• Login
    View Item 
    •   Home
    • The Christie Research Publications Repository
    • All Christie Publications
    • View Item
    •   Home
    • The Christie Research Publications Repository
    • All Christie Publications
    • View Item
    JavaScript is disabled for your browser. Some features of this site may not work without it.

    Browse

    All of ChristieCommunitiesTitleAuthorsIssue DateSubmit DateSubjectsThis CollectionTitleAuthorsIssue DateSubmit DateSubjectsProfilesView

    My Account

    LoginRegister

    Local Links

    The Christie WebsiteChristie Library and Knowledge Service

    Statistics

    Display statistics

    Systematic Review of Radiation Therapy Toxicity Reporting in Randomized Controlled Trials of Rectal Cancer: A Comparison of Patient-Reported Outcomes and Clinician Toxicity Reporting.

    • CSV
    • RefMan
    • EndNote
    • BibTex
    • RefWorks
    Authors
    Gilbert, A
    Ziegler, L
    Martland, M
    Davidson, Susan E
    Efficace, F
    Sebag-Montefiore, D
    Velikova, G
    Affiliation
    Leeds Institute of Cancer & Pathology, University of Leeds, Leeds, United Kingdom
    Issue Date
    2015-07-01
    
    Metadata
    Show full item record
    Abstract
    The use of multimodal treatments for rectal cancer has improved cancer-related outcomes but makes monitoring toxicity challenging. Optimizing future radiation therapy regimens requires collection and publication of detailed toxicity data. This review evaluated the quality of toxicity information provided in randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of radiation therapy in rectal cancer and focused on the difference between clinician-reported and patient-reported toxicity. Medline, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Library were searched (January 1995-July 2013) for RCTs reporting late toxicity in patients treated with regimens including preoperative (chemo)radiation therapy. Data on toxicity measures and information on toxicity reported were extracted using Quantitative Analyses of Normal Tissue Effects in the Clinic recommendations. International Society for Quality of Life Research standards on patient-reported outcomes (PROs) were used to evaluate the quality of patient-reported toxicity. Twenty-one RCT publications met inclusion criteria out of 4144 articles screened. All PRO studies reported higher rates of toxicity symptoms than clinician-reported studies and reported on a wider range and milder symptoms. No clinician-reported study published data on sexual dysfunction. Of the clinician-reported studies, 55% grouped toxicity data related to an organ system together (eg "Bowel"), and 45% presented data only on more-severe (grade ≥3) toxicity. In comparison, all toxicity grades were reported in 79% of PRO publications, and all studies (100%) presented individual symptom toxicity data (eg bowel urgency). However, PRO reporting quality was variable. Only 43% of PRO studies presented baseline data, 28% did not use any psychometrically validated instruments, and only 29% of studies described statistical methods for managing missing data. Analysis of these trials highlights the lack of reporting standards for adverse events and reveals the differences between clinician and patient reporting of toxicity. Recommendations for improving the quality of adverse event data collection are provided, with the aim of improving critical appraisal of outcomes for future studies.
    Citation
    Systematic Review of Radiation Therapy Toxicity Reporting in Randomized Controlled Trials of Rectal Cancer: A Comparison of Patient-Reported Outcomes and Clinician Toxicity Reporting. 2015, 92 (3):555-567 Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys
    Journal
    International Journal of Radiation Oncology, Biology, Physics
    URI
    http://hdl.handle.net/10541/560766
    DOI
    10.1016/j.ijrobp.2015.02.021
    PubMed ID
    26068490
    Type
    Article
    Language
    en
    ISSN
    1879-355X
    ae974a485f413a2113503eed53cd6c53
    10.1016/j.ijrobp.2015.02.021
    Scopus Count
    Collections
    All Christie Publications

    entitlement

    Related articles

    • Conservative, physical and surgical interventions for managing faecal incontinence and constipation in adults with central neurological diseases.
    • Authors: Todd CL, Johnson EE, Stewart F, Wallace SA, Bryant A, Woodward S, Norton C
    • Issue date: 2024 Oct 29
    • Non-surgical interventions for late rectal problems (proctopathy) of radiotherapy in people who have received radiotherapy to the pelvis.
    • Authors: van de Wetering FT, Verleye L, Andreyev HJ, Maher J, Vlayen J, Pieters BR, van Tienhoven G, Scholten RJ
    • Issue date: 2016 Apr 25
    • Interventions for the treatment of brain radionecrosis after radiotherapy or radiosurgery.
    • Authors: Chung C, Bryant A, Brown PD
    • Issue date: 2018 Jul 9
    • Consolidated standards of reporting trials (CONSORT) and the completeness of reporting of randomised controlled trials (RCTs) published in medical journals.
    • Authors: Turner L, Shamseer L, Altman DG, Weeks L, Peters J, Kober T, Dias S, Schulz KF, Plint AC, Moher D
    • Issue date: 2012 Nov 14
    • Drugs for preventing postoperative nausea and vomiting in adults after general anaesthesia: a network meta-analysis.
    • Authors: Weibel S, Rücker G, Eberhart LH, Pace NL, Hartl HM, Jordan OL, Mayer D, Riemer M, Schaefer MS, Raj D, Backhaus I, Helf A, Schlesinger T, Kienbaum P, Kranke P
    • Issue date: 2020 Oct 19
    DSpace software (copyright © 2002 - 2025)  DuraSpace
    Quick Guide | Contact Us
    Open Repository is a service operated by 
    Atmire NV
     

    Export search results

    The export option will allow you to export the current search results of the entered query to a file. Different formats are available for download. To export the items, click on the button corresponding with the preferred download format.

    By default, clicking on the export buttons will result in a download of the allowed maximum amount of items.

    To select a subset of the search results, click "Selective Export" button and make a selection of the items you want to export. The amount of items that can be exported at once is similarly restricted as the full export.

    After making a selection, click one of the export format buttons. The amount of items that will be exported is indicated in the bubble next to export format.