The objective of this study was to assess the psychometric properties of the Thai version of the European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Questionnaire (EORTC QLQ-C30) version 3.0. The questionnaire was completed by 310 cancer patients during their follow-up at 2 teaching hospital oncology clinics. About 70% of participants had advanced stage of cancer and 72% had been receiving chemotherapy. Cronbach's alpha coefficients of the six scales were above 0.7, except for cognitive and social function scales. All test-retest reliability coefficients were high. Multi trait scaling analysis showed that all item-scale correlation coefficients met the standards of convergent and discriminant validity. Most scales and items could discriminate between subgroups of patients with different clinical status assessed with the Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) scale. The results suggested that the EORTC QLQ-C30 and the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy - General (FACT-G) measured different aspects of quality of life and should be independently used. Testing psychometric properties of the EORTC QLQ-C30 in heterogeneous diagnostic group yield similar results as found in homogeneous group. These results support that the EORTC QLQ-C30 (version 3.0) has proven to be a reliable and valid measure of the quality of life in Thai patients with various types of cancer.

6536 Background: Colorectal cancer is an important health problems in Thailand; chemotherapy remains the most suitable treatment for metastatic patients. Chemotherapy treatment that was once delivered only in hospital environments is now administered at patient's home that helping patients to live normal lives during receiving chemotherapy. The chemotherapy regimens are based on a 48 hours 5-fluorouracil infusion combined that need patients to be hospitalized, consequence to decrease QOL and increase cost of treatment. Aims: Compares the QOL score, patients’ satisfaction and cost difference in treating ambulatory chemotherapy (AC) patients compared with inpatient treatment. Methods: An observational cohort which enrolled 156 patients at the Ramathibodi hospital from Dec 2015 to Nov 2016. AC administered by the central venous access device (CVAD). The regimen as FOLFOX or FOLFIRI, 5-FU were in the elastomeric infusion pump and administered at the patients’ home. Nurse coordinators followed up with the patients by phone. The FACT-G and FACT-C scale, patients’ satisfaction and cost of treatment questionnaire were collected at time of enrolment, 2 months and end of treatment. Results: 156 patients are enrolled that 111 patients treated with AC and 45 patients treated with inpatient. 134 returned the questionnaire (response rate 86%). Intention to treat analysis revealed significantly improved in social wellbeing and FACT-G (p <0.001) in AC group. Significant higher administration, service and overall satisfaction score in AC group. The AC reduced cost about 483 US dollars per cycle of chemotherapy. Conclusions: Ambulatory chemotherapy helps colorectal cancer patients to live normal lives by administer treatment at patients' home and results to significantly improve in quality of life especially in social wellbeing and more satisfaction. Moreover, ambulatory chemotherapy reduced cost of chemotherapy treatment.

No abstract

10 Background: Colorectal cancer is an important health problems in Thailand. Chemotherapy treatment that was once delivered only in hospital environments is now administered at patient's home that helping patients to live normal lives during receiving chemotherapy. The chemotherapy regimens are based on a 48 hours 5-fluorouracil infusion combined that need patients to be hospitalized, consequence to decrease QOL and increase cost of treatment. Methods: An observational cohort which enrolled 156 patients at the Ramathibodi hospital from Dec 2015 to Nov 2016. Ambulatory chemotherapy (AC) administered by the central venous access device (CVAD). The regimen as FOLFOX or FOLFIRI, 5-FU were in the elastomeric infusion pump and administered at the patients’ home. The questionnaire of FACT-G and FACT-C scale, cost of treatment were collected at time of enrolment, 2 months and end of treatment. DFS and OS were analyzed in patients who treated with first regimen of metastasis chemotherapy. Nurse coordinator followed up them by phone. Aims: Compares the DFS, OS, QOL score, and cost difference in AC patients compared with inpatient treatment. Results: 156 patients are enrolled that 111 patients treated with AC and 45 patients treated with inpatient. Questionnaire response rate was 86%. Intention to treat analysis revealed significantly improved in social wellbeing and FACT-G (p < 0.001) in AC group. No difference in DFS between AC and inpatient group (12.6 vs 11.9 months, HR 0.82, p = 0.33). Overall survival trended to longer survival in AC arm (2.43 vs 1.83 years, HR 0.78, P = 0.28). The AC reduced cost about 338 US dollars per cycle of chemotherapy. Conclusions: Ambulatory chemotherapy helps colorectal cancer patients to live normal lives by administer treatment at patients' home and results to significantly improve in quality of life . No difference in DFS and OS benefit, but trends in gaining more benefits in ambulatory treatment. Moreover, ambulatory chemotherapy reduced cost of chemotherapy treatment.