Assessment of quality of life (<scp>QOL</scp>) in cancer patients attending oncology unit of a<scp>Teaching Hospital in Bangladesh</scp>

Islam, Nazmul; Atreya, Alok; Nepal, Samata; Uddin, Kazi Jashim; Kaiser, Md. Rashed; Menezes, Ritesh G.; Lasrado, Savita; Abdullah‐Al‐Noman, Muhammad

doi:10.1002/cnr2.1829

Cited by 3 publications

(3 citation statements)

References 35 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Another important factor was the stage of cancer, which was found to be a significant factor in QoL, with participants with stage III and IV cancer being 86% and 84% less likely, respectively, to have a good QoL compared to those with stage I cancer. This report is supported by a study from Bangladesh, indicating that functional scales decline while dyspnea and insomnia worsen as the cancer advances ( 42 ). In fact, as cancer progresses, the patients’ condition typically deteriorates due to factors such as tumor growth, metastasis, and the side effects of cancer treatments ( 43 ).…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 73%

Quality of life and associated factors among patients with cancer receiving chemotherapy at Dessie Comprehensive Specialized Hospital, North-East Ethiopia: a cross-sectional study

Bayked,

Yimam,

Yalew

et al. 2024

Front. Oncol.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

BackgroundCancer is a major public health problem around the world. Cancer by itself and its treatment modalities affect the quality of life (QoL) of patients with it. However, there were a paucity of studies about the QoL of patients receiving chemotherapeutic treatment in Ethiopia. This study was aimed at addressing such a gap. Accordingly, we investigated QoL and associated factors among cancer patients receiving chemotherapy at Dessie Comprehensive Specialized Hospital (DCSH), North East Ethiopia, in 2023.MethodsWe employed a cross-sectional study from April 1 to May 30, 2023. The data was collected using the European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer Core QoL Questionnaire, version 3.0 (EORTC QLQ-C30). The data was entered and cleaned using EpiData version 4.6 and exported to Statistical Package for Social Sciences (SPSS) version 27 for analysis. The association between the dependent and independent variables was determined using Odds Ratios (ORs) at a p value < 0.05 with a 95% CI.ResultsData was collected from 394 patients. Their mean summary QoL score was 36.3 ± 9.0. About 39.3% demonstrated a good QoL summary score, whereas 60.7% were impacted by symptoms. A good functional QoL score was observed in 42.6% of the participants. About 54.8% and 31.7% reported good overall health status and good overall QoL, respectively. The most impacted functional domain was social functioning, affecting 64.5% of participants. The most common symptom was diarrhea, affecting 65.5% of the participants. Secondary school education level (Adjusted Odds Ratio-AOR = 3.16, 95% CI: 1.14-8.81), diploma and above education level (AOR = 4.90, 95% CI: 1.29-18.62), and urban residency (AOR = 1.74, 95% CI: 1.07-2.82) had a significant positive association with QoL, while being a civil servant (AOR = 0.13, 95% CI: 0.04-0.49), having stage III cancer (AOR = 0.14, 95% CI: 0.05-0.39), and stage IV cancer (AOR = 0.16, 95% 0.06-0.44) had a significant negative association with it.ConclusionThe QoL for cancer patients undergoing chemotherapy was significantly low and associated with their level of education, occupational status, area of residence, and stage of cancer. Incorporating psychosocial support is thus crucial in their treatment plans.

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 73%

Quality of life and associated factors among patients with cancer receiving chemotherapy at Dessie Comprehensive Specialized Hospital, North-East Ethiopia: a cross-sectional study

Bayked,

Yimam,

Yalew

et al. 2024

Front. Oncol.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“… 83 All functional scales in this study were higher than those reported among Bangladeshi patients with cancer, which was also reflected by the low global health status score of 48.85 (SD = 19.38). 84 On the other hand, a study that was conducted in Nepal reported a higher mean global health status among Nepali cancer patients (83.3 ± 17.70) despite a high mean financial burden score (68.02 ± 33.81). 85 …”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 96%

Understanding the Quality of Life Among Patients With Cancer in Saudi Arabia: Insights From a Cross-Sectional Study

Aljawadi,

Alkhudair,

Alrasheed

et al. 2024

Cancer Control

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Introduction Cancer patients’ quality of life (QoL) significantly influences treatment response and mortality rates. Understanding QoL domains among patients with cancer and what affects it can help create interventions that improve QoL and ease patients’ experience. This study measures the OoL among patients with cancer and influencing factors. Methods A prospective cross-sectional questionnaire-based study included cancer patients aged >18 currently receiving treatment. The questionnaire collected social and economic data, followed by the validated Arabic version of the European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Questionnaire (EORTC-QLQ-C30). Means and standard deviations for described numeric variables and frequencies and percentages described categorical variables. Analysis of variance, F-tests, and P-values were reported. Results Among 182 cancer patients, 60% were female. Younger patients exhibited higher QoL in physical and role functioning ( P = .016 and .03) and experienced more significant financial impact ( P = .0144). Females reported more adverse effects from cancer symptoms, including fatigue, nausea, vomiting, and pain (36.7% vs 25.5%, P = .005; 20.6% vs 11.5%, P = .0186; 34.7% vs 25.1%, P = .0281). Single patients had superior QoL in physical functioning compared to others ( P = .0127). Patients traveling long distances were more likely to face adverse financial consequences ( P = .007). Asthmatic patients exhibited lower QoL in physical, role, and cognitive functioning (72.3 vs 37.8, P = .0147; 76.4 vs 22.2, P = .0024; 84.7 vs 44.4, P = .0038) and reported increased dyspnea and appetite loss (16 vs 55.6 and 26.1 vs 66.7, both P < .05). Conclusion Factors influencing QoL in Saudi cancer patients include age, marital status, gender, hospital distance, and chronic conditions. Thus emphasizing the necessity for personalized care strategies to enhance outcomes and alleviate the overall burden of cancer care.

show abstract

“…Although various studies presented the results of LE and WW in treating patients with locally advanced rectal cancer, reliable data comparing the outcomes of these two approaches are still lacking [ 29 ]. In part, the reason WW and LE are difficult to compare is the need to consider different outcomes, including survival, relapses, and QoL variables [ 30 , 31 ]. In this framework, the win statistics could easily consider both classical efficacy and QoL outcomes, providing a comprehensive evaluation of treatment benefits and drawbacks.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Win Statistics in Observational Cancer Research: Integrating Clinical and Quality-of-Life Outcomes

Chiaruttini,

Lorenzoni,

Spolverato

et al. 2024

JCM

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: Quality-of-life metrics are increasingly important for oncological patients alongside traditional endpoints like mortality and disease progression. Statistical tools such as Win Ratio, Win Odds, and Net Benefit prioritize clinically significant outcomes using composite endpoints. In randomized trials, Win Statistics provide fair comparisons between treatment and control groups. However, their use in observational studies is complicated by confounding variables. Propensity score (PS) matching mitigates confounding variables but may reduce the sample size, affecting the power of win statistics analyses. Alternatively, PS matching can stratify samples, preserving the sample size. This study aims to assess the long-term impact of these methods on decision making, particularly in colorectal cancer patients. Methods: A motivating example involves a cohort of patients from the ReSARCh observational study (2016–2021) with locally advanced adenocarcinoma of the rectum, situated up to 12 cm from the anal verge. These patients underwent either a watch-and-wait approach (WW) or trans-anal local excision (LE). Win statistics compared the effects of WW and LE on a composite outcome (overall survival, recurrence, presence of ostomy, and rectum excision). For matched win statistics, we used robust inference techniques proposed by Matsouaka et al. (2022), and for stratified win statistics, we applied the method proposed by Dong et al. (2018). A simulation study assessed the coverage probability of matched and stratified win statistics in balanced and unbalanced groups, calculating how often the confidence intervals included the true values of WR, NB, and WO across 1000 simulations. Results: The results suggest a better efficacy of the LE approach when considering efficacy outcomes alone (WR: 0.47 (0.01 to 1.14); NB: −0.16 (−0.34 to 0.02); and WO: 0.73 (0.5 to 1.05)). However, when QoL outcomes are included in the analyses, the estimates are closer to 1 (WR: 0.87 (0.06 to 2.06); WO: 0.93 (0.61 to 1.4)) and to 0 (NB: −0.04 (−0.25 to 0.17)), indicating a negative impact of the treatment effect of LE regarding the presence of ostomy and the excision of the rectum. Moreover, based on the simulation study, our findings underscore the superior performance of matched compared to stratified win statistics in terms of coverage probability (matched WR: 97% vs. stratified WR: 33.3% in a high-imbalance setting; matched WR: 98% vs. stratified WR: 34.4% in a medium-imbalance setting; and matched WR: 99.2% vs. stratified WR: 37.4% in a low-imbalance setting). Conclusions: In conclusion, our study sheds light on the interpretation of the results of win statistics in terms of statistical significance, providing insights into the application of pairwise comparison in observational settings, promoting its use to improve outcomes for cancer patients.

show abstract

Assessment of quality of life (QOL) in cancer patients attending oncology unit of aTeaching Hospital in Bangladesh

Cited by 3 publications

References 35 publications

Quality of life and associated factors among patients with cancer receiving chemotherapy at Dessie Comprehensive Specialized Hospital, North-East Ethiopia: a cross-sectional study

Quality of life and associated factors among patients with cancer receiving chemotherapy at Dessie Comprehensive Specialized Hospital, North-East Ethiopia: a cross-sectional study

Understanding the Quality of Life Among Patients With Cancer in Saudi Arabia: Insights From a Cross-Sectional Study

Win Statistics in Observational Cancer Research: Integrating Clinical and Quality-of-Life Outcomes

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About