{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.03185247275775356, 'fraction_numerical': 0.003352891869237217, 'mean_word_length': 5.524590163934426, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Comparison and clinical implementation of quality of life tools in patients with small bowel neuroendocrine tumors treated with Lu-DOTA-TATE PRRT

Aim: This study assesses if clinically developed quality of life (QoL) tools are as effective in small bowel neuroendocrine tumors (NETs) as NET-specific research questionnaires. Methods: QoL in patients with small bowel NETs treated with Lu-DOTA-TATE was assessed with The European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) QLQ-C30, QLQ-GI.NET21 and Edmonton Symptom Assessment System Revised (ESAS-r) at baseline and after four treatments. Repeated measures ANOVA was performed. Results: Both EORTC and ESAS-r demonstrated maintained overall QoL. EORTC demonstrated statistically and clinically significant improvement in insomnia, diarrhea, gastrointestinal, endocrine symptoms and social function. ESAS-r demonstrated statistically and clinically significant improvement in overall total symptom distress score. Conclusion: ESAS-r is quick and easy to interpret. It is not as sensitive to individual symptoms but does track overall function. EORTC assessment is more complex, but better reflects QoL for NET specific symptoms.