Estimating the minimally important difference for the EQ-5D-5L and EORTC QLQ-C30 in cancer.

IF 3.2 2区 医学 Q1 HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES Health and Quality of Life Outcomes Pub Date : 2024-09-20 DOI:10.1186/s12955-024-02294-3
Siobhan Bourke, Bryan Bennett, Yemi Oluboyede, Tara Li, Louise Longworth, Sian Bissell O'Sullivan, Julia Braverman, Ioana-Alexandra Soare, James W Shaw
{"title":"Estimating the minimally important difference for the EQ-5D-5L and EORTC QLQ-C30 in cancer.","authors":"Siobhan Bourke, Bryan Bennett, Yemi Oluboyede, Tara Li, Louise Longworth, Sian Bissell O'Sullivan, Julia Braverman, Ioana-Alexandra Soare, James W Shaw","doi":"10.1186/s12955-024-02294-3","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>The minimal important difference (MID) is a useful tool to interpret changes in patients' health-related quality of life. This study aims to estimate MIDs for interpreting within-patient change for both components of the EQ-5D-5L questionnaire [EQ-Visual Analogue Scale (EQ-VAS) and utility index] and domains of the European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Questionnaire Core 30 (EORTC QLQ-C30) for cancer patients.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Data were obtained from the Cancer 2015 dataset, a longitudinal cohort of Australian cancer patients. Anchor-based approaches were used to estimate MIDs for the EQ-5D-5L index-based utility index [Australia and the United States (US) tariff sets], EQ-VAS scores, and the EORTC QLQ-C30. Clinical [Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) performance status] and patient-reported (items 29 and 30 of the EORTC QLQ-C30 and the EQ-VAS) anchors were assessed for appropriateness by their correlation strength. Clinical change groups (CCGs) were defined a priori for improvement and deterioration based on estimates used in previous literature. MIDs were estimated via linear regression and distribution-based methods.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>For the index-based utility scores in Australia, the anchor-defined MID estimates were 0.01 to 0.06 for improvement and - 0.04 to -0.03 for deterioration, with a weighted value of 0.03 for improvement and deterioration. The EQ-VAS MID estimate was 5 points for both improvement and deterioration. For the EORTC QLQ-C30, changes of at least 3.64 (improvement) and - 4.28 (deterioration) units on the physical functioning scale, 6.31 (improvement) and - 7.11 (deterioration) units on the role functioning scale, 4.65 (improvement) and - 3.41 (deterioration) units on the emotional functioning scale, and 5.41 (improvement) and - 5.56 (deterioration) units on the social functioning scale were estimated to be meaningful.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>This study identified lower MIDs for the EQ-5D-5L utility index, EQ-VAS, and EORTC QLQ-C30 domain scores, than those reported previously. The use of a real-world cancer-specific panel dataset may reflect smaller MID estimates that are more applicable to cancer patients in the clinical practice, rather than using MIDs that have been estimated from clinical trials.</p>","PeriodicalId":12980,"journal":{"name":"Health and Quality of Life Outcomes","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":3.2000,"publicationDate":"2024-09-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11416011/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Health and Quality of Life Outcomes","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1186/s12955-024-02294-3","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: The minimal important difference (MID) is a useful tool to interpret changes in patients' health-related quality of life. This study aims to estimate MIDs for interpreting within-patient change for both components of the EQ-5D-5L questionnaire [EQ-Visual Analogue Scale (EQ-VAS) and utility index] and domains of the European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Questionnaire Core 30 (EORTC QLQ-C30) for cancer patients.

Methods: Data were obtained from the Cancer 2015 dataset, a longitudinal cohort of Australian cancer patients. Anchor-based approaches were used to estimate MIDs for the EQ-5D-5L index-based utility index [Australia and the United States (US) tariff sets], EQ-VAS scores, and the EORTC QLQ-C30. Clinical [Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) performance status] and patient-reported (items 29 and 30 of the EORTC QLQ-C30 and the EQ-VAS) anchors were assessed for appropriateness by their correlation strength. Clinical change groups (CCGs) were defined a priori for improvement and deterioration based on estimates used in previous literature. MIDs were estimated via linear regression and distribution-based methods.

Results: For the index-based utility scores in Australia, the anchor-defined MID estimates were 0.01 to 0.06 for improvement and - 0.04 to -0.03 for deterioration, with a weighted value of 0.03 for improvement and deterioration. The EQ-VAS MID estimate was 5 points for both improvement and deterioration. For the EORTC QLQ-C30, changes of at least 3.64 (improvement) and - 4.28 (deterioration) units on the physical functioning scale, 6.31 (improvement) and - 7.11 (deterioration) units on the role functioning scale, 4.65 (improvement) and - 3.41 (deterioration) units on the emotional functioning scale, and 5.41 (improvement) and - 5.56 (deterioration) units on the social functioning scale were estimated to be meaningful.

Conclusion: This study identified lower MIDs for the EQ-5D-5L utility index, EQ-VAS, and EORTC QLQ-C30 domain scores, than those reported previously. The use of a real-world cancer-specific panel dataset may reflect smaller MID estimates that are more applicable to cancer patients in the clinical practice, rather than using MIDs that have been estimated from clinical trials.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
估算癌症患者 EQ-5D-5L 和 EORTC QLQ-C30 的最小重要差异。
背景:最小重要差异(MID)是解释患者健康相关生活质量变化的有用工具。本研究旨在估算最小重要差异,以解释癌症患者的 EQ-5D-5L 问卷的两个组成部分[EQ-视觉模拟量表(EQ-VAS)和效用指数]以及欧洲癌症研究和治疗组织生活质量问卷核心 30(EORTC QLQ-C30)各领域的患者内部变化:数据来自澳大利亚癌症患者纵向队列 "癌症 2015 "数据集。采用基于锚点的方法估算了基于 EQ-5D-5L 指数的效用指数[澳大利亚和美国(US)标准集]、EQ-VAS 评分和 EORTC QLQ-C30 的中位数。临床[东部合作肿瘤学组(Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group,ECOG)表现状态]和患者报告(EORTC QLQ-C30的第29和30项以及EQ-VAS)锚根据其相关强度评估是否合适。临床变化组(CCG)是根据以往文献中使用的估计值预先为病情改善和恶化定义的。通过线性回归和基于分布的方法估算中位数:对于澳大利亚基于指数的效用评分,锚定的 MID 估计值为:改善 0.01 至 0.06,恶化 - 0.04 至 -0.03,改善和恶化的加权值均为 0.03。EQ-VAS 的 MID 估计值为改善和恶化均为 5 点。就 EORTC QLQ-C30 而言,身体功能量表中至少有 3.64 个单位(改善)和-4.28 个单位(恶化)的变化、角色功能量表中至少有 6.31 个单位(改善)和-7.11 个单位(恶化)的变化、情感功能量表中至少有 4.65 个单位(改善)和-3.41 个单位(恶化)的变化、社会功能量表中至少有 5.41 个单位(改善)和-5.56 个单位(恶化)的变化才有意义:本研究确定的 EQ-5D-5L 实用性指数、EQ-VAS 和 EORTC QLQ-C30 领域评分的中位数低于之前的报告。使用真实世界的癌症特异性小组数据集可能反映出较小的 MID 估计值更适用于临床实践中的癌症患者,而不是使用临床试验估计的 MID。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
7.30
自引率
2.80%
发文量
154
审稿时长
3-8 weeks
期刊介绍: Health and Quality of Life Outcomes is an open access, peer-reviewed, journal offering high quality articles, rapid publication and wide diffusion in the public domain. Health and Quality of Life Outcomes considers original manuscripts on the Health-Related Quality of Life (HRQOL) assessment for evaluation of medical and psychosocial interventions. It also considers approaches and studies on psychometric properties of HRQOL and patient reported outcome measures, including cultural validation of instruments if they provide information about the impact of interventions. The journal publishes study protocols and reviews summarising the present state of knowledge concerning a particular aspect of HRQOL and patient reported outcome measures. Reviews should generally follow systematic review methodology. Comments on articles and letters to the editor are welcome.
期刊最新文献
Estimating the minimally important difference for the EQ-5D-5L and EORTC QLQ-C30 in cancer. EQ-5D-5L and SF-6Dv2 health utilities scores of diffuse large B-cell lymphoma patients in China Patient-reported outcome measures for acute rhinosinusitis in adults and children: a systematic review of the quality of existing instruments A sex-oriented analysis concerning skeletal muscle quantity and quality and associations to quality of life in hospitalized patients with cirrhosis Validation of the parents’ version of the KINDLR and Kiddy Parents questionnaire in a South African context
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1