Patient-reported outcomes in randomized clinical trials of systemic therapy for advanced soft tissue sarcomas in adults: A systematic review

• Published in: Critical reviews in oncology/hematology 2024-05, Vol.197, p.104345-104345, Article 104345
• Main Authors: Roets, Evelyne, van der Graaf, Winette, van Riet, Bauke H.G., Haas, Rick L., Younger, Eugenie, Sparano, Francesco, Wilson, Roger, van der Mierden, Stevie, Steeghs, Neeltje, Efficace, Fabio, Husson, Olga
• Format: Article
• Language: English
• Subjects: Health-related quality of Life (HRQoL); Patient-reported outcomes (PROs); Randomized clinical trial (RCT); Soft tissue sarcoma (STS); Systemic therapy
• ISSN: 1040-8428; 1879-0461
• DOI: 10.1016/j.critrevonc.2024.104345

This systematic review evaluates reporting of patient-reported outcomes (PROs) within randomized clinical trials (RCTs) for advanced soft tissue sarcoma (STS) patients. A systematic literature search from January 2000 – August 2022 was conducted for phase II/III RCTs evaluating systemic treatments in adult patients with advanced STS. Quality of PRO reporting was assessed using the CONSORT PRO extension. Out of 7294 abstracts, 59 articles were included; comprising 43 RCTs. Only 15 RCTs (35%) included PROs, none as primary endpoints. Only 10 of these RCTs reported PROs, either in the primary (6/10) or secondary publication (1/10) or in both (3/10), with a median time interval of 23 months. The median CONSORT PRO adherence score was 5.5/14, with higher scores in publications focusing exclusively on PROs. These results highlight the need for improved and more consistent PRO reporting to inform patient care in the setting of advanced STS. [Display omitted] •Most randomized clinical trials in patients with advanced STS did not include PROs.•Despite guidelines for reporting PROs the quality of PRO reporting is still poor.•PRO data are often subject to delay in publication.•Improved PRO reporting is needed for guiding patient care in advanced STS.