The Functional Assessment of Chronic Illness Therapy (FACIT) Measurement System is a collection of health-related quality of life (HRQOL) questionnaires targeted to the management of chronic illness. The measurement system, under development since 1987, began with the creation of a generic CORE questionnaire called the F unctional A ssessment of C ancer T herapy-G eneral (FACT-G). The FACT-G (now in Version 4) is a 27-item compilation of general questions divided into four primary QOL domains: Physical Well-Being, Social/Family Well-Being, Emotional Well-Being, and Functional Well-Being. It is appropriate for use with patients with any form of cancer, and extensions of it have been used and validated in other chronic illness condition (e.g., HIV/AIDS; multiple sclerosis; Parkinson's disease; rheumatoid arthritis), and in the general population. The FACIT Measurement System now includes over 400 questions, some of which have been translated into more than 45 languages. Assessment of any one patient is tailored so that the most-relevant questions are asked and administration time for any one assessment is usually less than 15 minutes. This is accomplished both by the use of specific subscales for relevant domains of HRQOL, or computerized adaptive testing (CAT) of selected symptoms and functional areas. FACIT questionnaires can be administered by self-report (paper or computer) or interview (face-to-face or telephone). Available scoring, normative data and information on meaningful change now allow one to interpret results in the context of a growing literature base.

/pdf/the-functional-assessment-of-chronic-illness-therapy-facit-5fwfojuur8.pdf

The Functional Assessment of Chronic Illness Therapy (FACIT) Measurement System: properties, applications, and interpretation

Importance Whole brain radiotherapy (WBRT) significantly improves tumor control in the brain after stereotactic radiosurgery (SRS), yet because of its association with cognitive decline, its role in the treatment of patients with brain metastases remains controversial. Objective To determine whether there is less cognitive deterioration at 3 months after SRS alone vs SRS plus WBRT. Design, Setting, and Participants At 34 institutions in North America, patients with 1 to 3 brain metastases were randomized to receive SRS or SRS plus WBRT between February 2002 and December 2013. Interventions The WBRT dose schedule was 30 Gy in 12 fractions; the SRS dose was 18 to 22 Gy in the SRS plus WBRT group and 20 to 24 Gy for SRS alone. Main Outcomes and Measures The primary end point was cognitive deterioration (decline >1 SD from baseline on at least 1 cognitive test at 3 months) in participants who completed the baseline and 3-month assessments. Secondary end points included time to intracranial failure, quality of life, functional independence, long-term cognitive status, and overall survival. Results There were 213 randomized participants (SRS alone, n = 111; SRS plus WBRT, n = 102) with a mean age of 60.6 years (SD, 10.5 years); 103 (48%) were women. There was less cognitive deterioration at 3 months after SRS alone (40/63 patients [63.5%]) than when combined with WBRT (44/48 patients [91.7%]; difference, −28.2%; 90% CI, −41.9% to −14.4%; P P  = .002). Time to intracranial failure was significantly shorter for SRS alone compared with SRS plus WBRT (hazard ratio, 3.6; 95% CI, 2.2-5.9; P P  = .26). Median overall survival was 10.4 months for SRS alone and 7.4 months for SRS plus WBRT (hazard ratio, 1.02; 95% CI, 0.75-1.38; P  = .92). For long-term survivors, the incidence of cognitive deterioration was less after SRS alone at 3 months (5/11 [45.5%] vs 16/17 [94.1%]; difference, −48.7%; 95% CI, −87.6% to −9.7%; P  = .007) and at 12 months (6/10 [60%] vs 17/18 [94.4%]; difference, −34.4%; 95% CI, −74.4% to 5.5%; P  = .04). Conclusions and Relevance Among patients with 1 to 3 brain metastases, the use of SRS alone, compared with SRS combined with WBRT, resulted in less cognitive deterioration at 3 months. In the absence of a difference in overall survival, these findings suggest that for patients with 1 to 3 brain metastases amenable to radiosurgery, SRS alone may be a preferred strategy. Trial Registration clinicaltrials.gov Identifier:NCT00377156

/pdf/effect-of-radiosurgery-alone-vs-radiosurgery-with-whole-38gnp3hwp5.pdf

Effect of Radiosurgery Alone vs Radiosurgery With Whole Brain Radiation Therapy on Cognitive Function in Patients With 1 to 3 Brain Metastases: A Randomized Clinical Trial

BACKGROUND

The Edmonton Symptom Assessment Scale (ESAS) is a nine-item patient-rated symptom visual analogue scale developed for use in assessing the symptoms of patients receiving palliative care. The purpose of this study was to validate the ESAS in a different population of patients.



METHODS

In this prospective study, 240 patients with a diagnosis of cancer completed the ESAS, the Memorial Symptom Assessment Scale (MSAS), and the Functional Assessment Cancer Therapy (FACT) survey, and also had their Karnofsky performance status (KPS) assessed. An additional 42 patients participated in a test-retest study.



RESULTS

The ESAS “distress” score correlated most closely with physical symptom subscales in the FACT and the MSAS and with KPS. The ESAS individual item and summary scores showed good internal consistency and correlated appropriately with corresponding measures from the FACT and MSAS instruments. Individual items between the instruments correlated well. Pain ratings in the ESAS, MSAS, and FACT correlated best with the “worst-pain” item of the Brief Pain Inventory (BPI). Test-retest evaluation showed very good correlation at 2 days and a somewhat smaller but significant correlation at 1 week. A 30-mm visual analogue scale cutoff point did not uniformly distinguish severity of symptoms for different symptoms.



CONCLUSIONS

For this population, the ESAS was a valid instrument; test-retest validity was better at 2 days than at 1 week. The ESAS “distress” score tends to reflect physical well-being. The use of a 30-mm cutoff point on visual analogue scales to identify severe symptoms may not always apply to symptoms other than pain. Cancer 2000;88:2164–71. © 2000 American Cancer Society.

https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/pdf/10.1002/%28SICI%291097-0142%2820000501%2988%3A9%3C2164%3A%3AAID-CNCR24%3E3.0.CO%3B2-5

Validation of the Edmonton Symptom Assessment Scale.

Summary Background Whole brain radiotherapy (WBRT) is the standard of care to improve intracranial control following resection of brain metastasis. However, stereotactic radiosurgery (SRS) to the surgical cavity is widely used in an attempt to reduce cognitive toxicity, despite the absence of high-level comparative data substantiating efficacy in the postoperative setting. We aimed to establish the effect of SRS on survival and cognitive outcomes compared with WBRT in patients with resected brain metastasis. Methods In this randomised, controlled, phase 3 trial, adult patients (aged 18 years or older) from 48 institutions in the USA and Canada with one resected brain metastasis and a resection cavity less than 5·0 cm in maximal extent were randomly assigned (1:1) to either postoperative SRS (12–20 Gy single fraction with dose determined by surgical cavity volume) or WBRT (30 Gy in ten daily fractions or 37·5 Gy in 15 daily fractions of 2·5 Gy; fractionation schedule predetermined for all patients at treating centre). We randomised patients using a dynamic allocation strategy with stratification factors of age, duration of extracranial disease control, number of brain metastases, histology, maximal resection cavity diameter, and treatment centre. Patients and investigators were not masked to treatment allocation. The co-primary endpoints were cognitive-deterioration-free survival and overall survival, and analyses were done by intention to treat. We report the final analysis. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01372774. Findings Between Nov 10, 2011, and Nov 16, 2015, 194 patients were enrolled and randomly assigned to SRS (98 patients) or WBRT (96 patients). Median follow-up was 11·1 months (IQR 5·1–18·0). Cognitive-deterioration-free survival was longer in patients assigned to SRS (median 3·7 months [95% CI 3·45–5·06], 93 events) than in patients assigned to WBRT (median 3·0 months [2·86–3·25], 93 events; hazard ratio [HR] 0·47 [95% CI 0·35–0·63]; p vs 41 [85%] of 48 evaluable patients assigned to WBRT; difference −33·6% [95% CI −45·3 to −21·8], p vs eight [9%] of 92 patients in the WBRT group) and cognitive disturbance (three [3%] vs five [5%]). There were no treatment-related deaths. Interpretation Decline in cognitive function was more frequent with WBRT than with SRS and there was no difference in overall survival between the treatment groups. After resection of a brain metastasis, SRS radiosurgery should be considered one of the standards of care as a less toxic alternative to WBRT for this patient population. Funding National Cancer Institute.

/pdf/postoperative-stereotactic-radiosurgery-compared-with-whole-53xqrrlig1.pdf

Postoperative stereotactic radiosurgery compared with whole brain radiotherapy for resected metastatic brain disease (NCCTG N107C/CEC·3): a multicentre, randomised, controlled, phase 3 trial

Measuring quality of life in men with prostate cancer using the functional assessment of cancer therapy-prostate instrument

Background. This report describes the development and validation of a brain subscale for the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy (FACT) scale, and the revalidation of the subscales of the general version (FACT-G), which measure physical, social, family, emotional, and functional well-being and the quality of the relationship with the physician.

Methods. 101 patients with primary brain tumors, after giving informed consent, participated in the last two phases of a four-phase validation process: item generation, item reduction, validation, and reliability testing. In the validation phase, FACT-G subscale and total scores as well as the brain subscale scores were correlated with other tests of mood, response, bias, and quality of life (QOL). Test-retest reliability testing was performed with 46 patients who had primary brain tumors.

Results. Validity and reliability coefficients were high for the FACT-G and brain subscale, except for the comparison with a second QOL measure (FP-QLI) and the Karnofsky Performance Status (KPS). The lower scores were the result of inherent differences in the two QOL instruments and the relatively high performance status of the brain tumor patients, which restricted the KPS score range.

Conclusion. The FACT-G has good psychometric properties supporting its broad generalizability and the brain subscale tests substantially different QOL issues than the core instrument. Use of this scale with the addition of the brain subscale provides a well rounded view of the various aspects of QOL from the patient's perspective. With modifications and further psychometric testing, the brain subscale may have broader applicability to subpopulations of patients with other brain disorders. Cancer 1995;75:1151–61.

The Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy (FACT) Scale : development of a brain subscale and revalidation of the general version (FACT-G) in patients with primary brain tumors

Victor A. Levin

Papers

The Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy (FACT) Scale : development of a brain subscale and revalidation of the general version (FACT-G) in patients with primary brain tumors