Harmonized Outcome Measures for Use in Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer Patient Registries and Clinical Practice.


Journal

Journal of the National Comprehensive Cancer Network : JNCCN
ISSN: 1540-1413
Titre abrégé: J Natl Compr Canc Netw
Pays: United States
ID NLM: 101162515

Informations de publication

Date de publication:
13 Aug 2021
Historique:
received: 24 08 2020
received: 08 01 2021
accepted: 28 01 2021
entrez: 13 8 2021
pubmed: 14 8 2021
medline: 14 8 2021
Statut: aheadofprint

Résumé

Lung cancer is the leading cause of cancer-related death in the United States and globally, and many questions exist about treatment options. Harmonizing data across registries and other data collection efforts would yield a robust data infrastructure to help address many research questions. The purpose of this project was to develop a minimum set of patient and clinician relevant harmonized outcome measures that can be collected in non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) patient registries and clinical practice. Seventeen lung cancer registries and related efforts were identified and invited to submit outcome measures. Representatives from medical specialty societies, government agencies, health systems, health information technology groups, patient advocacy organizations, and industry formed a stakeholder panel to categorize the measures and harmonize definitions using the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality's supported Outcome Measures Framework (OMF). The panel reviewed 66 outcome measures and identified a minimum set of 8 broadly relevant measures in the OMF categories of patient survival, clinical response, events of interest, and resource utilization. The panel harmonized definitions for the 8 measures through in-person and virtual meetings. The panel did not reach consensus on 1 specific validated instrument for capturing patient-reported outcomes. The minimum set of harmonized outcome measures is broadly relevant to clinicians and patients and feasible to capture across NSCLC disease stages and treatment pathways. A pilot test of these measures would be useful to document the burden and value of the measures for research and in clinical practice. By collecting the harmonized measures consistently, registries and other data collection systems could contribute to the development research infrastructure and learning health systems to support new research and improve patient outcomes.

Sections du résumé

BACKGROUND BACKGROUND
Lung cancer is the leading cause of cancer-related death in the United States and globally, and many questions exist about treatment options. Harmonizing data across registries and other data collection efforts would yield a robust data infrastructure to help address many research questions. The purpose of this project was to develop a minimum set of patient and clinician relevant harmonized outcome measures that can be collected in non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) patient registries and clinical practice.
METHODS METHODS
Seventeen lung cancer registries and related efforts were identified and invited to submit outcome measures. Representatives from medical specialty societies, government agencies, health systems, health information technology groups, patient advocacy organizations, and industry formed a stakeholder panel to categorize the measures and harmonize definitions using the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality's supported Outcome Measures Framework (OMF).
RESULTS RESULTS
The panel reviewed 66 outcome measures and identified a minimum set of 8 broadly relevant measures in the OMF categories of patient survival, clinical response, events of interest, and resource utilization. The panel harmonized definitions for the 8 measures through in-person and virtual meetings. The panel did not reach consensus on 1 specific validated instrument for capturing patient-reported outcomes. The minimum set of harmonized outcome measures is broadly relevant to clinicians and patients and feasible to capture across NSCLC disease stages and treatment pathways. A pilot test of these measures would be useful to document the burden and value of the measures for research and in clinical practice.
CONCLUSIONS CONCLUSIONS
By collecting the harmonized measures consistently, registries and other data collection systems could contribute to the development research infrastructure and learning health systems to support new research and improve patient outcomes.

Identifiants

pubmed: 34388732
doi: 10.6004/jnccn.2021.7021
pii: jnccn20450
pmc: PMC9036537
mid: NIHMS1797915
doi:
pii:

Types de publication

Journal Article

Langues

eng

Sous-ensembles de citation

IM

Subventions

Organisme : NCI NIH HHS
ID : K12 CA133250
Pays : United States
Organisme : NCI NIH HHS
ID : P30 CA016058
Pays : United States
Organisme : NCI NIH HHS
ID : P30 CA076292
Pays : United States

Références

J Comp Eff Res. 2014 Sep;3(5):473-80
pubmed: 25350799
Eur J Cancer. 2009 Jan;45(2):228-47
pubmed: 19097774
Cancer. 1994 Apr 15;73(8):2087-98
pubmed: 8156514
Ann Intern Med. 2020 Jun 16;172(12):803-809
pubmed: 32422056
CA Cancer J Clin. 2021 May;71(3):209-249
pubmed: 33538338
J Natl Cancer Inst. 1993 Mar 3;85(5):365-76
pubmed: 8433390
J Allergy Clin Immunol. 2019 Sep;144(3):671-681.e1
pubmed: 30857981
Lung Cancer. 1995 Jun;12(3):199-220
pubmed: 7655830
J Palliat Care. 1991 Summer;7(2):6-9
pubmed: 1714502
Eur J Cancer. 1994;30A(5):635-42
pubmed: 8080679
Value Health. 2014 Dec;17(8):846-53
pubmed: 25498780
Heart Rhythm. 2019 Jan;16(1):e3-e16
pubmed: 30449519
Eur Respir J. 2016 Sep;48(3):852-60
pubmed: 27390281
Transl Lung Cancer Res. 2018 Jun;7(3):220-233
pubmed: 30050761
J Clin Oncol. 2010 Sep 20;28(27):4268-74
pubmed: 20585094

Auteurs

Martin J Edelman (MJ)

1Department of Hematology/Oncology, Fox Chase Cancer Center, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania.

Daniel P Raymond (DP)

2Department of Thoracic and Cardiovascular Surgery, Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, Ohio.

Dwight H Owen (DH)

3Division of Medical Oncology, Department of Internal Medicine, Ohio State University Wexner Medical Center, Columbus, Ohio.

Michelle B Leavy (MB)

4OM1, Inc, Boston, Massachusetts.

Kari Chansky (K)

5Cancer Research and Biostatistics, Seattle, Washington.

Sriram Yennu (S)

6Department of Palliative Care, Rehabilitation, & Integrative Medicine, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Texas.

Felix G Fernandez (FG)

7Division of Cardiothoracic Surgery, Emory University School of Medicine, Atlanta, Georgia.

Carolyn J Presley (CJ)

3Division of Medical Oncology, Department of Internal Medicine, Ohio State University Wexner Medical Center, Columbus, Ohio.

Tithi Biswas (T)

8Department of Radiation Oncology, Case Western Reserve University, University Hospitals Seidman Cancer Center, Cleveland, Ohio.

Gwendolyn P Quinn (GP)

9Department of Population Health, New York University School of Medicine, New York, New York.

Matthew B Schabath (MB)

10Department of Cancer Epidemiology, H. Lee Moffitt Cancer Center & Research Institute, Tampa, Florida.

Seth Sheffler-Collins (S)

11American Association for Cancer Research, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania; and.

Laura Chu (L)

12Product Development, Personalized Healthcare Data Science, Genentech, Inc, South San Francisco, California.

Richard E Gliklich (RE)

4OM1, Inc, Boston, Massachusetts.

Classifications MeSH