Abstract
Purpose
To investigate the effect of systemic therapy on health-related quality of life (HRQoL) in patients with advanced esophagogastric cancer in daily clinical practice. This study assessed the HRQoL of patients with esophagogastric cancer during first-line systemic therapy, at disease progression, and after progression in a real-world context.
Methods
Patients with advanced esophagogastric cancer (2014–2021) receiving first-line systemic therapy registered in the Prospective Observational Cohort Study of Oesophageal-gastric cancer (POCOP) were included (n = 335). HRQoL was measured with the EORTC QLQ-C30 and QLQ-OG25. Outcomes of mixed-effects models were presented as adjusted mean changes.
Results
Results of the mixed-effect models showed the largest significant improvements during systemic therapy for odynophagia (− 18.9, p < 0.001), anxiety (− 18.7, p < 0.001), and dysphagia (− 13.8, p < 0.001) compared to baseline. After progression, global health status (− 6.3, p = 0.002) and cognitive (− 6.2, p = 0.001) and social functioning (− 9.7, p < 0.001) significantly worsened. At and after progression, physical (− 9.0, p < 0.001 and − 8.8, p < 0.001) and role functioning (− 15.2, p = 0.003 and − 14.7, p < 0.001) worsened, respectively. Trouble with taste worsened during systemic therapy (11.5, p < 0.001), at progression (12.0, p = 0.004), and after progression (15.3, p < 0.001).
Conclusion
In general, HRQoL outcomes in patients with advanced esophagogastric cancer improved during first-line therapy. Deterioration in outcomes was mainly observed at and after progression.
Implications for cancer survivors
Identification of HRQoL aspects is important in shared decision-making and to inform patients on the impact of systemic therapy on their HRQoL.
Similar content being viewed by others
Avoid common mistakes on your manuscript.
Introduction
Health-related quality of life (HRQoL) is an important outcome for patients with esophagogastric cancer, especially in patients with advanced disease whose prognosis is poor [1, 2]. Up to 40% of patients with advanced esophagogastric cancer receive systemic therapy and survival of these patients in population-based settings is approximately 8 months [3,4,5]. The intention of palliative systemic therapy is to extend survival, while maintaining or improving quality of life [6, 7].
Available data on HRQoL of patients with esophagogastric cancer mainly originate from the curative setting and from randomized controlled trials in the palliative setting [8,9,10,11,12]. A systematic review of phase II/III randomized clinical trials in esophagogastric cancer showed that in 28 out of the 34 palliative systemic treatment arms, HRQoL remained stable during treatment [7]. However, it is unknown if the stable status changes at progression. A previous study of pooled data from two phase III trials in esophagogastric cancer investigated HRQoL during second-line treatment according to the best overall response and reported that in patients with progressive disease mean scores of all EORTC QLQ-C30 scales, with the exception of diarrhea, worsened after 6 weeks compared to baseline [8].
Participation of patients in randomized clinical trials is limited (< 5%) due to strict inclusion criteria [13]. Additionally, patients in clinical trials usually have a better functional status and less comorbidities compared to all patients in daily practice, which could lead to inferior outcomes in a real-world context [14, 15]. Thus, the impact of systemic therapy on HRQoL could differ for patients in daily practice compared to patients in clinical trials. Therefore, the aim of this study was to assess HRQoL longitudinally in a real-world cohort of patients with advanced esophagogastric cancer during first-line treatment, at disease progression, and after progression.
Methods
Study design and data source
Patients with unresectable (cT4b), synchronous or metachronous metastatic esophageal (C15.0–C15.9), gastroesophageal junction/cardia (C16.0), or gastric cancer (C16.1–C16.9) diagnosed between 2014 and 2021 registered in the Netherlands Cancer Registry (NCR) and in the Prospective Observational Cohort Study of Oesophageal-gastric cancer Patients (POCOP) were selected (Supplementary Fig. 1) [16]. For the purpose of this study, only patients who initiated first-line systemic therapy were included.
Clinical data was obtained from the NCR. This registry serves the total Dutch population and is based on notification by the national automated pathology archive. For all patients with unresectable advanced or synchronous metastatic disease diagnosed until 2017 and metachronous metastatic disease until 2016, follow-up information, e.g., duration and failure of first-line, was registered in the second half of 2019, except in two hospitals due to logistic constraints. For patients diagnosed after 2017, information on duration and failure of first-line was registered at initial registration if available (i.e., registration is approximately 1 year after primary diagnosis). Information on vital status was available through the linkage of the NCR with the Dutch Personal Records Database and updated until February 1, 2022.
Patient-reported outcomes measures (PROMs) were available through linkage with POCOP. POCOP is a prospective cohort that contains PROMs of patients with esophageal or gastric cancer [16]. This multi-center cohort study started inclusion in December 2015 and currently approximately 3700 patients from 62 centers are included. Patients filled in the PROMs on paper or electronically (as per patient’s choice) at inclusion and 3, 6, 9, 12, 18, 24, and 36 months thereafter. In general inclusion of patients occurs at primary diagnosis, but inclusion may occur during a follow-up visit.
Patients were included in this study if they completed at least one questionnaire in one of the following time frames: baseline (prior to start of first-line systemic therapy), during first-line (from start first-line systemic therapy until 3 weeks after end of first-line therapy), at progression (from 4 weeks prior to progression until 4 weeks after progression of disease or until start of second-line therapy), and after progression (from 4 weeks after progression or from start of second-line therapy until 6 months after progression) (Supplementary Fig. 2). If the “at progression” interval overlaps with the “during first-line” interval, available questionnaires were included in the “at progression” interval. If the second-line therapy started within 4 weeks after progression (e.g., “at progression”), the available questionnaire was included in the “after progression” interval. Subgroup analyses were performed on patients who did not receive radiotherapy for symptom control or placement of a stent and for patients who received second-line systemic therapy. For the subgroup analyses of patients who received second-line therapy instead of “after progression,” “during second-line” was used (from the start of second-line until the end of second-line therapy or 4 weeks prior to progression on second-line therapy).
Health-related quality of life
The validated cancer-specific European Organisation of Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) Quality of Life Questionnaire (QLQ)-C30 and tumor-specific esophageal questionnaire (QLQ-OG25) were used in this study [17, 18]. The QLQ-C30 includes 5 functioning scales, 3 symptom scales, 6 single items, and a global health status item [17]. The QLQ-OG25 includes 6 symptom scales and 10 single items [18]. Each item is scored on a 4-point Likert scale, except for global health status which is scored on a 7-point Likert scale. Scores of the QLQ-C30 and QLQ-OG25 were linearly transformed to a score between 0 and 100. Missing data were managed according to the EORTC scoring manual. Higher global health status, functioning, and body image scores indicate a better HRQoL, whereas higher symptom scores indicate more severe symptoms.
Statistical analysis
Outcomes of EORTC QLQ-C30 and QLQ-OG25 were presented as mean scores (standard deviation [SD]). HRQoL scores were adjusted for clinical characteristics using linear mixed-effects models based on availability in the NCR (sex, performance status, number of comorbidities, number of metastatic sites, radiotherapy for symptom control, or placement of a stent). Outcomes were considered improved or worsened if statistically clinically relevant changes were observed. Interpretation of clinically relevant mean changes (small, medium, or large) over time for the QLQ-C30 subscales was performed based on Cocks et al. [19]. Specific guidelines for interpretation of the QLQ-OG25 subscales were unavailable and clinically relevant changes were interpreted according to general guidelines: small (5 to 10 points), medium (10 to 20 points), and large (> 20 points) [20]. p values of < 0.05 were considered statistically significant. All analyses were conducted using SAS® version 9.4 (SAS Institute, Cary, NC, USA).
Results
Patient characteristics
This study included 335 patients with unresectable or metastatic esophagogastric cancer who received first-line systemic therapy (Table 1). Besides first-line systemic therapy, 74 of 335 patients received radiotherapy for symptom relieve (22.1%) and 26 out of 335 patients received placement of a stent (7.8%). Two hundred thirty-nine out of 335 patients (71.3%) had first-line treatment failure due to disease progression. One hundred forty-four out of 335 patients (43.0%) received second-line therapy after first-line treatment failure due to disease progression.
Median overall survival for all patients since the start of first-line treatment was 10.3 months (Supplementary table 1). Among patients with first-line treatment failure due to progression, the median overall survival since the progression of the disease was 4.5 months. The median overall survival since the progression of the disease was 6.9 and 1.4 months for patients who received second-line treatment and who did not receive second-line treatment after progression, respectively.
A baseline questionnaire was available for 164 out of 335 patients (49.0%) and was filled in on average 3 weeks prior to the start of first-line therapy (SD 2.5 weeks). The numbers of questionnaires available were 200 (59.6%), 80 (23.8%), and 110 (32.8%) during first-line therapy, at disease progression, and after progression, respectively. The mean time since the start of first-line therapy to completion of the questionnaire was 7.9 (SD 7.4), 26.3 (SD 15.7), and 37.4 (SD 20.3) weeks for time frames during first-line therapy, at progression, and after progression, respectively.
Global quality of life and functioning scales
At baseline, mean global health status was 70.3 (unadjusted; Table 2, Fig. 1). Results of the mixed-effect model showed that the global health status remained stable during first-line therapy and at progression, but deteriorated after progression (mean change − 6.3, p = 0.002) compared to baseline (Table 3, Fig. 2A). Physical and role functioning remained stable during first-line therapy, but deteriorated at progression (physical: mean change − 9.0, p < 0.001; role: mean change − 8.8, p = 0.003) and after progression (physical: mean change − 15.2, p < 0.001; role: mean change − 15.2, p < 0.001) as compared to baseline. Cognitive (mean change − 6.2, p = 0.001) and social functioning (mean change − 9.7, p < 0.001) deteriorated after progression as compared to baseline. Emotional functioning improved during first-line therapy (mean change 8.3, p < 0.001).
Symptom scales
Mixed-effect models for EORTC QLQ-C30 outcomes showed that fatigue significantly worsened at all 3 time frames compared to baseline with a mean change of 7.3 (p < 0.001), 8.4 (p = 0.002), and 13.7 (p < 0.001) during first-line therapy, at progression, and after progression, respectively (Table 3, Fig. 2B). Pain improved during first-line therapy (mean change − 7.2, p < 0.001) compared to baseline. Diarrhea worsened during first-line therapy (mean change 6.3, p = 0.001) and after progression (mean change 10.9, p < 0.001). Dyspnea worsened after progression (mean change 11.9, p < 0.001). All other symptoms remained unchanged over time (Table 3).
Mixed-effect models showed that dysphagia, eating restrictions, odynophagia, anxiety, and weight loss improved during first-line therapy, at progression, and after progression compared to baseline (Table 3; Fig. 2C). During first-line therapy, pain and discomfort (mean change − 8.0, p < 0.001) and trouble with swallowing saliva (mean change − 5.9, p = 0.006) improved compared to baseline. Eating with others improved during first-line therapy (mean change − 11.1, p < 0.001) and after progression (mean change − 8.9, p = 0.003) compared to baseline. Trouble with taste worsened during first-line therapy (mean change 11.5, p < 0.001), at progression (mean change 12.0, p = 0.004), and after progression (mean change 15.3, p < 0.001) compared to baseline. Dry mouth (mean change 9.3, p = 0.006) and trouble talking (mean change 7.3, p = 0.004) worsened after progression compared to baseline. The other disease-specific symptoms remained unchanged over time. Comparison of HRQoL outcomes between time frames during first-line therapy, at progression, and after progression is available in Table 3.
Quality of life outcomes of patients not receiving radiotherapy for symptom control or stent placement
Mixed-effect models among patients who did not receive radiotherapy for symptom control or placement of a stent after diagnosis (n = 243) showed that during first-line therapy several disease-specific symptoms including dysphagia (mean change − 10.4, p < 0.001), odynophagia (mean change − 15.5, p < 0.001), and pain and discomfort (mean change: − 9.4, p = 0.002) improved compared to baseline (Supplementary table 2).
Quality of life outcomes of patients receiving second-line therapy
For patients who received second-line therapy after progression on first-line therapy (n = 144), results of mixed-effect models showed that during second-line therapy global health status, physical functioning, fatigue, dyspnea, financial difficulties, trouble with coughing, and trouble with talking worsened compared to the time frame at progression (Supplementary table 3). Eating with others and weight loss improved during second-line therapy compared to the time point at progression.
Discussion
Besides survival gain, the intent of systemic therapy is to maintain or improve HRQoL. In this real-world study in patients with unresectable or metastatic esophagogastric cancer receiving first-line systemic therapy, we observed that the majority of HRQoL outcomes were maintained or improved during first-line therapy and at progression, but generally deteriorated after progression, even if patients were treated with second-line systemic therapy.
Our findings in this real-world data cohort are in line with a previous meta-analysis of randomized clinical trials investigating HRQoL during first-line treatment [7]. This meta-analysis reported that global health status remained stable during first-line therapy. In addition, in the meta-analysis improvements of > 10 points were observed in emotional functioning, pain, abdominal pain, appetite loss, eating restrictions, and dysphagia. In our study, we also found an improvement in emotional functioning (8 points), pain (7 points), pain and discomfort (i.e., abdominal pain; 8 points), eating restrictions (10 points), and dysphagia (14 points) during first-line treatment.
In our study severe fatigue was already present at baseline and significantly worsened over time. Many factors (modifiable and non-modifiable) have been identified to affect cancer-related fatigue [21]. Particularly for patients with advanced cancer, earlier intervention (i.e., during systemic therapy) is needed and cognitive behavioral therapy or physical exercise programs during systemic therapy have shown to reduce the severity of cancer-related fatigue [22,23,24,25]. Despite existing guidelines for cancer-related fatigue among cancer survivors after treatment, the most common long-term effect among cancer patients remains cancer-related fatigue (68%) [26, 27]. Current care for cancer-related fatigue in clinical practice is possibly insufficient and health care professionals may address cancer-related fatigue more often during consultation and refer patients for interventions for cancer-related fatigue, such as cognitive behavioral therapy [25].
The treatment options for dysphagia include stent placement, short-course radiotherapy, or systemic therapy [28]. If life expectancy is > 3 months, radiotherapy is recommended for palliation of dysphagia [29,30,31]. In our study, among patients who did not receive radiotherapy or placement of a stent for symptom control, dysphagia, odynophagia, and pain and discomfort improved during first-line therapy, although the improvements were smaller compared to the total population. This may suggest that if immediate relief of tumor-specific symptoms is not needed, the effect of systemic therapy for symptom control could be awaited. Radiotherapy or stent placement could then be used as an intervention when needed later.
In contrast to the time frame during first-line therapy, during second-line therapy no improvements in symptoms were observed compared to the time point at progression, with the exception eating with others and worrying about weight loss which improved. Further deterioration in the quality of life was limited to a few functioning and symptom scales, implying that second-line therapy might be able to stabilize HRQoL.
The main strength of our study is the use of real-world data, which provides a representation of the HRQoL of patients in clinical practice. Furthermore, previous research into the representativeness of patients in POCOP as a reflection of the total esophagogastric cancer population in the Netherlands showed that patients receiving palliative systemic therapy participating in POCOP adequately reflect the total population of patients receiving palliative systemic therapy [32].
Our study also has several limitations. Our results could be biased as not all patients had completed questionnaires at all time periods and patients with poorer functional status or more severe side effects of systemic therapy could be more likely unable to fill in a questionnaire. Additionally, symptom burden differs between patients with esophageal and gastric cancer and for different treatment regimens, however due to limited sample size separate analyses were not performed. For patients diagnosed after 2017, follow-up was limited to approximately 1 year after diagnosis and for patients with long-term response or stable disease after first-line systemic therapy, information on disease progression was unavailable. In patients who did not receive second-line therapy, survival since disease progression was only 1.7 months and the number of patients who filled in a questionnaire after progression (i.e., from 4 weeks after date of progression) was too limited for analysis (n = 19).
In conclusion, our study showed that first-line systemic therapy results in the maintenance or improvements of HRQoL in patients with unresectable or metastatic esophagogastric cancer in daily practice. Our results also showed that in patients who did not receive radiotherapy or placement of a stent for symptom control, improvements in symptoms were still observed. In patients who received second-line therapy, the majority of HRQoL remained unchanged, and several outcomes deteriorated. This population-based data on HRQoL adds valuable real-world information to existing evidence from randomized controlled trials that can aid in informing patients, shared decision-making processes, and management of expectations.
Data availability
The data underlying this article is available at the Netherlands Comprehensive Cancer Organisation (IKNL) upon justified request.
References
Dalhammar K, Kristensson J, Falkenback D, Rasmussen BH, Malmstrom M (2022) Symptoms, problems and quality of life in patients newly diagnosed with oesophageal and gastric cancer - a comparative study of treatment strategy. BMC Cancer 22:434
Lagergren J, Smyth E, Cunningham D, Lagergren P (2017) Oesophageal cancer. Lancet 390:2383–2396
Dijksterhuis WPM, Verhoeven RHA, Slingerland M, Haj Mohammad N, de Vos-Geelen J, Beerepoot LV, van Voorthuizen T, Creemers GJ, van Oijen MGH, van Laarhoven HWM (2020) Heterogeneity of first-line palliative systemic treatment in synchronous metastatic esophagogastric cancer patients: a real-world evidence study. Int J Cancer 146:1889–1901
Pape M, Vissers PAJ, Bertwistle D, McDonald L, Slingerland M, Haj Mohammad N, Beerepoot LV, Ruurda JP, Nieuwenhuijzen GAP, Jeene PM, van Laarhoven HWM, Verhoeven RHA (2022) A population-based study in synchronous versus metachronous metastatic esophagogastric adenocarcinoma. Ther Adv Med Oncol 14:17588359221085556
Pape M, Vissers PAJ, de Vos-Geelen J, Hulshof M, Gisbertz SS, Jeene PM, van Laarhoven HWM, Verhoeven RHA (2022) Treatment patterns and survival in advanced unresectable esophageal squamous cell cancer: a population-based study. Cancer Sci 113:1038–1046
Ter Veer E, Haj Mohammad N, van Valkenhoef G, Ngai LL, Mali RMA, Anderegg MC, van Oijen MGH, van Laarhoven HWM (2016) The efficacy and safety of first-line chemotherapy in advanced esophagogastric cancer: a network meta-analysis. J Natl Cancer Inst 108:djw166
van Kleef JJ, Ter Veer E, van den Boorn HG, Schokker S, Ngai LL, Prins MJ, Mohammad NH, van de Poll-Franse LV, Zwinderman AH, van Oijen MGH, Sprangers MAG, van Laarhoven HWM (2020) Quality of life during palliative systemic therapy for esophagogastric cancer: systematic review and meta-analysis. J Natl Cancer Inst 112:12–29
Chau I, Fuchs CS, Ohtsu A, Barzi A, Liepa AM, Cui ZL, Hsu Y, Al-Batran SE (2019) Association of quality of life with disease characteristics and treatment outcomes in patients with advanced gastric cancer: exploratory analysis of RAINBOW and REGARD phase III trials. Eur J Cancer 107:115–123
Derogar M, Lagergren P (2012) Health-related quality of life among 5-year survivors of esophageal cancer surgery: a prospective population-based study. J Clin Oncol 30:413–418
Eyck BM, Klevebro F, van der Wilk BJ, Johar A, Wijnhoven BPL, van Lanschot JJB, Lagergren P, Markar SR, Lagarde SM, group Ls (2022) Lasting symptoms and long-term health-related quality of life after totally minimally invasive, hybrid and open Ivor Lewis esophagectomy. Eur J Surg Oncol 48:582–588
Jezerskyte E, van Berge Henegouwen MI, van Laarhoven HWM, van Kleef JJ, Eshuis WJ, Heisterkamp J, Hartgrink HH, Rosman C, van Hillegersberg R, Hulshof M, Sprangers MAG, Gisbertz SS, Dutch Upper GICG (2021) Postoperative complications and long-term quality of life after multimodality treatment for esophageal cancer: an analysis of the Prospective Observational Cohort Study of Esophageal-Gastric Cancer Patients (POCOP). Ann Surg Oncol 28:7259–7276
Klevebro F, Kauppila JH, Markar S, Johar A, Lagergren P (2021) Health-related quality of life following total minimally invasive, hybrid minimally invasive or open oesophagectomy: a population-based cohort study. Br J Surg 108:702–708
Donnelly CB, Wotherspoon AC, Morris M, Wilson RH, Chen JJ, Cairnduff V, Morgan E, Devlin A, Gavin AT (2017) A population-level investigation of cancer clinical trials participation in a UK region. Eur J Cancer Prev 26 Joining forces for better cancer registration in Europe: S229–S235
Sherman RE, Anderson SA, Dal Pan GJ, Gray GW, Gross T, Hunter NL, LaVange L, Marinac-Dabic D, Marks PW, Robb MA, Shuren J, Temple R, Woodcock J, Yue LQ, Califf RM (2016) Real-world evidence - what is it and what can it tell us? N Engl J Med 375:2293–2297
Templeton AJ, Booth CM, Tannock IF (2020) Informing patients about expected outcomes: the efficacy-effectiveness gap. J Clin Oncol 38:1651–1654
Coebergh van den Braak RRJ, van Rijssen LB, van Kleef JJ, Vink GR, Berbee M, van Berge Henegouwen MI, Bloemendal HJ, Bruno MJ, Burgmans MC, Busch ORC, Coene P, Coupe VMH, Dekker JWT, van Eijck CHJ, Elferink MAG, Erdkamp FLG, van Grevenstein WMU, de Groot JWB, van Grieken NCT, de Hingh I, Hulshof M, Ijzermans JNM, Kwakkenbos L, Lemmens V, Los M, Meijer GA, Molenaar IQ, Nieuwenhuijzen GAP, de Noo ME, van de Poll-Franse LV, Punt CJA, Rietbroek RC, Roeloffzen WWH, Rozema T, Ruurda JP, van Sandick JW, Schiphorst AHW, Schipper H, Siersema PD, Slingerland M, Sommeijer DW, Spaander MCW, Sprangers MAG, Stockmann H, Strijker M, van Tienhoven G, Timmermans LM, Tjin ATMLR, van der Velden AMT, Verhaar MJ, Verkooijen HM, Vles WJ, de Vos-Geelen J, Wilmink JW, Zimmerman DDE, van Oijen MGH, Koopman M, Besselink MGH, van Laarhoven HWM, Dutch Pancreatic Cancer Group DUGICG, group Pw (2018) Nationwide comprehensive gastro-intestinal cancer cohorts: the 3P initiative. Acta Oncol 57:195–202
Fayers P, Bottomley A, Group EQoL, Quality of Life U (2002) Quality of life research within the EORTC-the EORTC QLQ-C30. European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer. Eur J Cancer 38(Suppl 4):S125-133
Lagergren P, Fayers P, Conroy T, Stein HJ, Sezer O, Hardwick R, Hammerlid E, Bottomley A, Van Cutsem E, Blazeby JM, European Organisation for Research Treatment of Cancer G, Quality of Life G (2007) Clinical and psychometric validation of a questionnaire module, the EORTC QLQ-OG25, to assess health-related quality of life in patients with cancer of the oesophagus, the oesophago-gastric junction and the stomach. Eur J Cancer 43:2066–2073
Cocks K, King MT, Velikova G, de Castro G, Jr., Martyn St-James M, Fayers PM, Brown JM (2012) Evidence-based guidelines for interpreting change scores for the European Organisation for the Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Questionnaire Core 30. Eur J Cancer 48: 1713–1721
Osoba D, Rodrigues G, Myles J, Zee B, Pater J (1998) Interpreting the significance of changes in health-related quality-of-life scores. J Clin Oncol 16:139–144
DSilva F, Singh P, Javeth A (2022) Determinants of cancer-related fatigue among cancer patients: a systematic review. J Palliat Care 17:8258597221131133
Luo H, Galvao DA, Newton RU, Tang CI, Hart NH, Singh F, Dean A, Jasas K, Johansson M, Yusoff I, Spry N, Taaffe DR (2022) Evaluation of a clinic-based exercise program in patients with pancreatic cancer undergoing non-surgical treatment. Med Sci Sports Exerc 55:9–19
Machado P, Morgado M, Raposo J, Mendes M, Silva CG, Morais N (2022) Effectiveness of exercise training on cancer-related fatigue in colorectal cancer survivors: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. Support Care Cancer 30:5601–5613
Navigante A, Cresta Morgado P, Daud ML, Dos Santos Regis H, Kolberg M, Marazzi C, Lobbe V, Gonzalez AA, De Simone G (2022) Physical exercise and fatigue in advanced gastrointestinal cancer during chemotherapy. BMJ Support Palliat Care 13:218–227
Poort H, Peters M, van der Graaf WTA, Nieuwkerk PT, van de Wouw AJ, Nijhuis-van der Sanden MWG, Bleijenberg G, Verhagen C, Knoop H (2020) Cognitive behavioral therapy or graded exercise therapy compared with usual care for severe fatigue in patients with advanced cancer during treatment: a randomized controlled trial. Ann Oncol 31:115–122
Bower JE, Bak K, Berger A, Breitbart W, Escalante CP, Ganz PA, Schnipper HH, Lacchetti C, Ligibel JA, Lyman GH, Ogaily MS, Pirl WF, Jacobsen PB, American Society of Clinical O (2014) Screening, assessment, and management of fatigue in adult survivors of cancer: an American Society of Clinical Oncology clinical practice guideline adaptation. J Clin Oncol 32:1840–1850
Nederlandse Federaties van Kankerpatiënten organisaties (2017) Cijfers over late gevolgen van kanker. https://nfk.nl/media/1/Factsheet_NFK_Late-gevolgen-van-kanker_04.pdf. Accessed Januari 2023
van Rossum PSN, Mohammad NH, Vleggaar FP, van Hillegersberg R (2018) Treatment for unresectable or metastatic oesophageal cancer: current evidence and trends. Nat Rev Gastroenterol Hepatol 15:235–249
Jeene PM, Vermeulen BD, Rozema T, Braam PM, Lips I, Muller K, van Kampen D, Homs MYV, Oppedijk V, Berbee M, van Rossum PSN, El Sharouni S, Siersema PD, Hulshof M, Group PS (2020) Short-course external beam radiotherapy versus brachytherapy for palliation of dysphagia in esophageal cancer: a matched comparison of two prospective trials. J Thorac Oncol 15:1361–1368
Koggel LM, Lantinga MA, Siersema PD (2021) Palliation of malignant dysphagia: stent or radiotherapy? Ann Esophagus 4:41
van Rossum PSN, Jeene PM, Rozema T, Braam PM, Lips IM, Muller K, van Kampen D, Vermeulen BD, Homs MYV, Oppedijk V, Berbee M, Hulshof M, Siersema PD, El Sharouni SY (2021) Patient-reported outcomes after external beam radiotherapy versus brachytherapy for palliation of dysphagia in esophageal cancer: a matched comparison of two prospective trials. Radiother Oncol 155:73–79
Kuijper SC, Besseling J, Klausch T, Slingerland M, van der Zijden CJ, Kouwenhoven EA, Beerepoot LV, Haj Mohammad N, Klarenbeek B, Verhoeven RHA, van Laarhoven HWM. Real-world representativeness of patient reported outcome measures of patients with esophagogastric cancer [manuscript in preparation]
Acknowledgements
The authors thank the registration team of the Netherlands Comprehensive Cancer Organisation (IKNL) for the collection of data for the Netherlands Cancer Registry. Furthermore, the authors thank all participating patients for filling out the questionnaires and all hospitals that included patients for the POCOP study: Admiraal de Ruyter Ziekenhuis, Amphia ziekenhuis, Amsterdam Universitair Medische Centra, Antonius Sneek ziekenhuis, Albert Schweitzer ziekenhuis, Antonie van Leeuwenhoek ziekenhuis, Bernhoven ziekenhuis, BovenIJ ziekenhuis, Bravis ziekenhuis, Catherina Ziekenhuis Eindhoven, Helmond Elkerliek ziekenhuis, Erasmus Medisch Centrum, Elisabeth-TweeSteden Ziekenhuis, Flevoziekenhuis, Gelre ziekenhuizen, HagaZiekenhuis, Ikazia ziekenhuis, Isala ziekenhuis, Jeroen Bosch ziekenhuis, Leiden University Medical Center, Maasstad ziekenhuis, Martini ziekenhuis, Medisch Centrum Leeuwarden, Meander Medisch Centrum, Máxima Medisch Centrum, Maastricht Universitair Medisch Centrum Plus, Nij Smellinghe ziekenhuis, Noordwest Ziekenhuisgroep, R. de Graaf ziekenhuis, Radboudumc, Rijnstate ziekenhuis, Rode Kruis Ziekenhuis, St Jans Gasthuis Weert, Slingeland ziekenhuis, Spaarne ziekenhuis, St. Anna ziekenhuis, St. Antonius ziekenhuis, St. Jansdal ziekenhuis, Tjongerschans ziekenhuis, Universitair Medisch Centrum Utrecht, VieCuri Medisch Centrum, Weel-Bethesda ziekenhuis, Ziekenhuisgroep Twente, Zuyderland Medisch Centrum, and ZorgSaam Zorggroep Zeeuws-Vlaanderen.
Funding
This work was supported by Bristol Myers Squibb (CA209-77E). The funder has financed part of the data collection for the Netherlands Cancer Registry. The corresponding author had full access to all the data in the study.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Consortia
Contributions
Marieke Pape: conceptualization, data curation, formal analysis, and writing—original draft. Pauline A. J. Vissers: conceptualization, data curation, supervision, and writing—review and editing. Marije Slingerland: writing—review and editing. Nadia Haj Mohammad: writing—review and editing. Peter S. N. van Rossum: writing—review and editing. Rob. H. A. Verhoeven: conceptualization, supervision, and writing—review and editing. Hanneke H. W. Verhoeven: conceptualization, supervision, and writing—review and editing.
Corresponding author
Ethics declarations
Ethics approval and consent to participate
All patients provided written informed consent for participation in POCOP and linkage with the NCR. According to the Central Committee on Research involving Human Subjects, this type of study does not require approval from an ethics committee in The Netherlands. The study was approved by the Privacy Review Board of the NCR and the scientific committee of the Dutch Upper GI Cancer Group.
Competing interests
NHM reports personal fees (consultancy) from BMS, Eli Lilly, Astra Zeneca, Servier, and MSD. RV has served as a consultant for Daiichi Sankyo and reports a grant from BMS. HvL reports grants or advisory/speaker role from Astellas, BMS, Daiichy, Dragonfly, Lilly, Merck, Novartis, Nordic Pharma, and Servier; research funding or medical supply from Bayer, BMS, Celgene, Janssen, Incyte, Lilly, Merck, Nordic Pharma, Philips, Roche, and Servier; and has received unrestricted research funding (non-commercial) from Dutch Cancer Society, NWO/ZonMw, European Research Council, and MaagLeverDarm Stichting. MS served as a consultant for BMS and Eli Lilly. MP, PvR, and MH have no disclosures to declare.
Additional information
Publisher's note
Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Supplementary Information
Below is the link to the electronic supplementary material.
Rights and permissions
Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/.
About this article
Cite this article
Pape, M., Vissers, P.A.J., Slingerland, M. et al. Long-term health-related quality of life in patients with advanced esophagogastric cancer receiving first-line systemic therapy. Support Care Cancer 31, 520 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00520-023-07963-5
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00520-023-07963-5