Quality of Life Research

, Volume 8, Issue 8, pp 723–731

Quality of life and quality adjusted survival for breast cancer patients receiving adjuvant therapy

  • Diane L. Fairclough
  • John H. Fetting
  • David Cella
  • Wendy Wonson
  • Carol M. Moinpour
Article

Abstract

Purpose: The objective was to compare health related quality of life (QOL) in hormone receptor negative, node-positive breast cancer patients receiving adjuvant chemotherapy to determine whether a more intensive chemotherapy regimen has an adverse effect upon QOL that is not balanced by improvements in disease control or survival. Increased physical symptoms, including fatigue and the inconvenience of the dose intensive 16-week regimen, were expected to have a negative impact on QOL. Design: QOL was measured in 163 patients, randomized to either a standard cyclophosphamide, doxorubicin and 5-flurouracil (CAF) or a 16-week multidrug regimen, using the Breast Chemotherapy Questionnaire (BCQ). The 30 item BCQ was self-administered prior to therapy, during therapy, and 4 months post treatment. Results: BCQ scores decreased (worsened) more during therapy on the 16-week regimen, median change −1.4, than on CAF, median change −0.8 (p < 0.001). By 4 months post treatment, BCQ scores were higher than pre-treatment and equal in the two arms (CAF: 8.1 and 16 weeks: 8.2, p = 0.6). Over a period of 48 months, patients on the 16-week regimen averaged 1.4 fewer months of treatment with toxicity, 4.0 more months without symptoms and 0.7 fewer months post recurrence compared to patients on the CAF regimen. Given typical values for these health states, the gain in Q-TWiST observed for the CAF regimen during treatment shifted to the 16-week regimen after 1 year, with a gain of 2.0 to 2.4 months after 4 years. Conclusions: The hypothesized negative impact of the dose intensive 16-week regimen was confirmed by the BCQ assessments. However, Q-TWiST analysis suggests a small gain for the 16-week regimen. The later results should be interpreted with caution with the limited follow-up of 4 years.

Adjuvant chemotherapy Breast neoplasms Quality of life Randomized clinical trial 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    Fetting J, Gray R, Abelo. M, Fowble B, Smith T, Vail S, Durrani G, Eudey L, Henney J, Morgolin K, Citron M, Osborne D, Henderson C. CAF vs. a 16-week multidrug regimen as adjuvant therapy for receptor-negative, node positive breast cancer: An Intergroup study. Proc Am Soc Clin Oncol 1995; 114: 96 (#83).Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Goldhirsch A, Gelber RD, Simes RJ, Glasziou P, Coates AS. Costs and bene®ts of adjuvant therapy in breast cancer: a quality adjusted survival analysis. J Clin Oncol 1989; 7: 36–44.Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Gelber RD, Goldhirsch A, Cavalli F. Quality of Life Adjusted Evaluation of Adjuvant Therapies for Oper-able Breast Cancer. Annals of Internal Med 1991; 114: 621–628.Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Gelber RD, Cole BF, Gelber S, Goldhirsch A. Comparing treatments using quality-adjusted survival: the Q-TWiST method. The Am Stat 1995; 49: 161- 169.Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Moinpour C, Feigl P, Metch B, et al. Quality of Life endpoints in cancer clinical trails: Review and recom-mendations. JNCI 1989; 81: 485–495.Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Levine M, Guyatt G, Gent M, DePauw S, Goodyear MD, Hryniuk WM, Arnold A, Findlay B, Skillings JR, Bramwell VH, Levin L, Bush H, Abu-Zahra H, Kotalik J. Quality of life in stage II breast cancer: An instrument for clinical trials. J Clin Oncol 1988; 6: 1798–1810.Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Fetting JH, Gray R, Fairclough DL, Smith TJ, Margolin KA, Citron ML, Grove-Conrad M, Cella DL, Pandya K, Robert N, Henderson IC, Osborne CK, Abelo. MD. A 16-week Multidrug Regimen vs. cyclophosphamide, doxorubicin, and 5-Flurouracil (CAF) as Adjuvant Therapy for Node-Positive, Re-ceptor Negative Breast Cancer: An Intergroup Study. J Clin Oncol,1998; 16: 2382–2391.Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Hollander M, Wolfe DA. Nonparametric Statistical Methods. NY: John Wiley and Sons, 1973: 50–52, 75–82.Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Fairclough DF. Quality of Life in Cancer Clinical Trials: Now that we have the data, what do we do? J Appl Stat Sci 1996; 4: 253–269.Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Weeks J. Personal communication, 1996.Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    O'Leary JF, Fairclough DL, Jankowski MK, Weeks JC. Comparison of Time-tradeo. Utilities and Rating Scale Values of Cancer Patients and their Relatives. Med Decis Making 1995; 15: 132–137.Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Fetting J. Personal communication, 1997.Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Hurny C, Bernhard J, Coates AS, Castigilione-Gertsch M, Peterson HF, Gelber RD, Forbes JF, Rudenstam CM, Simoncini E, Crivellari D, Goldhirsch A, Senn HJ. Impact of adjuvant therapy on quality of life in women with node-positive operable breast cancer. Lancet 1996; 347: 1279–1284.Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Fairclough DL, Fetting J, Cella D, et al. Quality of Life on A Breast Cancer Adjuvant Trial Comparing CAF with a 16-week Regimen. Proc Am Soc Clin Oncol 1995; 114: (#890).Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Smith TJ, Hilner BE. The effcient and cost-effectiveness of Adjuvant Therapy of Early Bresist Cancer in Premenopausal Women. J Clin Oncol 1993; 11: 771- 776.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Kluwer Academic Publishers 1999

Authors and Affiliations

  • Diane L. Fairclough
    • 1
  • John H. Fetting
    • 2
  • David Cella
    • 3
  • Wendy Wonson
    • 4
  • Carol M. Moinpour
    • 5
  1. 1.AMC Cancer Research CenterDenverU.S.A
  2. 2.Johns Hopkins Oncology CenterBaltimoreU.S.A
  3. 3.Evanston Northwestern HealthcareCenter on Outcomes, Research and EducationEvanstonU.S.A
  4. 4.ECOG Coordinating CenterBrooklineU.S.A
  5. 5.Southwest Oncology Group Statistical CenterSeattleU.S.A

Personalised recommendations