J

Joseph L. Pater

Queen's University

ORCID: 0000-0003-0774-8970

Publishes on Health Systems, Economic Evaluations, Quality of Life, Estrogen and related hormone effects, Statistical Methods in Clinical Trials. 196 papers and 23.6k citations.

196Publications
23.6kTotal Citations

Is this you? Claim your profile.

Add your photo, update your bio, and get notified when your ranking changes.

Top publicationsby citations

Interpreting the significance of changes in health-related quality-of-life scores.
David Osoba, George Rodrigues, James D. Myles et al.|Journal of Clinical Oncology|1998
Cited by 2.9k

PURPOSE: To determine the significance to patients of changes in health-related quality-of-life (HLQ) scores assessed by the European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) Quality of Life Questionnaire (QLQ-C30). PATIENTS AND METHODS: A subjective significance questionnaire (SSQ), which asks patients about perceived changes in physical, emotional, and social functioning and in global quality of life (global QL) and the QLQ-C30 were completed by patients who received chemotherapy for either breast cancer or small-cell lung cancer (SCLC). In the SSQ, patients rated their perception of change since the last time they completed the QLQ-C30 using a 7-category scale that ranged from "much worse" through "no change" to "much better." For each category of change in the SSQ, the corresponding differences were calculated in QLQ-C30 mean scores and effect sizes were determined. RESULTS: For patients who indicated "no change" in the SSQ, the mean change in scores in the corresponding QLQ-C30 domains was not significantly different from 0. For patients who indicated "a little" change either for better or for worse, the mean change in scores was about 5 to 10; for "moderate" change, about 10 to 20; and for "very much" change, greater than 20. Effect sizes increased in concordance with increasing changes in SSQ ratings and QLQ-C30 scores. CONCLUSION: The significance of changes in QLQ-C30 scores can be interpreted in terms of small, moderate, or large changes in quality of life as reported by patients in the SSQ. The magnitude of these changes also can be used to calculate the sample sizes required to detect a specified change in clinical trials.

Erlotinib in Lung Cancer — Molecular and Clinical Predictors of Outcome
Ming‐Sound Tsao, Akira Sakurada, Jean-Claude Cutz et al.|New England Journal of Medicine|2005
Cited by 1.9k

BACKGROUND: A clinical trial that compared erlotinib with a placebo for non-small-cell lung cancer demonstrated a survival benefit for erlotinib. We used tumor-biopsy samples from participants in this trial to investigate whether responsiveness to erlotinib and its impact on survival were associated with expression by the tumor of epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) and EGFR gene amplification and mutations. METHODS: EGFR expression was evaluated immunohistochemically in non-small-cell lung cancer specimens from 325 of 731 patients in the trial; 197 samples were analyzed for EGFR mutations; and 221 samples were analyzed for the number of EGFR genes. RESULTS: In univariate analyses, survival was longer in the erlotinib group than in the placebo group when EGFR was expressed (hazard ratio for death, 0.68; P=0.02) or there was a high number of copies of EGFR (hazard ratio, 0.44; P=0.008). In multivariate analyses, adenocarcinoma (P=0.01), never having smoked (P<0.001), and expression of EGFR (P=0.03) were associated with an objective response. In multivariate analysis, survival after treatment with erlotinib was not influenced by the status of EGFR expression, the number of EGFR copies, or EGFR mutation. CONCLUSIONS: Among patients with non-small-cell lung cancer who receive erlotinib, the presence of an EGFR mutation may increase responsiveness to the agent, but it is not indicative of a survival benefit.