Advertisement
Journal Home
Search for

Volume 62, Issue 1, Pages 126-138 (October 2008)


View previous. 19 of 20 View next.

Systematic review of symptom control and quality of life in studies on chemotherapy for advanced non-small cell lung cancer: How CONSORTed are the data?

Karin Pat, Christophe Dooms, Johan VansteenkisteCorresponding Author Informationemail addressweb address

Received 30 December 2007; received in revised form 20 February 2008; accepted 24 February 2008. published online 07 April 2008.

Summary 

Background

The effect of chemotherapy on survival of patients with advanced NSCLC is modest, therefore patient reported outcomes (PRO's) are of high interest in randomized controlled trials (RCTs). CONSORT (CONsolidated Standards On Reporting Trials) is a quality checklist of 22 items for the conduct and reporting of RCTs. The aim of this report was to analyse to what extent the different RCTs with information on PRO's adhere to the CONSORT statement.

Methods

Systematic review of RCTs using PRO's either as primary or secondary endpoint. Compliance with the (revised) CONSORT statement was checked by 2 independent reviewers by making for each study the simple sum of the 22 CONSORT items, or a weighted score with a maximum rating of 31 points.

Results

The median weighted CONSORT score of the different RCTs was 25, with a remarkable difference from 12 till 30. There was no significant change over time, nor difference between academic and commercial studies, but a significant correlation between CONSORT agreement and journal type (P<0.0001). Adherence to CONSORT was similar for studies comparing chemotherapy with best supportive care alone, comparing different first-line chemotherapies with PRO either as primary or secondary endpoint, or studies looking at second-line chemotherapy. Benefit in PRO's was reported in all of these settings.

Conclusion

The overall adherence of peer-reviewed RCTs to CONSORT is reasonable, with nonetheless major differences between journals, and with no clear sign of change over time. Apart from modest survival differences, benefits in PRO endpoints are present in all categories of studies we analysed.

Respiratory Oncology Unit (Department of Pulmonology) and Leuven Lung Cancer Group, University Hospital Gasthuisberg, Leuven, Belgium

Corresponding Author InformationCorresponding author at: Respiratory Oncology Unit (Pulmonology), University Hospital Gasthuisberg, Herestraat 49, B-3000 Leuven, Belgium. Tel.: +32 16 346802; fax: +32 16 346803.

 Note: Data presented in part at the European Respiratory Society Meeting, Munich, September 2006.

PII: S0169-5002(08)00106-2

doi:10.1016/j.lungcan.2008.02.018


View previous. 19 of 20 View next.