Physician-assessed and patient-reported outcome measures in chemotherapy-induced sensory peripheral neurotoxicity: two sides of the same coin.

BackgroundThe different perception and assessment of chemotherapy-induced peripheral neurotoxicity (CIPN) between healthcare providers and patients has not yet been fully addressed, although these two approaches might eventually lead to inconsistent, possibly conflicting interpretation, especially regarding sensory impairment.Patients and methodsA cohort of 281 subjects with stable CIPN was evaluated with the National Cancer Institute-Common Toxicity Criteria (NCI-CTC v. 2.0) sensory scale, the clinical Total Neuropathy Score (TNSc©), the modified Inflammatory Neuropathy Cause and Treatment (INCAT) sensory sumscore (mISS) and the European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer CIPN specific self-report questionnaire (EORTC QOL-CIPN20).ResultsPatients' probability estimates showed that the EORTC QLQ-CIPN20 sensory score was overall more highly related to the NCI-CTC sensory score. However, the vibration perception item of the TNSc had a higher probability to be scored 0 for EORTC QLQ-CIPN20 scores lower than 35, as vibration score 2 for EORTC QLQ-CIPN20 scores between 35 and 50 and as grade 3 or 4 for EORTC QLQ-CIPN20 scores higher than 50. The linear models showed a significant trend between each mISS item and increasing EORTC QLQ-CIPN20 sensory scores.ConclusionNone of the clinical items had a perfect relationship with patients' perception, and most of the discrepancies stood in the intermediate levels of CIPN severity. Our data indicate that to achieve a comprehensive knowledge of CIPN including a reliable assessment of both the severity and the quality of CIPN-related sensory impairment, clinical and PRO measures should be always combined.