Background: Soft tissue sarcomas (STS) are a heterogenous group of rare tumors that involve the connective tissue in the body. As with many rare tumors, little is known about the impact of STS on patient well-being. The objective of this review was to understand patient experience and quality of life (QOL) following diagnosis of STS.
Methods: This was a systematic review of English language articles published between 2005-2015 in PubMed/Medline, Embase, PsychINFO, and Evidence-Based Medicine. The review included recent conference proceedings and resources from advocacy websites. Articles were considered relevant if they included adult STS patient reported outcomes (PROs) or details on patient experience.
Results: Of the 3,430 articles identified, 20 were eligible for inclusion. Of these, 14 were clinical studies that included PRO measures, 1 summarized PRO measures used in STS studies, and 5 described the STS patient experience. Patients with STS report a variety of concerns including emotional well-being (e.g. anxiety, depression), body image, functional deficit following surgery, and practical considerations such as obtaining child care and ability to work. Reports of patient experience vary widely given the heterogeneity of STS and individualized treatment. In clinical studies that used PROs, the European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer QOL Questionnaire Core 30 (EORTC QLQ-C30) was the most commonly used cancer-specific measure (N = 5) followed by the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy–General (N = 2). The generic EQ-5D was used in 5 publications but was limited to the visual analog scale portion of the measure in two of these studies. Similar to other cancers, STS patients report lower QOL when compared to the general population.
Conclusions: Few studies have published either qualitative or quantitative data on the patient experience with STS. While STS has a measurable impact on QOL, there is a lack of detailed information in the published literature. Although PROs are often used in clinical studies of STS, they are not STS-specific tools and may not capture the unique needs of this population. There is a need for qualitative research to better understand the patient perspective of STS.
