Validation and real-world assessment of the Functional Assessment of Anorexia-Cachexia Therapy (FAACT) scale in patients with advanced non-small cell lung cancer and the cancer anorexia-cachexia syndrome (CACS)
Validation and real-world assessment of the Functional Assessment of Anorexia-Cachexia Therapy (FAACT) scale in patients with advanced non-small cell lung cancer and the cancer anorexia-cachexia syndrome (CACS)
复制标题
DOI：
10.1007/s00520-015-2606-z
复制
发表时间：
2015-08-01
影响因子：
3.1
通讯作者：
Abernethy, Amy P.
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
LeBlanc, Thomas W.;Samsa, Greg P.;Abernethy, Amy P.
癌症恶病质综合征（CACS）患者有显著的症状负担，生活质量（QoL）受损，生存期缩短。因此，测量与CACS相关的生活质量损害在临床实践和研究中都很重要。为了进一步验证厌食-恶病质治疗功能评估（FAACT）量表在晚期肺癌人群中的有效性，我们使用标准统计方法，在晚期非小细胞肺癌（aNSCLC）患者数据集中测试了FAACT及其厌食-恶病质子量表（ACS）的性能。然后，我们比较了常用的生活质量指标的性能分层CACS状态和患者自我报告的食欲和体重loss.The FAACT和ACS证明内部效度与可接受的范围内公布的其他生活质量量表（克朗巴赫α = 0.9和0.79，分别）。相关系数表明FAACT和ACS之间的预期方向和尺度，测量相关的结构中度相关。在有和无CACS的患者中，ACS比其他QoL工具对变化更敏感（平均评分33.1 vs. 37.2，p = 0.011，ES = 0.58）。在aNSCLC患者中，FAACT及其ACS与其他工具相比表现良好，进一步支持其在临床研究中的有效性和价值。FAACT和ACS评分与CACS的典型标志症状和其他生活质量变化相关，进一步支持其作为CACS患者临床试验中的生活质量终点。
Patients with cancer anorexia-cachexia syndrome (CACS) suffer a significant symptom burden, impaired quality of life (QoL), and shorter survival. Measurement of QoL impairments related to CACS is thereby important both in clinical practice and in research. We aimed to further validate the Functional Assessment of Anorexia-Cachexia Therapy (FAACT) scale in an advanced lung cancer population.We tested the performance of the FAACT and its anorexia-cachexia subscale (ACS) within a dataset of patients with advanced non-small cell lung cancer (aNSCLC), using standard statistical methods. We then compared the performance of commonly used QoL measures stratified by CACS status and by patient self-report of appetite and weight loss.The FAACT and its ACS demonstrate internal validity consistent with acceptable published ranges for other QoL scales (Cronbach alpha = 0.9 and 0.79, respectively). Correlation coefficients demonstrate moderate correlations in the expected directions between FAACT and ACS and scales that measure related constructs. Comparing patients with and without CACS, the ACS is more sensitive to change than other QoL instruments (mean score 33.1 vs. 37.2, p = 0.011, ES = 0.58).In patients with aNSCLC, the FAACT and its ACS performed well compared with other instruments, further supporting their validity and value in clinical research. FAACT and ACS scores covaried with symptoms and other QoL changes that are typical hallmarks of CACS, lending further support to their use as QoL endpoints in clinical trials among patients with CACS.