Next Article in Journal
The Future of Targeted Therapy for Leiomyosarcoma
Previous Article in Journal
Activation of Epstein–Barr Virus’ Lytic Cycle in Nasopharyngeal Carcinoma Cells by NEO212, a Conjugate of Perillyl Alcohol and Temozolomide
Previous Article in Special Issue
A Retrospective Chart Review of Treatment Patterns and Overall Survival among a Cohort of Patients with Relapsed/Refractory Mycosis Fungoides in France, Germany, Italy, Spain and the United Kingdom
 
 
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Article

Evaluation of Quality of Life and Treatment Satisfaction in Newly Diagnosed Cutaneous T-Cell Lymphoma Patients

1
Department of Dermatology, Leiden University Medical Center, 2333 ZA Leiden, The Netherlands
2
Health, Medical and Neuropsychology Unit, Institute of Psychology, Leiden University, 2311 EZ Leiden, The Netherlands
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Cancers 2024, 16(5), 937; https://doi.org/10.3390/cancers16050937
Submission received: 22 January 2024 / Revised: 20 February 2024 / Accepted: 20 February 2024 / Published: 26 February 2024
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Cutaneous Lymphoma)

Abstract

:

Simple Summary

This study provides an insight into newly diagnosed patients with MF on patients’ expectations, quality of life, and treatment satisfaction. These data can be used for adequate expectation management and provide a rationale for further evaluation of treatment regimens in these patients.

Abstract

Background: Little is known about the impact of MF on quality of life (QoL) in newly diagnosed patients. Objectives: To describe the impact of the MF diagnosis on QoL, patient expectations, and treatment satisfaction over the first 6 months after diagnosis. Methods: Outcomes of this prospective cohort study of newly diagnosed MF patients conducted between 2020 and 2022 at the Leiden University Medical Center included the Skindex-29, RAND-12 Health Survey, degree of itch, pain, and fatigue (Visual Analogue Scale (VAS)), patient expectations, and Client Satisfaction Questionnaire-8 (CSQ-8), measured at baseline and after six months. Results: A total of 28 patients with MF were included. At baseline, 66% (n = 18) “strongly-totally” expected positive effects of the treatment. At the time of diagnosis, 28% of the patients (n = 8) were moderately to severely affected. There was no statistical change in the Skindex-29 score sum score (20 [10–34] vs. 20 [9–36]; p = 0.81) or in the other three subdomains, the RAND-12 scores, and the VAS itch, pain, and fatigue over time. Treatment satisfaction was high overall. Conclusion: Despite that the newly diagnosed MF patients anticipate a positive treatment effect, few improvements in QoL and symptom reduction were found. These data can be used for adequate expectation management and provide a rationale for further evaluation of treatment regimens in these patients.

1. Introduction

Mycosis fungoides (MF) is the most frequent subtype of primary cutaneous T-cell lymphoma (CTCL). CTCL are a heterogeneous group of diverse entities, such as Sezary syndrome and aggressive epidermotropic cutaneous CD8+ lymphoma, that usually present in the skin with no evidence of extracutaneous disease at the time of diagnosis [1,2]. Mycosis fungoides can be subdivided into classical MF (cMF) and folliculotropic mycosis fungoides (FMF), a variant with distinctive clinical and pathological features [3]. There are different disease stages of MF, varying from localized patches and plaques to ulcerative tumors and erythroderma [1,4]. While it is still a rare disease, the current incidence of MF is rising and is currently estimated at 0.46 per 100,000 persons [5].
The prognosis of MF is greatly dependent on the disease stage. Also, the diverse manifestation results in a broad range of symptoms and varies from patient to patient, but symptoms can be experienced as very severe, especially in the case of profound itching [6,7,8]. It is well known that the quality of life (QoL) in patients with MF is significantly lower than in the general population [9,10,11,12]. Previous studies even compare the impact of late-stage CTCL with diseases like end-stage renal disease and diabetes [6,13,14].
In addition, it has been previously reported that patients with a more recent diagnosis of CTCL were more affected in the symptom and functioning domains and had more intense itching [7,15]. On top of this, there is a significant impact of receiving the diagnosis, often after a diagnostic delay of 2–10 years from the onset of symptoms [16].
Only the PROCLIPI study has described health-related QoL in relatively newly diagnosed patients, but in this study, these patients were included within a timeframe of 6 months after the diagnosis, and not immediately after they received the diagnosis [17]. In addition, patients’ expectations have not been explored to date. It could be that the QoL and degree of itching improves significantly in the first months after the diagnosis. Awareness of the course of QoL and patients’ expectations are necessary for clinicians in order to properly counsel patients and provide realistic expectations.
This study aims to describe the impact of the MF diagnosis on QoL, patients’ expectations, the course of QoL, and treatment satisfaction over the first 6 months. Also, differences between cMF and FMF are explored.

2. Materials and Methods

A prospective cohort study was performed between May 2020 and January 2022 of all newly diagnosed cMF and FMF patients aged >18 years old referred to the dermatology department of the Leiden University Medical Center (LUMC) that were willing and able to provide a formal written consent. The LUMC is the national referral center in the Netherlands for CTCL patients. This study was approved by the institutional medical ethical review board (N20.052). Patients were included in case they received the diagnosis MF and filled out baseline questionnaires within one month after the diagnosis. All included patients were diagnosed according to the clinicopathologic criteria of the World Health Organization-European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer [3]. In case of MF, disease stages IA-IIA were defined as early stage and ≥IIB was considered as late stage. FMF was classified as early stage or late stage. Disease progression was defined as progression from early- to late-stage disease.
Patients were asked to complete baseline questionnaires related to dermatology specific QoL, generic health-related QoL, and treatment expectations as we previously described [18]. After six months, these questionnaires were repeated, except for treatment expectations, and treatment satisfaction was explored.

2.1. Outcome Measurements

The primary outcome was the potential change in dermatology specific QoL over time. Secondary outcomes were generic health-related QoL, treatment expectations, and treatment satisfaction. In addition, baseline characteristics, such as age, sex, comorbidities using the Charlson Comorbidity Score (CCI), and if available, disease progression within the study period, were extracted from the patients’ medical records.

2.2. Skindex-29

The Skindex-29 is a very frequently used questionnaire that specifically addresses the QoL in patients with skin disease [19]. The 29-item questionnaire is also the most frequently used QoL instrument in QoL studies in CTCL patients [6]. Individual items measure the frequency of affected QoL on 5 levels using a 5-point Likert scale ranging from 1 (‘never’) to 5 (‘all the time’). The individual items can be categorized in a symptoms domain, emotions domain, functional limitations domain, and as a total score. Each of the domains have different cut-off points, as proposed by Prinsen et al. These are ≥39, ≥42, and ≥52 for mild, moderately, and severely impaired for the symptoms domain; ≥24, ≥35, and ≥39 for the emotions domain; and ≥21, ≥32 and ≥37 for the functional limitation domain, respectively. The cut-off points for the total Skindex-29 score is ≥25 for mild, ≥32 for moderate, and ≥44 for severe impairment. Scores below the lowest cut-off points for mildly impaired were regarded as unaffected [20].

2.3. RAND-12

The RAND-12 Health Survey (RAND-12) is derived from the RAND-36 questionnaire. RAND-12 is used to measure general health-related QoL and results in a physical component score (PCS) and mental component score (MCS). The two domain scores range from 0 to 100, with higher scores indicating a better health status. The minimally, clinically important difference is considered in case of a 3-to-5-point difference over time [21].

2.4. Itch, Pain, and Fatigue

The degree of itch, pain, and fatigue in the last 4 weeks was reported with a visual analogue score (VAS) (0–10) [22].

2.5. Expectations Questionnaire

To assess treatment expectations, a 6-item unvalidated questionnaire, also used in a previous study by Ottevanger et al., was used [18]. This questionnaire explores expectations related to the expected effect of the treatment on pain, time consumption, mood, energy, the anticipated treatment effect, and anticipation of adverse events due to the treatment. The results of this questionnaire, because there are not yet validated, are used for descriptive analyses only.

2.6. Client Satisfaction Questionnaire (CSQ)

The CSQ was used to establish treatment satisfaction after six months [23]. The 8-item questionnaire results in eight scores that range from 25 to 100. No clinically correlated categories can be derived from the total score; items are analyzed separately.

2.7. Statistical Analysis

Statistical analysis was performed with IBM SPSS statistics 25, Armonk, NY, and reported following the Strengthening the Reporting of Observational studies in Epidemiology (STROBE) guidelines [24]. All analyses were performed according to corresponding instrument manuals. The normality of data distribution was tested with the Kolmogorov–Smirnov test. Continuous data were reported as median and interquartile range (IQR) due to the non-normal distribution and categorical data as number and percentage (%), as applicable. To establish potential improvement or worsening over time, the Wilcoxon rank test was performed.
Statistical tests were performed in IBM SPSS statistics version 29.0 for the total group of patients and to test for differences between cMF and FMF. The correlations with degree of itch and fatigue and Skindex-29 scores were assessed using the Pearson R correlation analysis. A coefficient of ≤0.19 was considered very weak, 0.20–0.39 weak, 0.40–0.59 moderate, 0.60–0.80 strong, and 0.80–1 very strong.

3. Results

3.1. Study Population

In total, 28 patients with MF were included with a median age of 65 years [50–72] (Table 1). Most patients were diagnosed with cMF (n = 21 (75%)) and an early-stage disease (n = 26 (93%)). Two patients (7%) experienced disease progression from early- to late-stage disease during the study period (one cMF and one FMF case). The median overall CCI score was 1 [0–3]. There were no statistical differences in baseline characteristics between cMF patients and FMF patients (Table 1). All patients survived the follow-up period and there was no loss to follow-up.

3.2. Patient Expectations

Most patients (82% (n = 22) expected to not experience any pain (Table 2). Approximately one-third “strongly-totally” expected the treatment of their disease to be time consuming. All patients “Not at all-somewhat” expected a decrease in their energy levels. Many expected the treatment to have positive effects on their symptoms, with 33% (n = 9) expecting some effects of their treatment on symptoms, 44% (n = 12) strongly expecting treatment effects, and 22% (n = 6) totally expecting treatment effects. Only one patient (4%) strongly expected adverse events. The remaining patients (96%) “not at all” to “somewhat” expected side effects.

3.3. Skindex-29

During the study period, most patients (57% (n = 16) at baseline and 61% (n = 17) after six months) were unaffected on the total Skindex-29 score (Table 3). There was no statistical change from baseline during the study period in the total Skindex-29 score sum score (20 [10–34] vs. 20 [9–36] with p = 0.81) or in the other three subdomains. At baseline, 28% (n = 8) were moderately to severely affected. After six months, this was relatively unchanged, namely, 32% (n = 9). Regarding the symptoms domain categories, 21 patients (75%) remained stable, 4 (14%) improved, and 3 (11%) worsened. This was almost identical in the emotions domain. In the functioning domain, 86% (n = 24) remained stable and 14% (n = 4) improved. For the total Skindex-29 categories, 79% (n = 22) remained stable, 14% (n = 4) improved, and 7% (n = 2) worsened. The two patients that experienced disease progression to a late-stage disease did not worsen regarding their total Skindex-29 or symptoms score.
FMF patients had a higher total Skindex-29 score (42 [10–50] vs. 16 [9–25]; p = 0.03) and higher function domain score (41 [10–50] vs. 4 (0–9); p = 0.02) than cMF patients at baseline. No baseline differences between FMF and cMF patients were found for the symptoms and emotions domain. At follow-up, FMF patients scored statistically higher on all Skindex-29 domains compared to cMF patients (53 [36–71] vs. 21 [14–46], p = 0.04 for symptoms; 40 [18–58] vs. 20 [10–29], p = 0.03 for emotions; 35 [8–62] vs. 6 [0–13], p < 0.01 for functioning; 37 [22–59] vs. 14 [8–23], p = 0.01 for the total skindex-29 score). Within the cMF group, there was no statistically significant change over time for the total Skindex-29 score or any of the other domains. The same was also found in the FMF group.

3.4. RAND-12

The RAND-12 PCS after six months did not statistically change from baseline (55 [46–57] to 54 [37–55], p = 0.13) (Table 3). This was also the case for the MCS (50 [37–55] to 51 [39–54], p = 0.68). Within this timeframe, 54% (n = 15) remained clinically stable according to the minimally, clinically important difference regarding their PCS score; 18% (n = 5) improved; and 29% (n = 8) worsened. For the MCS, 50% remained stable, 29% (n = 8) improved, and 21% (n = 6) worsened. There were no differences at baseline or follow-up for the median PCS or MCS between cMF and FMF (p = 0.16, p = 0.17, p = 0.09, and p = 0.14, respectively).

3.5. Itch, Pain, and Fatigue

The median itch, pain, and fatigue VAS scores at baseline were 2.5 [1.0–5.8], 1 [0–2.0], and 4 [1.3–6.8] (Table 3). These also did not statistically change over time (p = 0.75, 0.92, and 0.74, respectively). There was a statistically significant difference at baseline between cMF and FMF patients, with FMF patients experiencing more itching (VAS 2 [1–4] vs. 6 [2–10]; p = 0.042) and fatigue (VAS 3 [1–5.5] vs. 7 [5–8]; p < 0.01). This statistically significant difference remained after 6 months with a median VAS itch score of 1 [0–5] in the cMF group and median score of 8 [1–9] in the FMF group (p = 0.017). This was also the case for fatigue (median VAS fatigue 3 [1–4.5] vs. 8 [4–9], p = 0.017). There were no statistical differences between baseline and follow-up for itch or fatigue within the cMF or FMF group.
The VAS itch at baseline was a strong predictor for the baseline Skindex-29 symptoms (R 0.70; p < 0.01) and total skindex-29 score (R 0.60; p < 0.01), while only moderate for the emotions (R 0.49; p < 0.01) and functioning domains (R 0.44, p = 0.02). The VAS fatigue was only moderately predictive for all Skindex-29 domains.

3.6. Treatment Satisfaction

The overall treatment satisfaction was high, with 39% (n = 11) being “mostly satisfied” and 50% (n = 14) being “very satisfied” (Table 4). Only 11% (n = 3) were “indifferent or mildly dissatisfied”. Almost all patients were satisfied with the quality (90% “good-excellent”), the type of treatment they received (89% “generally-definitely”), and the support they received with the treatment to deal with their disease (89% “somewhat-helped a great deal”).

4. Discussion

The results of this study show that although most patients are unaffected regarding their Skindex-29 scores, a significant proportion experience a reduced QoL without a significant improvement over time. Although patients have high expectations that treatment would result in symptom reduction, this reduction was not found in the Skindex-29 scores. This group could require extra counseling. Meanwhile, treatment satisfaction was high despite that no improvement in QoL or reduction in itch and fatigue was seen, especially in FMF patients.
This is one of the first prospective studies on the clinical course regarding QoL in the first 6 months after receiving diagnosis while also exploring patients’ expectations and evaluating treatment satisfaction. Only the PROCLIPI study (2021) has previously described QoL in newly diagnosed patients. The median Skindex-29 scores in our study are similar to those found in the PROCLIPI study by Quaglino et al. [17]. However, a follow-up measurement was available in less than half of their patients (56 out of 121). In addition, patients were considered newly diagnosed if they had received a diagnosis less than 6 months prior to filling out questionnaires. In contrast to our study, the study of Quaglino et al. did find a small but statistically significant reduction in the total sum score of 24 to 19 after a median follow-up period of 13 months (range 1–43) [17]. Although this was a statistically significant decrease, it remains questionable whether this is of any clinical importance.
As mentioned before, it has been described that patients with a more recent diagnosis (<2 years vs. ≥2 years) had a worse QoL [7]. It could also be hypothesized that it takes longer than the follow-up period of 6 months in this study for first- or second-line therapies to have an effect on symptom reduction and improve QoL. This hypothesis is also confirmed by Quaglino et al., who showed that 75% of patients have persistent skin lesions after their first-line treatment [17]. Complete responses of topical therapies are often not or only temporarily seen in patients with early-stage disease [25]. This also reiterates the chronic aspect of the disease, even in newly diagnosed patients, especially when patients have the expectancy of a strong–total effect of the treatment on their symptoms, while one third of the patients remains to experience a significantly reduced QoL over time. These expectations have to be addressed appropriately in order to prevent unrealistic expectations and increase adequate coping mechanisms [26]. Although this seems to be adequately addressed with high levels of treatment satisfaction being reported in this cohort, addressing the different domains of QoL during the treatment course is very important to provide personalized, if needed multidisciplinary, care for every patient [27]. In other chronic diseases, this has shown to yield some positive results regarding QoL [28].
Despite that the majority of patients had an early-stage disease, just over one-third of the patients experienced a moderate–severe impaired QoL on baseline. These results are in line with previous studies on early-stage MF patients, with others demonstrating that a significant proportion of patients reporting moderate–severe impairment on QoL [15]. This study also found itching, fatigue and impact on overall QoL to be significantly worse in FMF patients compared to cMF patients. Also, a reduction in itching and fatigue was not seen within the first 6 months. This could be due to the known poor responsiveness to skin-directed therapies [17,29,30].
This study had some limitations. There was a small sample size, and treatment regimens were not taken into account. The small sample size resulted in limited generalizability regarding the cMF vs. FMF comparisons. The different therapies that patients received during the study period were not taken into account. However, future studies should also focus on relating the effect of treatment on the QoL for the different CTCL subtypes and stages.

5. Conclusions

Overall, this study showed that a significant proportion of patients experience an impaired QoL and that few improvements in QoL are seen within the first six months in newly diagnosed patients with MF while having high expectations of symptom reductions. These data can be used for adequate expectation management and provide a further rationale for a more in-depth analysis of treatment regimens in newly diagnosed MF patients and their effect on QoL and symptom reductions. In addition, the lack of improvement could require extra counseling in patients.

Author Contributions

Conceptualization, R.O., S.v.B., A.W.M.E., R.W., M.H.V. and K.D.Q.; methodology, R.O., S.v.B., A.W.M.E., R.W., M.H.V. and K.D.Q.; software, R.O.; validation, R.O., S.v.B. and K.D.Q.; formal analysis, R.O., S.v.B. and K.D.Q.; investigation, R.O.; data curation, R.O. and K.D.Q.; writing—original draft preparation, R.O., S.v.B. and K.D.Q.; writing—review and editing, R.O., S.v.B., J.M.K., A.W.M.E., R.W., M.H.V. and K.D.Q.; supervision, S.v.B., A.W.M.E., R.W., M.H.V. and K.D.Q.; project administration, R.O. and K.D.Q.; funding acquisition, M.H.V. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

This study was made possible by an unrestricted research grant from Kyowa Kirin B.V. (grant number: 8224-41473).

Institutional Review Board Statement

This study was conducted in accordance with the Declaration of Helsinki and approved by the Institutional Review Board (or Ethics Committee) of the Leiden University Medical Center (N20.052) for studies involving humans.

Informed Consent Statement

Informed consent was obtained from all subjects involved in the study.

Data Availability Statement

Data will be available upon reasonable request via the corresponding author.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflicts of interest. The funders had no role in the design of the study; in the collection, analyses, or interpretation of data; in the writing of the manuscript; or in the decision to publish the results.

References

  1. Willemze, R.; Jaffe, E.S.; Burg, G.; Cerroni, L.; Berti, E.; Swerdlow, S.H.; Ralfkiaer, E.; Chimenti, S.; Diaz-Perez, J.L.; Duncan, L.M.; et al. WHO-EORTC classification for cutaneous lymphomas. Blood 2005, 105, 3768–3785. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  2. Robson, A.; Assaf, C.; Bagot, M.; Burg, G.; Calonje, E.; Castillo, C.; Cerroni, L.; Chimenti, N.; Dechelotte, P.; Franck, F.; et al. Aggressive epidermotropic cutaneous CD8+ lymphoma: A cutaneous lymphoma with distinct clinical and pathological features. Report of an EORTC Cutaneous Lymphoma Task Force Workshop. Histopathology 2015, 67, 425–441. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  3. van Santen, S.; Jansen, P.M.; Quint, K.D.; Vermeer, M.H.; Willemze, R. Plaque stage folliculotropic mycosis fungoides: Histopathologic features and prognostic factors in a series of 40 patients. J. Cutan. Pathol. 2019, 47, 241–250. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  4. Willemze, R.; Cerroni, L.; Kempf, W. The 2018 update of the WHO-EORTC classification for primary cutaneous lymphomas. Blood 2019, 133, 1703–1714. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  5. Ottevanger, R.; de Bruin, D.; Willemze, R.; Jansen, P.; Bekkenk, M.; de Haas, E.; Horvath, B.; van Rossum, M.; Sanders, C.; Veraart, J.; et al. Incidence of mycosis fungoides and Sézary syndrome in the Netherlands between 2000 and 2020. Br. J. Dermatol. 2021, 185, 434–435. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  6. Ottevanger, R.; van Beugen, S.; Evers, A.; Willemze, R.; Vermeer, M.; Quint, K. Quality of life in patients with Mycosis Fungoides and Sézary Syndrome: A systematic review of the literature. J. Eur. Acad. Dermatol. Venereol. 2021, 35, 2377–2387. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  7. Ottevanger, R.; van Beugen, S.; Evers, A.W.; Willemze, R.; Vermeer, M.H.; Quint, K.D. Itch in patients with cutaneous T-cell lymphoma as a quality of life indicator. JAAD Int. 2022, 9, 57–64. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  8. Vij, A.; Duvic, M. Prevalence and severity of pruritus in cutaneous T cell lymphoma. Int. J. Dermatol. 2012, 51, 930–934. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  9. Herbosa, C.; Semenov, Y.; Rosenberg, A.; Mehta-Shah, N.; Musiek, A. Clinical severity measures and quality-of-life burden in patients with mycosis fungoides and Sézary syndrome: Comparison of generic and dermatology-specific instruments. J. Eur. Acad. Dermatol. Venereol. 2020, 34, 995–1003. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  10. Demierre, M.-F.; Tien, A.; Miller, D. Health-related quality-of-life assessment in patients with cutaneous T-cell lymphoma. Arch. Dermatol. 2005, 141, 325–330. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  11. Engin, B.; Kecici, A.S.; Uzun, A.O.; Yalcin, M. Psychiatric Comorbidity, Depression and Anxiety Levels and Quality of Life of the Patients with Mycosis Fungoides. Dermatol. Ther. 2020, 33, e13922. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  12. Bouwhuis, S.; Gonzalez-Arriaza, H.; McEvoy, M.; Davis, M. Physical and mental health survey of 20 patients with Sézary syndrome using the Medical Outcomes Study 36-Item Short-Form Health Survey. J. Eur. Acad. Dermatol. Venereol. 2003, 17, 724–725. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  13. Semenov, Y.; Rosenberg, A.; Herbosa, C.; Mehta-Shah, N.; Musiek, A. Health-related quality of life and economic implications of cutaneous T-cell lymphoma. Br. J. Dermatol. 2020, 182, 190–196. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  14. Sampogna, F.; Frontani, M.; Baliva, G.; Lombardo, G.; Alvetreti, G.; Di Pietro, C.; Tabolli, S.; Russo, G.; Abeni, D. Quality of life and psychological distress in patients with cutaneous lymphoma. Br. J. Dermatol. 2009, 160, 815–822. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  15. Molloy, K.; Jonak, C.; Woei-A.-Jin, F.; Guenova, E.; Busschots, A.M.; Bervoets, A.; Hauben, E.; Knobler, R.; Porkert, S.; Fassnacht, C.; et al. Characteristics associated with significantly worse quality of life in mycosis fungoides/Sézary syndrome from the Prospective Cutaneous Lymphoma International Prognostic Index (PROCLIPI) study. Br. J. Dermatol. 2020, 182, 770–779. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  16. Ottevanger, R.; Feenstra, J.S.; van Vliet, L.M.; van Beugen, S.; Evers, A.W.M.; Kennedy, C.; Willemze, R.; Vermeer, M.H.; Quint, K.D. Unveiling the hidden struggles: Exploring the profound impact of advanced stage cutaneous T-cell lymphoma on quality of life. Ski. Health Dis. 2023, 3, e300. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  17. Quaglino, P.; Prince, H.; Cowan, R.; Vermeer, M.; Papadavid, E.; Bagot, M.; Servitjie, O.; Berti, E.; Guenova, E.; Stadler, R.; et al. Treatment of early-stage mycosis fungoides: Results from the PROspective Cutaneous Lymphoma International Prognostic Index (PROCLIPI) study. Br. J. Dermatol. 2021, 184, 722–730. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  18. Ottevanger, R.; van Beugen, S.; Evers, A.W.M.; Willemze, R.; Vermeer, M.H.; Quint, K.D. Quality of Life in Cutaneous T-cell Lymphoma Patients Receiving Mogamulizumab: Important Factors to Consider. Cancers 2022, 15, 32. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  19. Chren, M.-M.; Lasek, R.J.; Flocke, S.A.; Zyzanski, S.J. Improved discriminative and evaluative capability of a refined version of skindex, a quality-of-life instrument for patients with skin diseases. Arch. Dermatol. 1997, 133, 1433–1440. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  20. Prinsen, C.A.; Lindeboom, R.; de Korte, J. Interpretation of skindex-29 scores: Cutoffs for mild, moderate, and severe impairment of health-related quality of life. J. Investig. Dermatol. 2011, 131, 1945–1947. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  21. Hays, R.D.; Morales, L.S. The RAND-36 measure of health-related quality of life. Ann. Med. 2001, 33, 350–357. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  22. Evers, A.; Duller, P.; van de Kerkhof, P.; van der Valk, P.; de Jong, E.; Gerritsen, M.; Otero, E.; Verhoeven, E.; Verhaak, C.; Kraaimaat, F. The Impact of Chronic Skin Disease on Daily Life (ISDL): A generic and dermatology-specific health instrument. Br. J. Dermatol. 2008, 158, 101–108. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  23. Attkisson, C.; Zwick, R. The client satisfaction questionnaire: Psychometric properties and correlations with service utilization and psychotherapy outcome. Eval. Program Plan. 1982, 5, 233–237. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  24. von Elm, E.; Altman, D.G.; Egger, M.; Pocock, S.J.; Gotzsche, P.C.; Vandenbroucke, J.P. The Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (STROBE) statement: Guidelines for reporting observational studies. Rev. Esp. Salud Public 2008, 82, 251–259. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  25. Scarisbrick, J.J.; Bagot, M.; Ortiz-Romero, P.L. The changing therapeutic landscape, burden of disease, and unmet needs in patients with cutaneous T-cell lymphoma. Br. J. Haematol. 2021, 192, 683–696. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  26. Porkert, S.; Lehner-Baumgartner, E.; Valencak, J.; Knobler, R.; Riedl, E.; Jonak, C. Patients’ Illness Perception as a Tool to Improve Individual Disease Management in Primary Cutaneous Lymphomas. Acta Derm.-Venereol. 2018, 98, 240–245. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  27. Beynon, T.; Radcliffe, E.; Child, F.; Orlowska, D.; Whittaker, S.; Lawson, S.; Selman, L.; Harding, R. What are the supportive and palliative care needs of patients with cutaneous T-cell lymphoma and their caregivers? A systematic review of the evidence. Br. J. Dermatol. 2014, 170, 599–608. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  28. Flanagan, S.; Damery, S.; Combes, G. The effectiveness of integrated care interventions in improving patient quality of life (QoL) for patients with chronic conditions. An overview of the systematic review evidence. Health Qual. Life Outcomes 2017, 15, 188. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  29. van Doorn, R.; Scheffer, E.; Willemze, R. Follicular mycosis fungoides, a distinct disease entity with or without associated follicular mucinosis: A clinicopathologic and follow-up study of 51 patients. Arch. Dermatol. 2002, 138, 191–198. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  30. Wieser, I.; Wang, C.; Alberti-Violetti, S.; Lyons, G.; Tran, C.; Talpur, R.; Duvic, M. Clinical characteristics, risk factors and long-term outcome of 114 patients with folliculotropic mycosis fungoides. Arch. Dermatol. Res. 2017, 309, 453–459. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Table 1. Patient characteristics.
Table 1. Patient characteristics.
Patient CharacteristicsTotal
n = 28
MF
n = 21
FMF
n = 7
Age65 [50–72]66 [54–75]54 [35–66]
GenderMale16 (57%)13 (62%)3 (43%)
CCI1 [0–3]0 [0–2]2 [0–3]
013112
1550
2312
3642
4000
5101
Disease stageEarly stage26 (93%)21 (100%)5 (71%)
Late stage2 (7%)02 (29%)
Numbers are displayed as number (%) or median [interquartile range]. CCI, Charlson Comorbidity Index; MF, Mycosis fungoides; FMF, Folliculotropic Mycosis fungoides.
Table 2. Patient expectation at baseline on six different domains.
Table 2. Patient expectation at baseline on six different domains.
DomainExpected Leveln (%) (n = 27)
PainNot at all22 (82%)
Somewhat5 (19%)
Strongly-
Totally-
Time consumptionNot at all8 (30%)
Somewhat11 (41%)
Strongly6 (22%)
Totally2 (7%)
MoodNot at all23 (85%)
Somewhat4 (15%)
Strongly-
Totally-
EnergyNot at all21 (78%)
Somewhat5 (19%)
Strongly1 (4%)
Totally-
Treatment effect on symptomsNot at all-
Somewhat9 (33%)
Strongly12 (44%)
Totally6 (22%)
Adverse eventsNot at all14 (52%)
Somewhat12 (44%)
Strongly1 (4%)
Totally-
Numbers are displayed as number (%).
Table 3. Skindex-29, RAND-12, and itch, pain, and fatigue VAS scores at the start and end of study period, including median scores.
Table 3. Skindex-29, RAND-12, and itch, pain, and fatigue VAS scores at the start and end of study period, including median scores.
Outcomes Baseline (n = 28)FU (n = 28)p
Skindex-29 categorical scores
SymptomsUnaffected16 (57%)17 (61%)
Mildly2 (7%)-
Moderately5 (18%)4 (14%)
Severely5 (18%)7 (25%)
EmotionsUnaffected14 (50%)15 (54%)
Mildly7 (25%)5 (18%)
Moderately1 (4%)2 (7%)
Severely6 (21%)6 (21%)
FunctioningUnaffected20 (71%)21 (75%)
Mildly2 (7%)3 (11%)
Moderately1 (4%)1 (4%)
Severely5 (18%)3 (10%)
TotalUnaffected18 (64%)19 (68%)
Mildly2 (7%)-
Moderately4 (14%)6 (21%)
Severely4 (14%)3 (11%)
Skindex-29 total scores *
Symptoms (0–100)32 [17–46]30 [15–53]0.75
Emotions (0–100)24 [15–36]21 [10–21]0.43
Functioning (0–100)6 [1–31]6 [6–24]0.66
Total (0–100)20 [10–34]20 [9–36]0.81
RAND-12
PCS (0–100) 55 [46–57]54 [37–55]0.13
MCS (0–100) 50 [37–55]51 [39–54]0.68
VAS
Itch (0–10) 2.5 [1.0–5.8]1 [1.0–7.8]0.75
Pain (0–10) 1 [0–2.0]1 [0–2.0]0.92
Fatigue (0–10) 4 [1.3–6.8]3 [1.0–5.0]0.74
Numbers are displayed as number (%) or median [interquartile range]. PSC, Physical Component Score; MCS, Mental Component Score; VAS, Visual Analogue Scale; M1, baseline measurement; FU, measurement after 6-month follow-up. * Mean differences with corresponding IQR per Skindex-29 domain.
Table 4. Treatment satisfaction as measured with the CSQ-8.
Table 4. Treatment satisfaction as measured with the CSQ-8.
DomainEvaluationn (%)
Quality of treatmentPoor-
Fair3 (11%)
Good17 (61%)
Excellent8 (29%)
Type of treatmentNo, definitely not1 (4%)
No, not really2 (7%)
Yes, generally16 (57%)
Yes, definitely9 (32%)
Met needsNone of my needs have been met2 (7%)
Only a few of my needs have been met1 (4%)
Most of my needs have been met14 (50%)
Almost all of my needs have been met11 (39%)
Recommend to a friendNo, definitely not-
No, not really2 (7%)
Yes generally11 (39%)
Yes, definitely15 (54%)
Amount of helpQuite dissatisfied-
Indifferent or mildly dissatisfied-
Mostly satisfied22 (78%)
Very satisfied6 (22%)
Deal with problemsNo, it seemed to make things worse-
No, not really3 (11%)
Yes, somewhat12 (43%)
Yes, helped a great deal13 (46%)
Overall satisfactionQuite dissatisfied-
Indifferent or mildly dissatisfied3 (11%)
Mostly satisfied11 (39%)
Very satisfied14 (50%)
Come backNo, definitely not-
No, I don’t think so2 (7%)
Yes, I think so7 (25%)
Yes, definitely19 (68%)
Total CSQ-8 score (25–100) 85 [76–96]
Numbers are displayed as number (%) or median [interquartile range].
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content.

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Ottevanger, R.; van Beugen, S.; Kersten, J.M.; Evers, A.W.M.; Vermeer, M.H.; Willemze, R.; Quint, K.D. Evaluation of Quality of Life and Treatment Satisfaction in Newly Diagnosed Cutaneous T-Cell Lymphoma Patients. Cancers 2024, 16, 937. https://doi.org/10.3390/cancers16050937

AMA Style

Ottevanger R, van Beugen S, Kersten JM, Evers AWM, Vermeer MH, Willemze R, Quint KD. Evaluation of Quality of Life and Treatment Satisfaction in Newly Diagnosed Cutaneous T-Cell Lymphoma Patients. Cancers. 2024; 16(5):937. https://doi.org/10.3390/cancers16050937

Chicago/Turabian Style

Ottevanger, Rosanne, Sylvia van Beugen, Juliette M. Kersten, Andrea W. M. Evers, Maarten H. Vermeer, Rein Willemze, and Koen D. Quint. 2024. "Evaluation of Quality of Life and Treatment Satisfaction in Newly Diagnosed Cutaneous T-Cell Lymphoma Patients" Cancers 16, no. 5: 937. https://doi.org/10.3390/cancers16050937

Note that from the first issue of 2016, this journal uses article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop