The impact of symptom interference using the MD Anderson Symptom Inventory-Brain Tumor Module (MDASI-BT) on prediction of recurrence in primary brain tumor patients

Cancer

Volumn 117, Issue 14, 2011, Pages 3222-3228

  Armstrong, Terri S ^a,b,c   Vera Bolanos, Elizabeth ^b   Gning, Ibrahima ^b   Acquaye, Alvina ^b   Gilbert, Mark R ^b   Cleeland, Charles ^b   Mendoza, Tito ^b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF TEXAS HEALTH SCIENCE CENTER AT HOUSTON   (United States)

^b UNIVERSITY OF TEXAS MD ANDERSON CANCER CENTER   (United States)

^c UNIVERSITY OF TEXAS   (United States)

Author keywords

brain tumor; symptoms; tumor progression

Indexed keywords

ADULT; AGE DISTRIBUTION; AGED; ARTICLE; BRAIN BIOPSY; BRAIN TUMOR; CANCER GRADING; CANCER GROWTH; CANCER PATIENT; CANCER RECURRENCE; CLINICAL ASSESSMENT TOOL; CONTROLLED STUDY; DISEASE SEVERITY; ETHNICITY; FEMALE; GLIOBLASTOMA; HUMAN; HUMAN TISSUE; KARNOFSKY PERFORMANCE STATUS; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; MALE; MD ANDERSON SYMPTOM INVENTORY BRAIN TUMOR MODULE; PREDICTION; PRIMARY TUMOR; PRIORITY JOURNAL; PROGNOSIS; SCORING SYSTEM; SEX DIFFERENCE; SYMPTOMATOLOGY;

ACTIVITIES OF DAILY LIVING; ADOLESCENT; ADULT; AGED; AGED, 80 AND OVER; BRAIN NEOPLASMS; DISEASE PROGRESSION; FEMALE; GLIOBLASTOMA; HEALTH STATUS INDICATORS; HUMANS; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; PROGNOSIS; RECURRENCE;

EID: 79959946996     PISSN: 0008543X     EISSN: 10970142     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1002/cncr.25892     Document Type: Article

References (23)

1. Louis DN, Ohgaki H, Wiestler OD, et al. The 2007 WHO classification of tumours of the central nervous system. Acta Neuropathol. 2007; 114: 97-109. (Pubitemid 47103521)
2. Wu W, Lamborn KR, Buckner JC, et al. Joint NCCTG and NABTC prognostic factors analysis for high-grade recurrent glioma. Neuro Oncol. 2010; 12: 164-172.
3. Lote K, Egeland T, Hager B, et al. Survival, prognostic factors, and therapeutic efficacy in low-grade glioma: a retrospective study in 379 patients. J Clin Oncol. 1997; 15: 3129-3140. (Pubitemid 27377505)
4. Stupp R, Janzer RC, Hegi ME, Villemure JG, Mirimanoff RO., Prognostic factors for low-grade gliomas. Semin Oncol. 2003; 30 (suppl 19): 23-28. (Pubitemid 38199160)
5. Wen PY, Macdonald DR, Reardon DA, et al. Updated response assessment criteria for high-grade gliomas: response assessment in neuro-oncology working group. J Clin Oncol. 2010; 28: 1963-1972.
6. Brandes AA, Tosoni A, Franceschi E, et al. Recurrence pattern after temozolomide concomitant with and adjuvant to radiotherapy in newly diagnosed patients with glioblastoma: correlation with MGMT promoter methylation status. J Clin Oncol. 2009; 27: 1275-1279.
7. Brandsma D, van den Bent MJ., Pseudoprogression and pseudoresponse in the treatment of gliomas. Curr Opin Neurol. 2009; 22: 633-638.
8. Jain R, Scarpace LM, Ellika S, et al. Imaging response criteria for recurrent gliomas treated with bevacizumab: role of diffusion weighted imaging as an imaging biomarker. J Neurooncol. 2010; 96: 423-431.
9. Quinten C, Coens C, Mauer M, et al. Baseline quality of life as a prognostic indicator of survival: a meta-analysis of individual patient data from EORTC clinical trials. Lancet Oncol. 2009; 10: 865-871.
10. Armstrong TS, Cohen MZ, Eriksen LR, Hickey JV., Symptom clusters in oncology patients and implications for symptom research in people with primary brain tumors. J Nurs Scholarship. 2004; 36: 197-206. (Pubitemid 41725172)
11. Meyers CA, Hess KR, Yung WK, Levin VA., Cognitive function as a predictor of survival in patients with recurrent malignant glioma. J Clin Oncol. 2000; 18: 646-650. (Pubitemid 30078546)
12. Wang XS, Shi Q, Lu C, et al. Prognostic value of symptom burden for overall survival in patients receiving chemotherapy for advanced nonsmall cell lung cancer. Cancer. 2010; 116: 137-145.
13. Park HC, Janjan NA, Mendoza TR, et al. Temporal patterns of fatigue predict pathologic response in patients treated with preoperative chemoradiation therapy for rectal cancer. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2009; 75: 775-781.
14. Armstrong TS, Mendoza T, Gning I, et al. Validation of the M.D. Anderson Symptom Inventory Brain Tumor Module (MDASI-BT). J Neurooncol. 2006; 80 (1): 27-35. (Pubitemid 44473259)
15. Serlin RC, Mendoza TR, Nakamura Y, Edwards KR, Cleeland CS., When is cancer pain mild, moderate or severe? Grading pain severity by its interference with function. Pain. 1995; 61: 277-284.
16. Mendoza TR, Wang XS, Cleeland CS, et al. The rapid assessment of fatigue severity in cancer patients: use of the Brief Fatigue Inventory. Cancer. 1999; 85: 1186-1196. (Pubitemid 29115600)
17. Cleeland CS, Nakamura Y, Mendoza TR, Edwards KR, Douglas J, Serlin RC., Dimensions of the impact of cancer pain in a four country sample: new information from multidimensional scaling. Pain. 1996; 67: 267-273. (Pubitemid 26375342)
18. Mauer ME, Taphoorn MJ, Bottomley A, et al. Prognostic value of health-related quality-of-life data in predicting survival in patients with anaplastic oligodendrogliomas, from a phase III EORTC brain cancer group study. J Clin Oncol. 2007; 25: 5731-5737.
19. Mauer M, Stupp R, Taphoorn MJ, et al. The prognostic value of health-related quality-of-life data in predicting survival in glioblastoma cancer patients: results from an international randomised phase III EORTC Brain Tumour and Radiation Oncology Groups, and NCIC Clinical Trials Group study. Br J Cancer. 2007; 97: 302-307. (Pubitemid 47196748)
20. Cleeland CS, Mendoza TR, Wang XS, Chouc C, Harle MT, Morrissey M, Engstrom MC,. Assessing symptom distress in cancer patients: the M. D. Anderson Symptom Inventory. Cancer. 2000; 89: 1634-1646.
21. Kind P., US FDA guidance: apropos of PROs. Pharmacoeconomics. 2006; 24: 833-836. (Pubitemid 44338294)
22. Cella D., The FDA and the person with cancer: give PROs a chance. Oncology (Williston Park). 2006; 20: 436.
23. Arpinelli F, Bamfi F., The FDA guidance for industry on PROs: the point of view of a pharmaceutical company. Health Qual Life Outcomes. 2006; 4: 85.