: the QLQ=C30 (+ 3). J Clin Oncol. 1998;16(3):1188-1196.

   Not in our library10.1200/jco.1998.16.3.1188

7. 7.

   Hutchinson T. A., Boyd N. F., Feinstein A. R., Gonda A., Hollomby D., Rowat B. Scientific problems in clinical scales, as demonstrated in the Karnofsky index of performance status. J Chronic Dis. 1979;32(9-10):661-666.

   Not in our library10.1016/0021-9681(79)90096-1

8. 8.

   Ihde D. C. Chemotherapy of lung cancer. N Engl J Med. 1992;327(20):1434-1441.

   Not in our library10.1056/nejm199211123272006

9. 9.

   Jenkinson C., Coulter A., Wright L. Short form 36 (SF36) health survey questionnaire: normative data for adults of working age. BMJ. 1993;306(6890):1437-1440.

   Not in our library10.1136/bmj.306.6890.1437

10. 10.

    Loprinzi C. L., Laurie J. A., Wieand H. S., Krook J. E., Novotny P. J., Kugler J. W., Bartel J., Law M., Bateman M., Klatt N. E. Prospective evaluation of prognostic variables from patient-completed questionnaires. North Central Cancer Treatment Group. J Clin Oncol. 1994;12(3):601-607.

    Not in our library10.1200/jco.1994.12.3.601

11. 11.

    Lund B., Williamson P., van Houwelingen H. C., Neijt J. P. Comparison of the predictive power of different prognostic indices for overall survival in patients with advanced ovarian carcinoma. Cancer Res. 1990;50(15):4626-4629.

    Not in our library

12. 12.

    Mountain C. F. Revisions in the International System for Staging Lung Cancer. Chest. 1997;111(6):1710-1717.

    Not in our library10.1378/chest.111.6.1710

13. 13.

    Oken M. M., Creech R. H., Tormey D. C., Horton J., Davis T. E., McFadden E. T., Carbone P. P. Toxicity and response criteria of the Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group. Am J Clin Oncol. 1982;5(6):649-655.

    Not in our library

14. 14.

    Osborne M. L., Vollmer W. M., Linton K. L., Buist A. S. Characteristics of patients with asthma within a large HMO: a comparison by age and gender. Am J Respir Crit Care Med. 1998;157(1):123-128.

    Not in our library10.1164/ajrccm.157.1.9612063

15. 15.

    Osoba D. Lessons learned from measuring health-related quality of life in oncology. J Clin Oncol. 1994;12(3):608-616.

    Not in our library10.1200/jco.1994.12.3.608

16. 16.

    Osterlind K., Andersen P. K. Prognostic factors in small cell lung cancer: multivariate model based on 778 patients treated with chemotherapy with or without irradiation. Cancer Res. 1986;46(8):4189-4194.

    Not in our library

17. 17.

    Paesmans M., Sculier J. P., Libert P., Bureau G., Dabouis G., Thiriaux J., Michel J., Van Cutsem O., Sergysels R., Mommen P. Prognostic factors for survival in advanced non-small-cell lung cancer: univariate and multivariate analyses including recursive partitioning and amalgamation algorithms in 1,052 patients. The European Lung Cancer Working Party. J Clin Oncol. 1995;13(5):1221-1230.

    Not in our library10.1200/jco.1995.13.5.1221

18. 18.

    Presant C. A. Quality of life in cancer patients. Who measures what? Am J Clin Oncol. 1984;7(5):571-573.

    Not in our library10.1097/00000421-198410000-00036

19. 19.

    Roila F., Lupattelli M., Sassi M., Basurto C., Bracarda S., Picciafuoco M., Boschetti E., Milella G., Ballatori E., Tonato M. Intra and interobserver variability in cancer patients' performance status assessed according to Karnofsky and ECOG scales. Ann Oncol. 1991;2(6):437-439.

    Not in our library10.1093/oxfordjournals.annonc.a057981

20. 20.

    Ruckdeschel J. C., Finkelstein D. M., Ettinger D. S., Creech R. H., Mason B. A., Joss R. A., Vogl S. A randomized trial of the four most active regimens for metastatic non-small-cell lung cancer. J Clin Oncol. 1986;4(1):14-22.

    Not in our library10.1200/jco.1986.4.1.14

21. 21.

    Schag C. C., Heinrich R. L., Ganz P. A. Karnofsky performance status revisited: reliability, validity, and guidelines. J Clin Oncol. 1984;2(3):187-193.

    Not in our library10.1200/jco.1984.2.3.187

22. 22.
    Who should measure quality of life, the doctor or the patient? · 1988

    No notice
23. 23.
    Evaluating the quality of life of cancer patients: assessments by patients, significant others, physicians and nurses · 1999

    No notice
24. 24.
    Performance status assessment in cancer patients. An inter-observer variability study · 1993

    No notice
25. 25.

    Taylor A. E., Olver I. N., Sivanthan T., Chi M., Purnell C. Observer error in grading performance status in cancer patients. Support Care Cancer. 1999;7(5):332-335.

    Not in our library10.1007/s005200050271

26. 26.

    Yates J. W., Chalmer B., McKegney F. P. Evaluation of patients with advanced cancer using the Karnofsky performance status. Cancer. 1980;45(8):2220-2224.

    Not in our library10.1002/1097-0142(19800415)45:8<2220::aid-cncr2820450835>3.0.co;2-q

Cited by papers we hold 6

• Moving beyond Karnofsky and ECOG Performance Status Assessments with New Technologies · 2016
  No notice
• Evaluation of an inflammation-based prognostic score in patients with inoperable gastro-oesophageal cancer · 2006
  No notice
• Evaluation of an inflammation-based prognostic score (GPS) in patients with metastatic breast cancer · 2006
  No notice
• Comparison of an inflammation-based prognostic score (GPS) with performance status (ECOG) in patients receiving platinum-based chemotherapy for inoperable non-small-cell lung cancer · 2004
  No notice
• Performance status score: do patients and their oncologists agree? · 2003
  No notice
• Evaluation of cumulative prognostic scores based on the systemic inflammatory response in patients with inoperable non-small-cell lung cancer · 2003
  No notice

Reads

A person counts once a day per paper. We keep no cookie and no address: a reader is a hash that changes every day. Any month under five reads shows no number.