ISPOR 20th Annual European Congress
Glasgow, Scotland
November, 2017
Patient-Reported Outcomes & Patient Preference Studies (PRO)
Patient-Reported Outcomes (PRO)
Martin A
Crystallise Ltd., East Tilbury, UK
OBJECTIVES: To create an evidence map of the different patient-reported outcome instruments used in studies of patients with skin cancer, the geographical settings in which these studies were conducted and the interventions assessed.

METHODS: We searched the database ( for PRO studies on skin cancer published between 1960 and May 15 2017, and analysed the abstracts identified by the search to determine the different PRO instruments cited across the range of geographical locations and interventions. We presented the findings as an evidence map.

RESULTS: We found a total of 79 abstracts that reported the use of 45 different PRO instruments. Of these, nine instruments were specific for skin cancers, four were designed for other cancers or cancer in general, 18 were general instruments used to evaluate quality of life or utilities, seven assessed the impact of treatments, and seven assessed symptoms or comorbidities of people with skin cancer. The most frequently used tool was the EORTC QLQ-C30 (12 abstracts), followed by the SF-26 (9), then Skindex, DLQI and visual anlogue scales (7 each) and Skin Cancer Index (5). Studies generally recruited patients with melanona (35 abstracts), basal cell carcinoma (13), squamous cell carcinoma (7), all non-melanoma skin cancers (13) or skin cancer in general (15). The USA was the most frequent location for the studies, with 27 abstracts, followed by the UK (11) then Italy (5). The main interventions assessed were surgery, including Mohs microsurgery (17 abstracts), interferon (7), photodynamic therapy (5) dacarbazine (4) and screening or surveillance (12).

CONCLUSIONS: A wide range of PRO tools have been used in studies of skin cancer from a wide range of locations, but only six tools and three countries were cited in five or more abstracts.