Skip to main content

Advertisement

Log in

Lebensqualität in der Onkologie

Status Quo und Ausblick

Quality of life in oncology

Current status and future prospects

  • Leitthema
  • Published:
Der Onkologe Aims and scope

Zusammenfassung

In der Onkologie hat die Lebensqualität der Patienten im Verlauf der beiden letzten Jahrzehnte zunehmende Beachtung gefunden. Neben der Verlängerung des Überlebens ist sie heute der zweite Parameter der zur Evaluation neuer Tumortherapien herangezogen wird. Sowohl die Invasivität heute zur Verfügung stehender Therapien als auch die oftmals begrenzte Lebenserwartung der Patienten hat zu diesem Paradigmenwechsel beigetragen. Es existieren heute eine Vielzahl von hervorragend evaluierten Instrumenten für eine große Anzahl verschiedener Patientengruppen und Tumorentitäten. Trotzdem bleibt weiterhin erheblicher Forschungsbedarf zu den Fragen, wann eine Änderung in der Lebensqualität für den einzelnen Patienten bedeutsam ist und wie Lebensqualitätsinstrumente für die besonderen Gruppen der sehr jungen, der älteren und für Patienten mit sehr invasiven Therapien zu bewerten und anzuwenden sind.

Abstract

During the last two decades the importance of the patient’s quality of life (QoL) has gained growing acceptance among those working in the oncology disciplines. QoL is now the second parameter after survival that is used to evaluate the effectiveness of new oncological therapies. The invasiveness of some of the current therapies and the restricted life expectancy of many of the patients diagnosed with cancer are what have led to this changed therapeutic paradigms. A large number of well-validated instruments are now available for use in many different patient populations and for almost all of the common tumor entities. Nonetheless, a substantial research effort is still needed, in particular into when a change in QoL is meaningful for the individual patient and how QoL-specific instruments should be rated and applied in very young and in elderly patients and in those undergoing maximally invasive therapies.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Abb. 1
Abb. 2
Abb. 3

Literatur

  1. Aaronson NK, Ahmedzai S, Bergmann B et al. (1993) The European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer QLQ-C30: A quality-of-life instrument for use in international clinical trials in oncology. J Natl Cancer Inst 85:365–376

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Bergner M (1989) Quality of life, health status, and clinical research. Med Care 27 [3 Suppl]:S148–56

    Google Scholar 

  3. Bergner M, Bobbitt RA, Carter WB et al. (1981) The Sickness Impact Profile: Development and final revision of a health status measure. Med Care 19:787–805

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Cella DF (1995) Measuring quality of life in palliative care. Semin Oncol 22 [2 Suppl 3]:73-81

    Google Scholar 

  5. Cella DF, Bonomi AE, Lloyd SR et al. (1995) Reliability and validità of the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-Lung (FACT-L) quality of life instrument. Lung Cancer 12:199–220

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Cella DF, Tulsky DS, Gray G et al. (1993) The Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy (FACT) scale: development and validation of a general measure. J Clin Oncol 11:570–579

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Chang CH, Cella DF (1997) equitating health-related quality-of-life instruments in applied oncology setting. Phys Med Rehabil State Art Rev 11:397–406

    Google Scholar 

  8. Detmar SB, Muller MJ, Schornagel JH et al. (2002) Health-Related Quality-of-life Assessments and Patient-Physician Communication: A Randomized Controlled Trial. JAMA 288:3027

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Friedrich C, Kolb G, Wedding U et al. (2003) Comprehensive Geriatric Assessment in the Elderly Cancer Patient. Onkologie 26:355–360

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Gotay CC (1996) Trial-related quality of life: Using quality-of-life assessment to distinguish among caner therapies. J Natl Cancer Inst Monogr 20:1–6

    Google Scholar 

  11. Hopwood P, Harvey A, Davies J et al. (1998) Survey of the Administration of quality of life (QL) questionnaires in three multicentre randomised trials in cancer. The Medical Research Council Lung Cancer Working Party the CHART Steering Committee. Eur J Cancer. 34:49–57

  12. Hunt SM, McEwen J, McKenna SP (1985) Measuring health status: a new tool for clinicians and epidemiologists. J R Coll Gen Pract 35:185–88

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Johnson JR, Temple R (1985) Food and Drug Administration requirements for approval of new anticancer drugs. Cancer Treat Rep 69 (10):1155–1159

    Google Scholar 

  14. Karnofsky DA, Burchenal JH (1949) In: Macleod CM (ed) Evaluation of Chemotherapeutic Agents. Columbia University Press, New York

  15. Kemmler G, Holzner B, Kopp M et al. (1999) Comparison of two quality-of-life instruments for cancer patients: the functional Assessment of Cancer-General and the European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Questionaire-C30. J Clin Oncol 17:2932–2940

    Google Scholar 

  16. Krege S, Friedrich C, Lummen G et al. (2004) Geriatric assessment: Is it useful in the selection of elderly tumour patients for a difficult therapy? Urologe A. DOI: 10.1007/s00120-004-0637-z

  17. MAPI Research Institute: Quality of Life Assessment in Medicine. Verfügbar über: http://www.QLMed.org/index.html, access 12/08/2004

  18. Matza LS, Swensen AR, Flood EM et al. (2004) Assessment of health-related quality of life in children: a review of conceptual, methodological, and regulatory issues. Value Health 7:79–92

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. McLachlan SA, Allenby A, Matthews J et al. (2001) Randomized trial of coordinated psychosocial interventions based on patient self-assessments versus standard care to improve the psychosocial functioning of patients with cancer. J Clin Oncol 19:4117

    Google Scholar 

  20. McQuellon RP, Muss HB, Hoffman SL et al. (1995) Patient preferences for treatment of metastatic breast cancer: a study of women with early-stage breast cancer. J Clin Oncol 13:858–868

    Google Scholar 

  21. Schipper H, Clinch JJ, McMurray A et al. (1984) Measuring the quality of life of cancer patients: The Functional Living Index-Cancer: Development and validation. J Clin Oncol 2:472–83

    Google Scholar 

  22. Sekeres MA, Stone RM, Zahrieh D et al. (2004). Decision-making and quality of life in older adults with acute myeloid leukemia or advanced myelodysplastic syndrome. Leukemia 18:809–816

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Testa MA, Simonson DC (1996) Assessment of quality of life outcomes. N Engl J Med 334: 835–840

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Titzer ML, Fisch M, Kristeller JL et al. (2001) Clinicians‘ Assessment of Quality of Life (QOL) in Outpatients with Advanced Cancer: How Accurate is Our Prediction? A Hoosier Oncology Group Study. Proc Am Soc Clin Oncol 20:1532 (Abstract)

    Google Scholar 

  25. Torrance GW, Feeny DH, Furlong WJ et al. (1996) Multiattribute utility function for a comprehensive health status classification system: Health Utilities Index Mark 2. Med Care 34:702–722

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. Ware J, Sherbourne CD (1992) The MOS 36-item Short Form Health Survey (SF-36)-I: Conceptual framework and item selection. Med Care 30:473–483

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Watson M, Buck G, Wheatley K et al. (2004) UK Medical Research Council AML 10 trial. Adverse impact of bone marrow transplantation on quality of life in acute myeloid leukaemia patients; analysis of the UK Medical Research Council AML 10 Trial. Eur J Cancer 40:971–978

    Article  Google Scholar 

  28. Wisloff F, Hjorth M (1997) Health-related quality of life assessed before and during chemotherapy predicts for survival in multiple myeloma. Nordic Myeloma Study Group. Br J Haematol 97:29–37

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Interessenkonflikt:

Der korrespondierende Autor versichert, dass keine Verbindungen mit einer Firma, deren Produkt in dem Artikel genannt ist, oder einer Firma, die ein Konkurrenzprodukt vertreibt, bestehen.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to G. Deutschinoff.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Deutschinoff, G., Friedrich, C., Thiem, U. et al. Lebensqualität in der Onkologie. Onkologe 11, 164–172 (2005). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00761-004-0825-x

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00761-004-0825-x

Schlüsselwörter

Keywords

Navigation