Background and purpose: There is a paucity of data regarding the feasibility and relevance of Patient Reported Outcome (PRO) tools to assess radiotherapy-related toxicity in lung cancer. Material and methods: From January to June 2013, lung cancer patients undergoing thoracic radiotherapy/chemo-radiotherapy completed nine patient-adapted Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (CTCAE), the European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life (QoL) questionnaire and the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS) at baseline, the end of radiotherapy and at follow-up. Clinicians completed the same CTCAE items and agreement between patients' and clinicians' reporting was assessed using weighted kappa coefficients. QoL and HADS scores were correlated with the patients' and clinicians' reported toxicity. Results: 70/116 patients completed the questionnaires for at least one time point excluding baseline. Agreement between patients' and clinicians' reported toxicity ranged from slight to substantial. Most discrepancies were within one grade and patients reported greater severity than clinicians for most symptoms. QoL and HADS scores were more strongly correlated with the patients' compared to clinicians' matching toxicity reports. The PRO tool was found to be statistically reliable. Conclusions: The use of a PRO tool in lung cancer radiotherapy is feasible, reliable and acceptable to patients. PROs should be integrated in future clinical trials evaluating new radiotherapy approaches to assess toxicity. © 2014.
- Lung cancer
- Patient-reported outcomes