Zucker, David S.

BackgroundMeasuring function with valid and responsive tools in patients with cancer is essential for driving clinical decision‐making and for the end points of clinical trials. Current patient‐reported outcome measurements of function fall short for many reasons. This study evaluates the responsiveness of the Patient‐Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS) Cancer Function Brief 3D Profile, a novel measure of function across multiple domains.MethodsTwo hundred nine participants across five geographically distinct tertiary care centers completed the assessment and pain rating at two outpatient cancer rehabilitation clinic visits. Patients and providers completed a global rating of change measure at the second visit to indicate whether the patient was improving or worsening in function. Multiple response indices and linear models measured whether the measure was responsive to self‐reported and clinician‐rated changes over time. Correlations between changes in function and changes in anchors (pain rating and performance status) were also calculated.ResultsFunction as measured by the PROMIS Cancer Function Brief 3D Profile changed appropriately as both patients and clinicians rated change. Small to moderate effect sizes supported the tool's responsiveness. Function was moderately correlated with pain and more strongly correlated with performance status, and changes in function corresponded with changes in anchor variables. No floor/ceiling effect was found.ConclusionsThe PROMIS Cancer Function Brief 3D Profile is sensitive to changes over time in patients with cancer. The measure may be useful in clinical practice and as an end point in clinical trials.Lay summary We gave patients a questionnaire by which they told their physicians how well they were functioning, including how fatigued they were. This study tested that questionnaire to see whether the scores would change if patients got better or worse.

AbstractIn 2018, the American College of Sports Medicine (ACSM) reconvened an international, multi‐disciplinary group of professionals to review pertinent published literature on exercise for people with cancer. The 2018 roundtable resulted in the publication of three articles in 2019. The three articles serve as an important update to the original ACSM Roundtable on Cancer, which convened in 2010. Although the focus of the three 2019 articles is on exercise, which is only one part of comprehensive cancer rehabilitation, the evidence presented in the 2019 ACSM articles has direct implications for physiatrists and other rehabilitation professionals who care for people with cancer. As such, the narrative review presented here has two primary objectives. First, we summarize the evidence within the three ACSM articles and interpret it within a familiar rehabilitation framework, namely the Dietz model of Cancer Rehabilitation, in order to facilitate implementation broadly within rehabilitation practice. Second, via expert consensus, we have tabulated relevant exercise recommendations for specific cancer populations at different points in the cancer care continuum and translated them into text, tables, and figures for ease of reference. Notably, the authors of this article are members of the Cancer Rehabilitation Physician Consortium (CRPC), a group of physicians who subspecialize in cancer rehabilitation medicine (CRM).

This article presents a clinical screening and referral framework to enable health care professionals to guide individuals with cancer to safe and effective exercise programs.