Harness, Jay K.

9047 Background: Symptomatic adverse events (AE) in cancer trials are reported by clinicians using the National Cancer Institute's (NCI) Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (CTCAE). To integrate the patient perspective into AE reporting, NCI contracted (HHSN261201000043C) to create a patient-reported outcomes companion tool (PRO-CTCAE). We report the validity and reliability of PRO-CTCAE’s 124 items reflecting 78 symptomatic AEs. Methods: English-speaking subjects (n=869; 44% male; median [mdn] age 59; 32% racial/ethnic minority; 34% high school or less; 17% ECOG Performance Status [PS] 2-4) receiving treatment for a range of cancers at 4 NCI-designated cancer centers and 5 sites in NCI's Community Cancer Centers Program completed a web-based survey in clinic including PRO-CTCAE and EORTC QLQ-C30. Pearson correlations were computed between PRO-CTCAE items and QLQ-C30 scales. Differences in PRO-CTCAE item scores between clinician-reported ECOG PS (0-1 vs 2-4) groups were computed. Test-retest reliability of 48 prespecified items was evaluated in a subset (n=79). Results: Correlations in the expected direction were observed for 116/124 PRO-CTCAE items with the QLQ-C30 global health scale (mdn r=-.21; range .08 to -.57). Stronger correlations were seen for PRO-CTCAE items with conceptually related QLQ-C30 domains: fatigue with physical, role and social functioning (-.54 to -.66); anxiety and depression with emotional functioning (-.54 to -.70); and concentration and memory problems with cognitive functioning (-.62 to -.72) [all p <0.001]. Fatigue, nausea, vomiting, pain, dyspnea, insomnia, appetite loss, constipation and diarrhea items strongly correlated with corresponding QLQ-C30 symptom scales (.69 to .79, all p <0.001). Scores for 98/124 PRO-CTCAE items were higher in the ECOG PS 2-4 vs 0-1 group (mdn effect size .3). Test-retest reliability was observed across all tested items (mdn intraclass correlation coeff .77; range .53 to .96). Conclusions: Results demonstrate favorable validity and reliability of PRO-CTCAE in a large, heterogeneous sample of patients undergoing cancer treatment. Further testing in multicenter treatment trials is underway.

AbstractWhat is the future of thyroid surgery in the new millennium? How can surgeons keep abreast of advances in thyroid endocrinology, genetics, surgical therapy, and other aspects of thyroid disease management? How should surgeons be trained to become highly competent in thyroid disease and to perform safe, effective thyroid operative procedures? Nine internationally recognized endocrine surgeons were asked to express their views on these and related subjects. They noted that advances in molecular biology, pathology, and genetics of thyroid disease should allow more tailored surgical approaches during the twenty‐first century. Current training of general surgical residents in thyroid and other types of endocrine surgery is highly variable, which may contribute to increased complication rates and number of second operations. The leadership for addressing these deficiencies and promoting a more organized approach to thyroid disease management should come from national endocrine surgery associations and their leaders. It is incumbent upon endocrine surgeons to maintain their central role in the management of many aspects of thyroid disease. Organizing teams of specialists into thyroid centers (centers of excellence) can (1) increase efficiency; (2) increase quality of care; (3) decrease costs; (4) encourage a more individualized approach to surgery; (5) lower complication rates; and (6) foster innovation in technology and disease management. Two years of additional fellowship training in thyroid and endocrine surgery is now being advocated by increasing numbers of national endocrine surgical associations as the best way to prepare surgeons for society's needs for highly skilled, competent thyroid surgeons of the future.