↓ Skip to main content

Effectiveness outcomes and health related quality of life impact of disease progression in patients with advanced nonsquamous NSCLC treated in real-world community oncology settings: results from a…

Overview of attention for article published in Health and Quality of Life Outcomes, August 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user
facebook
1 Facebook page
reddit
2 Redditors

Citations

dimensions_citation
16 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
39 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Effectiveness outcomes and health related quality of life impact of disease progression in patients with advanced nonsquamous NSCLC treated in real-world community oncology settings: results from a prospective medical record registry study
Published in
Health and Quality of Life Outcomes, August 2017
DOI 10.1186/s12955-017-0735-4
Pubmed ID
Authors

Mark S. Walker, William Wong, Arliene Ravelo, Paul J. E. Miller, Lee S. Schwartzberg

Abstract

Treatment options for advanced nonsquamous non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) in the first line include platinum-based doublet therapy with or without bevacizumab. This study examined efficacy outcomes and patient reported outcomes (PROs) in a community oncology patient sample. Advanced nonsquamous NSCLC patients from 34 U.S. community oncology practices treated in first line with bevacizumab regimens (A platinum doublet; gemcitabine doublet; pemetrexed with platinum) or non-bevacizumab regimens (B platinum doublet; gemcitabine doublet; C pemetrexed with platinum) were recruited for this prospective study. Patient characteristics and clinical outcomes were accessed from routine care records. Three validated and widely used PRO measures of health related quality of life (HRQOL) and symptom burden were collected prospectively at each visit and up to one-year follow-up. Effectiveness outcomes were progression free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) assessed by Kaplan-Meier and Cox regression methods. PROs were analyzed with linear mixed model regression to examine changes over time, and the effect of disease progression. Of 147 patients in the study, 145 provided PRO data. Patients in treatment groups were: A (n = 66, 44.9%); B (n = 25, 17.0%); C (n = 56, 38.1%). A was associated with significantly longer OS than B (HR = 0.341, p = 0.0012), and significantly longer than C (HR = 0.602, p = 0.0354). PFS results were similar. Irrespective of regimen group and on 12/32 measures, patients showed significant and clinically meaningful worsening of symptoms and HRQOL at disease progression. After disease progression, the pattern of symptom and HRQOL change showed continued worsening. Bevacizumab-containing regimens were associated with longer PFS and OS compared with non-bevacizumab regimens. PRO measures show disease progression is associated with worsening HRQOL. Delaying disease progression can sustain better HRQL and reduce symptom burden.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 39 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 39 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 7 18%
Student > Ph. D. Student 6 15%
Other 4 10%
Researcher 4 10%
Student > Bachelor 2 5%
Other 2 5%
Unknown 14 36%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 10 26%
Nursing and Health Professions 6 15%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 2 5%
Psychology 2 5%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 1 3%
Other 1 3%
Unknown 17 44%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 19 August 2017.
All research outputs
#15,475,586
of 22,997,544 outputs
Outputs from Health and Quality of Life Outcomes
#1,354
of 2,186 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#199,350
of 317,683 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Health and Quality of Life Outcomes
#31
of 56 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,997,544 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 22nd percentile – i.e., 22% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,186 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.5. This one is in the 30th percentile – i.e., 30% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 317,683 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 28th percentile – i.e., 28% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 56 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 35th percentile – i.e., 35% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.