Validating an Instrument for Direct Patient Reporting of Distress and Chemotherapy-Related Toxicity among South African Cancer Patients.

Abstract

Simple SummaryIn the USA and Europe, questionnaires that allow patients to directly report chemotherapy side effects can improve their quality of life and clinical outcomes. No similar tools exist for Africa, so we aimed to design and validate a paper-based tool for use in oncology clinics in South Africa: The Patient Reported Symptoms-South Africa (PRS-SA) survey. The PRS-SA included questions on overall feelings of distress and severity of 11 common chemotherapy side effects. By comparing responses to the PRS-SA to responses to other quality of life questionnaires and to patients’ performance status, we found the PRS-SA to be valid and responsive for measuring all included symptoms. Compared to a standard instrument for measuring depression and anxiety, the PRS-SA’s distress thermometer had 88% sensitivity and 55% specificity for identifying distress. The PRS-SA may be a useful tool for efficiently assessing distress and chemotherapy symptoms in South Africa’s overburdened public oncology clinics.Patient-reported outcome measures (PROM) for monitoring treatment toxicity improve quality of life (QoL) and clinical outcomes. However, no such PROMs exist for sub-Saharan African cancer patients. We aimed to validate the Patient Reported Symptoms-South Africa (PRS-SA) survey, a novel PROM for measuring distress and chemotherapy-related symptoms in South African cancer patients. We enrolled patients at the oncology clinic at Charlotte Maxeke Hospital, Johannesburg. At three separate visits, participants simultaneously completed the PRS-SA survey and several previously validated questionnaires. We constructed a receiver operator characteristics curve for distress levels predicting a Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS) score ≥15. We evaluated construct validity for symptom items by comparing severity to the EORTC Core Quality of Life Questionnaire (QLQ-C30) summary score (Pearson correlation tests) and ECOG performance status (Mann–Whitney U tests). We assessed symptom item responsiveness by comparing change in severity to change in QLQ-C30 summary score and comparing standardized mean scores with negative, no, or positive change on the Global Impression of Change (GIC) questionnaire (Jockheere–Terpstra trend test). Overall, 196 participants with solid tumors completed instruments. A distress score of 4 had 82% sensitivity and 55% specificity for clinical depression/anxiety. All symptom items showed construct validity by association with either QLQ-C30 score or performance status (highest p = 0.03). All but cough showed responsiveness to change in QLQ-C30 score (highest p = 0.045). In South African cancer patients, the PRS-SA’s stress scale behaves similarly to the distress thermometer in other populations, and the symptom items demonstrated construct validity and responsiveness. Of note, 46% and 74% of participants who completed the PRS-SA in English or isiZulu, respectively, required assistance reading half or more of the instrument.