Clinical Relevance of Routine Monitoring of Patient-reported Outcomes Versus Clinician-reported Outcomes in Oncology

Frederic Fiteni, Alice Cuenant, Mireille Favier, Christelle Cousin,Nadine Houede

IN VIVO(2019)

引用 6|浏览5
暂无评分
摘要
The National Cancer Institute Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events classification is the standard classification used by the physicians in oncology for reporting adverse events. This classification has evolved over the last years according to the emergence of new therapies. Reporting symptoms, quality of life (QoL) and toxicities via patient-reported outcomes (PROs) in clinical practice is not yet a standard of care, nevertheless many studies have been conducted recently to assess feasibility and impact of routine monitoring of PROs, which should enable for better management of toxicities and earlier detection of disease progression in a more patient-centered health care delivery system. The aim of this article was to discuss the advantages and limitations of both approaches, clinicians-reported outcomes and PROs. Growing evidence supports that the routine collection of PROs leads to improvement of QoL and overall survival of cancer patients.
更多
查看译文
关键词
Patient-reported outcomes,clinicians-reported outcomes,quality of life,oncology,electronic patient-reported outcomes,review
AI 理解论文
溯源树
样例
生成溯源树,研究论文发展脉络
Chat Paper
正在生成论文摘要