Quality of patient-reported outcome reporting in randomised controlled trials of haematological malignancies according to international quality standards: a systematic review

被引:0
|
作者
Chakraborty, Rajshekhar [1 ]
Cannella, Laura [2 ]
Cottone, Francesco [2 ]
Efficace, Fabio [2 ]
机构
[1] Cleveland Clin, Taussig Canc Ctr, Cleveland, OH 44106 USA
[2] Italian Grp Adult Hematol Dis, Data Ctr & Hlth Outcomes Res Unit, I-00161 Rome, Italy
来源
LANCET HAEMATOLOGY | 2020年 / 7卷 / 12期
关键词
STEM-CELL TRANSPLANTATION; RISK MYELODYSPLASTIC SYNDROMES; ACUTE PROMYELOCYTIC LEUKEMIA; LOW-DOSE DEXAMETHASONE; NON-HODGKIN-LYMPHOMA; DIAGNOSED MULTIPLE-MYELOMA; METASTATIC BREAST-CANCER; PLACEBO-CONTROLLED TRIAL; PRIMARY CNS LYMPHOMA; OF-LIFE DATA;
D O I
暂无
中图分类号
R5 [内科学];
学科分类号
1002 ; 100201 ;
摘要
Patient-reported outcome (PRO) endpoints are increasingly considered for inclusion in randomised controlled trials (RCTs) involving patients with haematological malignancies. The aim of our systematic review was to investigate the quality of PRO reporting across these RCTs. We searched Ovid MEDLINE, Embase, the Cochrane Library, and PubMed for English language articles published between Jan 1, 2014, and Jan 31, 2019. Eligible articles were RCTs of cancer-directed therapy in adult patients with haematological malignancies that reported on PRO measures in the primary publication or in a subsequent publication, with a comparison of PROs among treatment groups. A total of 3678 records were assessed, and 71 RCTs, enrolling 24 701 patients, were included in our systematic review. Most RCTs (n=65 [92%]) had PRO measures as a secondary or exploratory endpoint. A PRO hypothesis and relevant PRO domains were specified in 36 (51%) RCTs. Statistical approaches for dealing with missing data were documented in 26 (37%) RCTs. Quality of PRO reporting was higher in RCTs citing the Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials Statement-PRO extension (CONSORT-PRO) than in those not citing this checklist, as evidenced by the International Society for Quality of Life Research score (median score in studies citing the CONSORT-PRO extension [n=4] was 89 [IQR 75-94] vs 61 [44-78] in those not citing this extension). Independent factors significantly associated with higher reporting included having PROs as a primary endpoint (p=0.008) and the presence of a subsequent publication on PROs (p<0.0001). International guidelines for designing, reporting, and analysing PRO data are now available to further improve overall study quality. Our findings can help investigators to focus on key aspects most in need of attention when reporting PROs in future trials of haematological malignancies.
引用
收藏
页码:892 / 901
页数:10
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [21] Quality of reporting inflammatory bowel disease randomised controlled trials: a systematic review
    Gordon, Morris
    Khudr, Jamal
    Sinopoulou, Vassiliki
    Lakunina, Svetlana
    Rane, Aditi
    Akobeng, Anthony
    BMJ OPEN GASTROENTEROLOGY, 2024, 11 (01):
  • [22] A systematic review of outcome reporting in achalasia randomised controlled trials
    Gray, R. T.
    Kennedy, R.
    Kennedy, J. A.
    BRITISH JOURNAL OF SURGERY, 2016, 103 : 119 - 119
  • [23] Patient-reported outcomes in bariatric surgery: a systematic review of standards of reporting
    Coulman, K. D.
    Abdelrahman, T.
    Owen-Smith, A.
    Andrews, R. C.
    Welbourn, R.
    Blazeby, J. M.
    OBESITY REVIEWS, 2013, 14 (09) : 707 - 720
  • [24] Do randomised controlled trials relevant to pharmacy meet best practice standards for quality conduct and reporting? A systematic review
    Ritchie, Alison
    Seubert, Liza
    Clifford, Rhonda
    Perry, Danae
    Bond, Christine
    INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF PHARMACY PRACTICE, 2020, 28 (03) : 220 - 232
  • [25] Patient-reported outcomes in head and neck and thyroid cancer randomised controlled trials: A systematic review of completeness of reporting and impact on interpretation
    Mercieca-Bebber, Rebecca L.
    Perreca, Alessandro
    King, Madeleine
    Macann, Andrew
    Whale, Katie
    Soldati, Salvatore
    Jacobs, Marc
    Efficace, Fabio
    EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF CANCER, 2016, 56 : 144 - 161
  • [26] Assessing the quality of patient-reported outcome measurements for gynecological cancers: a systematic review
    Moss, Charlotte L.
    Guerrero-Urbano, Teresa
    White, Ingrid
    Taylor, Benjamin
    Kristeleit, Rebecca
    Montes, Ana
    Fox, Louis
    Beyer, Katharina
    Sztankay, Monika
    Ratti, Maria M.
    Sisca, Elena S.
    Derevianko, Alexandra
    MacLennan, Steven
    Wood, Nicholas
    Wintner, Lisa M.
    Van Hemelrijck, Mieke
    FUTURE ONCOLOGY, 2022, 19 (09) : 663 - 678
  • [27] Reporting quality of surgical randomised controlled trials in head and neck cancer: a systematic review
    Netanya Aarabi Canagarajah
    George James Porter
    Kurchi Mitra
    Timothy Shun Man Chu
    European Archives of Oto-Rhino-Laryngology, 2021, 278 : 4125 - 4133
  • [28] The reporting quality of parallel randomised controlled trials in ophthalmic surgery in 2011: a systematic review
    A C Yao
    A Khajuria
    C F Camm
    E Edison
    R Agha
    Eye, 2014, 28 : 1341 - 1349
  • [29] Comparing the reporting and conduct quality of exercise and pharmacological randomised controlled trials: a systematic review
    Adams, Scott C.
    McMillan, Julia
    Salline, Kirsten
    Lavery, Jessica
    Moskowitz, Chaya S.
    Matsoukas, Konstantina
    Chen, Maggie M. Z.
    Santa Mina, Daniel
    Scott, Jessica M.
    Jones, Lee W.
    BMJ OPEN, 2021, 11 (08):
  • [30] Reporting quality of surgical randomised controlled trials in head and neck cancer: a systematic review
    Canagarajah, Netanya Aarabi
    Porter, George James
    Mitra, Kurchi
    Chu, Timothy Shun Man
    EUROPEAN ARCHIVES OF OTO-RHINO-LARYNGOLOGY, 2021, 278 (11) : 4125 - 4133