Russian Journal of OncologyRussian Journal of OncologyРоссийский онкологический журнал1028-99842412-9119Eco-Vector10664810.17816/onco106648ReviewsНаучные обзорыReview ArticleAssessment of the quality of life of patients with cancer: Current state of the problemОценка качества жизни онкологических пациентов: современное состояние проблемыhttps://orcid.org/0000-0002-6621-0284AlekseevaAnna P.АлексееваАнна Павловна
Russian Federation

Clinical Pharmacologist, Postgraduate Student

клинический фармаколог, аспирант

hramluk_ap@mail.ruChelyabinsk Regional Clinical Center of Oncology and Nuclear MedicineГБУЗ «Челябинский областной клинический центр онкологии и ядерной медицины»South-Ural State Medical UniversityФГБОУ ВО «Южно-Уральский государственный медицинский университет»1010202215062021263931002204202221072022Copyright ©; 2021, Alekseeva A.Copyright ©; 2021, Алексеева А.П.2021Alekseeva A.Алексеева А.П.https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/https://rjonco.com/1028-9984/article/view/106648

The successes of modern medicine in the treatment of malignant neoplasms have led to increased interest in the study of quality of life (QOL), which is considered one of the endpoints of modern clinical research in oncology. This study aimed to identify the main features of the current state and patterns of further development in assessing the QOL of patients with cancer. This study was based on a bibliographic search in PubMed and Google Scholar. A literature search was conducted using pairs of keywords “quality of life–oncology,” “quality of life–cancer,” “quality of life–questionnaires–oncology,” “patient-reported outcome (PRO)–oncology,” and “quality-adjusted life-year (QALY)–oncology” for articles published from 2017 to 2022 in Russian and English. Further, the articles were identified manually through the article link lists. PROs are currently considered the generally accepted standard for collecting data on the subjective perception of patients with cancer regarding their health status. Numerous questionnaires for assessing QOL are available, but the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy–General and the European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Questionnaire are preferred. The combination of advanced technologies allows the collection of more reliable PRO data. Thus, unified approaches for the application of PRO results in large clinical trials are necessary.

Успехи современной медицины в терапии злокачественных новообразований привели к повышению интереса к изучению качества жизни (КЖ), которое рассматривают как одну из конечных точек современных клинических исследований в онкологии. Цель – выявить основные особенности современного состояния и закономерности дальнейшего развития проблемы оценки КЖ онкологических пациентов. Эта статья, основанная на библиографическом поиске в базах данных PubMed и Google Scholar, содержит обзор литературы, поиск которой проводился с использованием пар ключевых слов «КЖ – онкология», «КЖ – рак», «КЖ – опросники – онкология», «PRO (patient-reported outcome – исходы, сообщаемые пациентами) – онкология», «QALY (quality-adjusted life-year – год жизни с поправкой на качество) – онкология» для статей, опубликованных с 2017 по 2022 г. на русском и английском языках. Далее статьи были идентифицированы вручную через списки ссылок статей. PRO в настоящее время считаются общепринятым стандартом для сбора данных о субъективном восприятии онкологическими больными собственного состояния здоровья. Существует большое количество анкет для оценки КЖ, но предпочтение отдается FACT-G (Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy – General – Функциональная оценка терапии рака – общая) и QLQ-C30 (Quality of Life of Cancer Patients – опросник КЖ EORTC (European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer – Европейской организации по исследованию и лечению рака). Сочетание усовершенствованных технологий позволяет собирать более надёжные данные PRO. Необходима разработка единых подходов для применения результатов PRO в крупных клинических исследованиях.

oncologyquality of lifequestionnairesонкологиякачество жизниопросникиBernatskii AS, Vagaitseva MV, Demin EV, et al. Onco-psychology. The manual for. Oncologists and clinical psychologist. St. Petersburg. 2017. (In Russ).Бернацкий А.С., Вагайцева М.В., Деми Е. В., и др. (2017). Онкопсихология. Руководство для врачей-онкологов и медицинских психологов. Санкт-Петербург, 2017.Spigel DR, McCleod M, Jotte RM, et al. Safety, efficacy, and patient-reported health-related quality of life and symptom burden with nivolumab in patients with advanced non–small cell lung cancer, including patients aged 70 years or older or with poor performance status (CheckMate 153). Journal of Thoracic Oncology. 2019;14(9):1628–1639. doi: 10.1016/j.jtho.2019.05.010Spigel D.R., McCleod M., Jotte R.M., et al. Safety, efficacy, and patient-reported health-related quality of life and symptom burden with nivolumab in patients with advanced non–small cell lung cancer, including patients aged 70 years or older or with poor performance status (CheckMate 153) // J Thor Oncol. 2019. Vol. 14, N 9. P. 1628–1639. doi: 10.1016/j.jtho.2019.05.010Haraldstad K, Wahl A, Andenaes R, et al. A systematic review of quality of life research in medicine and health sciences. Qual Life Res. 2019;28(10):2641–2650. doi: 10.1007/s11136-019-02214-9.Haraldstad K., Wahl A., Andenaes R., et al. A systematic review of quality of life research in medicine and health sciences // Qual Life Res. 2019. Vol. 28, N 10. P. 2641–2650. doi: 10.1007/s11136-019-02214-9Coens C, Pe M, Dueck AC, et al. international standards for the analysis of quality-of-life and patient-reported outcome endpoints in cancer randomised controlled trials: recommendations of the SISAQOL Consortium. Lancet Oncol. 2020;21(2):e83-e96. doi: 10.1016/S1470-2045(19)30790-9Coens C., Pe M., Dueck A.C., et al. International standards for the analysis of quality-of-life and patient-reported outcome endpoints in cancer randomised controlled trials: recommendations of the SISAQOL Consortium // Lancet Oncol. 2020. Vol. 21, N 2. P. e83-e96. doi: 10.1016/S1470-2045(19)30790-9Bottomley A, Reijneveld JC, Koller M, et al Current state of quality of life and patient-reported outcomes research. Eur J Cancer. 2019;121:55–63. doi: 10.1016/j.ejca.2019.08.016Bottomley A., Reijneveld J.C., Koller M., et al. Current state of quality of life and patient-reported outcomes research // Eur J Cancer. 2019. Vol. 121. P. 55–63. doi: 10.1016/j.ejca.2019.08.016Kim J, Singh H, Ayalew K, et al. Use of PRO measures to inform tolerability in oncology trials: implications for clinical review, IND safety reporting, and clinical site inspections. Clin Cancer Res. 2018;24(8):1780–1784. doi: 10.1158/1078-0432.CCR-17-2555Kim J., Singh H., Ayalew K., et al. Use of PRO measures to inform tolerability in oncology trials: implications for clinical review, IND safety reporting, and clinical site inspections // Clin Cancer Res. 2018. Vol. 24, N 8. P. 1780–1784. doi: 10.1158/1078-0432.CCR-17-2555Basch E. High compliance rates with patient-reported outcomes in oncology trials submitted to the US Food and Drug Administration. JNCI: J Natl Cancer Inst. 2019;111(5):437–439. doi: 10.1093/jnci/djy183Basch E. High compliance rates with patient-reported outcomes in oncology trials submitted to the US Food and Drug Administration // JNCI: J Natl Cancer Inst. 2019. Vol. 111, N 5. P. 437–439. doi: 10.1093/jnci/djy183Lobanov YuF, Skudarnov EV, Strozenko LA, et al. Kachestvo zhizni kak problema v zdravookhranenii: sovremennye tendentsii. Mezhdunarodnyy zhurnal prikladnykh i fundamental’nykh issledovaniy. 2018;(5–1):235–239. (In Russ).Лобанов Ю.Ф., Скударнов Е.В., Строзенко Л.А., и др. Качество жизни как проблема в здравоохранении: современные тенденции // Международный журнал прикладных и фундаментальных исследований. 2018. № 5–1. С. 235–239. https://applied-research.ru/ru/article/view?id=12250Ionova TI, Nikitina TP, Novik AA, Snegovoy AV. Prakticheskie rekomendatsii po otsenke kachestva zhizni u onkologicheskikh bol’nykh. Zlokachestvennye opukholi. 2017;7(3):586–591. (In Russ).doi: 10.18027/2224-5057-20l7-7-3s2-586-59lИонова Т.И., Никитина Т.П., Новик А.А. Снеговой А.В. Практические рекомендации по оценке качества жизни у онкологических больных // Злокачественные опухоли. 2017. Т. 7, № 3. С. 586–591. doi: 10.18027/2224-5057-20l7-7-3s2-586-59lStrelkova SD, Murzina GZ, Popova NM, Starovoytov SO. Otsenka kachestva zhizni patsientov so zlokachestvennymi novoobrazovaniyami. Modern Science. 2020;(10–11):272–277. (In Russ).Стрелкова С.Д., Мурзина Г.З., Попова Н.М., Старовойтов С.О. Оценка качества жизни пациентов со злокачественными новообразованиями // Modern Science. 2020. № 10–11. С. 272–277.l’rikh EA, Tambieva ZA, Urmancheeva AF, Kutusheva GF. Kachestvo zhizni onkoginekologicheskikh bol’nykh: kolichestvennye metodiki opredeleniya. Akusherstvo i Ginekologiya Sankt-Peterburga. 2020;(1–2):30–34. (In Russ).Ульрих Е.А., Тамбиева З.А., Урманчеева А.Ф., Кутушева Г.Ф. Качество жизни онкогинекологических больных: количественные методики определения // Акушерство и Гинекология Санкт-Петербурга. 2020. № 1–2. С. 30–34.Luckett T, King MT, Butow PN, et al Choosing between the EORTC QLQ-C30 and FACT-G for measuring health-related quality of life in cancer clinical research: issues, evidence and recommendations. Ann Oncol. 2011;22(10):2179–2190. doi: 10.1093/annonc/mdq721Luckett T., King M.T., Butow P.N., et al. Choosing between the EORTC QLQ-C30 and FACT-G for measuring health-related quality of life in cancer clinical research: issues, evidence and recommendations // Ann Oncol. 2011. Vol. 22, N 10. P. 2179–2190. doi: 10.1093/annonc/mdq721Snyder CF, Dy SM, Hendricks DE, et al Asking the right questions: investigating needs assessments and health-related quality-of-life questionnaires for use in oncology clinical practice. Support Care Cancer. 2007;15:1075–1085. doi: 10.1007/s00520-007-0223-1Snyder C.F., Dy S.M., Hendricks D.E., et al. Asking the right questions: investigating needs assessments and health-related quality-of-life questionnaires for use in oncology clinical practice // Support Care Cancer. 2007. Vol. 15. P. 1075–1085. doi: 10.1007/s00520-007-0223-1Keller SD, Bayliss MS, Ware JE, et al. Comparison of responses to SF-36 Health Survey questions with one-week and four-week recall periods. Health Serv Res. 1997;32(3):367. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/9240286/Keller S.D., Bayliss M.S., Ware J.E., et al. Comparison of responses to SF-36 Health Survey questions with one-week and four-week recall periods // Health Serv Res. 1997. Vol. 32, N 3. P. 367. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/9240286/Campolina AG, Lopez RVM, Nardi EP, Ferraz MB. Quality of life in a sample of Brazilian adults using the generic SF-12 questionnaire. Rev Assoc Méd Bras. 2018;64(3):234–242. doi: 10.1590/1806-9282.64.03.234Campolina A.G., Lopez R.V.M., Nardi E.P., Ferraz M.B. Quality of life in a sample of Brazilian adults using the generic SF-12 questionnaire // Rev Assoc Méd Bras. 2018. Vol. 64, N 3. P. 234–242. doi: 10.1590/1806-9282.64.03.234Van Leeuwen M, Husson O, Alberti P, et al. Understanding the quality of life (QOL) issues in survivors of cancer: towards the development of an EORTC QOL cancer survivorship questionnaire. Health Qual Life Outcomes. 2018;16(1):1–15. doi: 10.1186/s12955-018-0920-0Van Leeuwen M., Husson O., Alberti P., et al. Understanding the quality of life (QOL) issues in survivors of cancer: towards the development of an EORTC QOL cancer survivorship questionnaire // Health Qual Life Outcomes. 2018. Vol. 16, N 1. P. 1–15. doi: 10.1186/s12955-018-0920-0Bottomley A, Reijneveld JC, Koller M, et al. Current state of quality of life and patient-reported outcomes research. Eur J Cancer. 2019;(121):55–63. doi: 10.1016/j.ejca.2019.08.016Bottomley A., Reijneveld J.C., Koller M., et al. Current state of quality of life and patient-reported outcomes research // Eur J Cancer. 2019. Vol. 121. P. 55–63. doi: 10.1016/j.ejca.2019.08.016Raymakers AJN, Regier DA, Peacock SJ. Health-related quality of life in oncology drug reimbursement submissions in Canada: A review of submissions to the pan-Canadian Oncology Drug Review. Cancer. 2020;126(1):148–155. doi: 10.1002/cncr.32455Raymakers A.J.N., Regier D.A., Peacock S.J. Health-related quality of life in oncology drug reimbursement submissions in Canada: A review of submissions to the pan-Canadian Oncology Drug Review // Cancer. 2020. Vol. 126, N 1. P. 148–155. doi: 10.1002/cncr.32455Van Hout B, Janssen MF, Feng YS, et al. Interim scoring for the EQ-5D-5L: mapping the EQ-5D-5L to EQ-5D-3L value sets. Value Health. 2012;15(5):708–715. doi: 10.1016/j.jval.2012.02.008Van Hout B., Janssen M.F., Feng Y.S., et al. Interim scoring for the EQ-5D-5L: mapping the EQ-5D-5L to EQ-5D-3L value sets // Value Health. 2012. Vol. 15, N 5. P. 708–715. doi: 10.1016/j.jval.2012.02.008Pequeno NPF, Cabral NLA, Marchiona DM, et al. Quality of life assessment instruments for adults: a systematic review of population-based studies. Health Qual Life Outcomes. 2020;18(1):1–13. doi: 10.1186/s12955-020-01347-7Pequeno N.P.F., Cabral N.L.A., Marchiona D.M., et al. Quality of life assessment instruments for adults: a systematic review of population-based studies // Health Qual Life Outcomes. 2020. Vol. 18, N 1. P. 1–13. doi: 10.1186/s12955-020-01347-7Hauth F, Bizu V, App R, et al. electronic patient-reported outcome measures in radiation oncology: Initial experience after workflow implementation. JMIR Mhealth Uhealth. 2019;7(7):e12345. doi: 10.2196/12345Hauth F., Bizu V., App R., et al. electronic patient-reported outcome measures in radiation oncology: Initial experience after workflow implementation // JMIR Mhealth Uhealth. 2019. Vol. 7, N 7. P. e12345. doi: 10.2196/12345Lundy JJ, Coon CD, Fu AC, Pawar V. Collection of post-treatment PRO data in oncology clinical trials. Ther Innov Regul Sci. 2021;55(1):111–117. doi: 10.1007/s43441-020-00195-3Lundy J.J., Coon C.D., Fu A.C., Pawar V. Collection of post-treatment PRO data in oncology clinical trials // Ther Innov Regul Sci. 2021. Vol. 55, N 1. P. 111–117. doi: 10.1007/s43441-020-00195-3Wintner LM, Sztankay M, Riedl D, et al. How to implement routine electronic patient-reported outcome monitoring in oncology rehabilitation. Int J Clin Pract. 2021;75(4):e13694. doi: 10.1111/ijcp.13694Wintner L.M., Sztankay M., Riedl D., et al. How to implement routine electronic patient-reported outcome monitoring in oncology rehabilitation // Int J Clin Pract. 2021. Vol. 75, N 4. P. e13694. doi: 10.1111/ijcp.13694Warsame R, D’Souza A. Patient reported outcomes have arrived: a practical overview for clinicians in using patient reported outcomes in oncology. Mayo Clin Proc. 2019;94(11):2291–2301. doi: 10.1016/j.mayocp.2019.04.005Warsame R., D’Souza A. Patient reported outcomes have arrived: a practical overview for clinicians in using patient reported outcomes in oncology // Mayo Clin Proc. 2019. Vol. 94, N 11. P. 2291–2301. doi: 10.1016/j.mayocp.2019.04.005