Assessing Performance Status in Lung Cancer
Author Information
Author(s): Ando M, Ando Y, Hasegawa Y, Shimokata K, Minami H, Wakai K, Ohno Y, Sakai S
Primary Institution: Nagoya University Graduate School of Medicine
Hypothesis
How do assessments of performance status by patients, nurses, and oncologists compare in their prognostic value for advanced non-small cell lung cancer?
Conclusion
The assessment of performance status by oncologists is more reliable than that by patients or nurses in predicting survival in advanced non-small cell lung cancer.
Supporting Evidence
- Weighted Kappa statistics showed moderate agreement between oncologists and patients (0.53) and between oncologists and nurses (0.63).
- Oncologists provided the healthiest performance status assessments, while patients provided the poorest.
- Each group's assessment was significantly correlated with survival when included in the Cox model.
Takeaway
Doctors, nurses, and patients all have different views on how sick someone is, but doctors' opinions are usually the best at predicting how long someone might live.
Methodology
The study investigated discrepancies in performance status assessments among patients, nurses, and oncologists using weighted Kappa statistics.
Limitations
The assessment by patients did not effectively distinguish between survival outcomes for performance status 1 and 2.
Participant Demographics
Inpatients with inoperable, advanced non-small cell lung cancer.
Statistical Information
P-Value
<0.001
Statistical Significance
p<0.001
Digital Object Identifier (DOI)
Want to read the original?
Access the complete publication on the publisher's website