Table 1:

Comparisons of Patient and Clinician Reported Peripheral Neuropathy

PRO and Subscale	n	Collection Time Point	Objective Assessmentsb	Findings	Journal Reference
FACT/GOG-Ntx	99	BL (controls) or Post-Tx (cases)	Yes	Ntx significantly worse in cases than controls (p<0.001)	Calhoun, Welshman et al. 2003
	27	BL, each cycle, 3M Post-Tx	Yes	Ntx and CTCAE Spearman’s ρ=−0.59 (p=0.001)	Moore, Donnelly et al. 2003
	134	Each cycle		Ntx sensory ROC curve AUC=0.90	Huang, Brady et al. 2007
	300	BL, C3, C5, C7, 7M and 12M		Ntx and CTCAE sensory Spearman’s ρ=0.45	Shimozuma, Ohashi et al. 2009
	422	BL, within 4W of Tx end, 6M Post-Tx		Ntx and CTCAE sensory Pearson r=0.69	Cella, Huang et al. 2010
	29	Each cycle	Yes	NTx sensory worse in patients with sensory CTCAE≥1 (p<0.001)	Griffith, Couture et al. 2014
EORTC QLQ-CIPN20	230	BL		CIPN20 sensory and CTCAE sensory Pearson r=0.20 (p≤0.01)	Lavoie Smith, Barton et al. 2013
	281	Post-Tx	Yes	CIPN20 and CTCAE sensory Spearman’s ρ=0.47 (p≤0.007)	Cavaletti, Cornblath et al. 2013
	281	Post-Tx	Yes	CIPN20 sensory and CTCAE sensory linear correlation β=13.3 (p<0.001)	Alberti, Rossi et al. 2014
	414	Each cycle		CIPN20 sensory and CTCAE linear association (p<0.0001)	Le-Rademacher, Kanwar et al. 2017
PNQ	300	BL, C3, C5, C7, 7M and 12M		PNQ sensory and CTCAE sensory Spearman’s ρ=0.44	Shimozuma, Ohashi et al. 2009
	35	BL, 8W, 16W		PNQ sensory and CTCAE sensory Spearman’s ρ=0.58	Kuroi, Shimozuma et al. 2009
	20	Post-Tx	Yes	PNQ and CTCAE sensory statistical comparison NR	Bennett, Park et al. 2012

^a:Used NCI-Sanofi grading scale, which is similar to NCI CTCAE

^b:Objective assessments included: Thermal discrimination, Vibration perception, Nerve conduction, Quantitative sensory testing, Mechanical stimulation with a monofilament, Grip strength, Pinprick sensibility, Deep tendon reflexes

Acronyms: NR: Not reported, ROC: receiver operating curve, BL: baseline, Post-Tx: after treatment ended, C: cycle, W: week, M: month