Quality of life among people with eye cancer: a systematic review from 2012 to 2022

Abstract

Background Eye cancer is a serious eye disease that threatens patients’ lives. In the past decade, there have been more and more studies on eye cancer. From the recently published eye cancer literature review, it can be seen that the two most popular research hotspots are retinoblastoma (RB) and uveal melanoma (UM) [1, 2]. Although several studies have assessed QOL in different types of eye cancer patients, a study that synthesizes the factors influencing QOL in eye cancer patients is yet to be undertaken. This study aimed to review and evaluate the literature related to the QOL of RB and UM survivors, and provide a synthesis of the current evidence on the impact of the two types of eye cancer on the overall QOL of patients. Methods Eight databases (APA Psych Articles, CINAHL Complete, Health Source: Nursing/Academic Edition, MEDLINE Complete, Scopus, Cochrane Library, PubMed, and Registers (Clinicaltrials.gov.)) were searched between January 2012 and December 2022 for English, peer-reviewed quantitative original studies within this review. All publications were screened using the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-Analyses reporting guidelines. The methodological quality of the reviews was assessed using the Joanna Briggs Institute Critical Appraisal Checklists. The findings were summarised and tabulated accordingly. Results Seventeen articles were analysed. Among them, 14 articles on patients with UM, and three articles on patients with RB using 18 different types of measurement tools were included. Eight researchers claimed that the overall QOL of patients with eye cancer was better than or similar to that of the general healthy population. However, nine studies indicated that these patients had poorer QOL than others. Many factors affect QOL, including treatment, sex, and age. Conclusion This systematic review identified the QOL levels and several factors that influence the QOL of ocular cancer patients worldwide, due to the variability in quality of the studies, it also showed the need for further research to assess factors affecting long-term QOL outcomes in RB and UM survivors. Simultaneously, it clarified the necessity and importance of developing standardized and complete assessment tools to compare QOL in different countries. Early interventions can be developed to improve the survivors’ QOL by identifying potential deficits in specific areas.