Skip to main content

Table 1 A list of reviews on measurement issue and quality of life in breast cancer patients (2008–2018)

From: Health-related quality of life in breast cancer patients: review of reviews from 2008 to 2018

Authors [References] Year Main focus Description/analysis No. of databases No. of included studies Performed QA Risk of bias assessment Result(s)
Chen et al. [10] 2010 Patient-reported outcome measures for oncologic breast surgery Systematic review 8 NA No No Reliable and valid instruments exist, but even the best instruments do not address all important surgery‐specific and psychometric issues
Winters et al. [11] 2010 Treatment recommendations in breast reconstruction based on patient-reported outcome measures and HRQOL Systematic review 4 34 Yes No Sound scientific methodology in HRQOL is undermined by poorly designed and underpowered studies
There is a pressing need for further longitudinal studies in breast reconstruction incorporating sensitive and condition-specific patient-report outcome measures; provide adequate sample sizes, and respect established guidelines for rigorous HRQOL methodology
Lemieux et al. [12] 2011 QOL measurement in RCTs An updated systematic review PubMed 190 No No Reporting of QOL methodology should improve
Reed et al. [13] 2012 QOL assessments in advanced breast cancer Review PubMed 51 No No There should be more consensuses on which QOL instruments are used
Chopra and Kamal [14] 2012 QOL instruments in long-term BCS Systematic review 5 19 No No The use of validated instruments will not only provide valid data but also help improve the quality of care in long-term BCS
Adamowicz et al. [15] 2012 Assessment of HRQOL parameters as end points in phase III trials in advanced BC Review NA 34 No No HRQOL evaluation in clinical trials has the potential to predict patient prognosis and serves as a useful tool to assess patients’ experience during cancer therapy
Pusic et al. [16] 2013 Patient-reported outcome instruments and outcomes in breast cancer patients with lymphedema Systematic review NA 39 Yes No The Upper Limb Lymphedema 27 (ULL-27) was found to have strong psychometric properties. Future studies should strive to use high-quality condition- specific PRO instruments, follow existing guidelines for HRQOL measurement
Niu HY et al. [17] 2014 Validity, reliability and responsiveness of breast cancer-specific HRQL instruments Review 3 4 Yes No The EORTC QLQ-BR23, FACT-B, FACT-ES, and HFRDIS had fairly good psychometric properties to assess HRQOL
Nguyen et al. [18] 2015 Effectiveness of EORTC QLQ-BR23 and FACT-B Review 3 NA No No Both questionnaires were effective in assessing QOL. Decision-making between the questionnaires depends on the study’s purpose and design
Oliveira et al. [19] 2015 The procedures of translation, cross-cultural adaptation, and measurement properties of breast cancer-specific QOL questionnaires Systematic review 4 24 Yes No Caution should be exercised when using breast cancer-specific QOL questionnaires that have been translated, adapted, and tested
Maratia et al. [20] 2016 Evaluation of available specific and generic breast cancer HRQOL instruments Systematic review 2 32 Yes No The EORTC BR-23, IBCSG, SF-36, and WHO-QOL BREF had good performance, depending on the purpose of the study
Ghislain et al. [21] 2016 HRQOL in locally advanced and metastatic breast cancer: reporting of methodological and clinical issues in RCTs Systematic review PubMed 49 Yes No The absence of the HRQOL research hypotheses and the overemphasis on statistical rather than clinical significance was the main problem
Turner-Bowker et al. [22] 2016 Patient-reported outcomes in advanced breast cancer clinical trials Systematic review 3 25 No No Patient-reported outcomes may be used to provide a more comprehensive perspective of the benefits and risks from treatment
Krohe et a l [23] 2016 PRO in metastatic breast cancer: a review of industry-sponsored clinical trials Review 38 No No Stakeholders turn more attention to the patient perspective; one would expect PROs to increase as complementary measures to traditional endpoints and become an even more critical part of treatment evaluation
Pe et al. [24] 2018 Patient-reported outcome data in randomized controlled trials of locally advanced and metastatic breast cancer Review PubMed 66 No No A need to improve standards in the analysis, interpretation, and reporting of Patient-reported outcome and quality of life data in cancer RCTs
Liu et al. [25] 2018 BREAST-Q measurement of the patient perspective in oncoplastic breast surgery Systematic review 4 54 Yes No BREAST-Q can effectively measure patient's satisfaction and HRQOL in relation to different type of breast oncoplastic surgeries. BREAST-Q captured meaningful and reliable information from the patients' perspective and may be useful for clinical decision-making
Tevis et al. [26] 2018 Patient-reported outcomes for breast cancer Review Not specified 123 No No The implementation of PROs can be complex and challenging and care must be taken to minimize the potential for survey fatigue by patients and the potential financial burden for implementation, maintenance, and analyses of collected data
  1. QA quality appraisal, NA not available, QOL quality of life, HRQO health-related quality of life, PRO patient-reported outcomes, RCTs randomized clinical trials, EORTC QLQ-C30 the European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Questionnaire-Core, FACT-B The Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-Breast quality-of-life, EORTC QLQ-BR23 the European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer quality of life core breast cancer, HFRDIS Hot Flash Related Daily Interference Scale, IBCSG the International Breast Cancer Study Group, SF-36 The 36-Item Short Form Health Survey, WHO-QOL BREF World Health Organization Quality of Life Instruments, FACT-ES Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-Endocrine Subscale, BREAST-Q patient-reported outcome measure for breast surgery