Meaningful change threshold estimation for the non-small cell lung cancer symptom assessment questionnaire (NSCLC-SAQ): psychometric analysis from a phase 3 trial (LIBRETTO-431).

IF 2.7 3区 医学 Q1 HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES Quality of Life Research Pub Date : 2025-04-01 Epub Date: 2025-01-23 DOI:10.1007/s11136-025-03895-1
Nathan Clarke, Gill Worthy, Nalin Payakachat, Adrienne M Gilligan, Kim Cocks
{"title":"Meaningful change threshold estimation for the non-small cell lung cancer symptom assessment questionnaire (NSCLC-SAQ): psychometric analysis from a phase 3 trial (LIBRETTO-431).","authors":"Nathan Clarke, Gill Worthy, Nalin Payakachat, Adrienne M Gilligan, Kim Cocks","doi":"10.1007/s11136-025-03895-1","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>Meaningful change thresholds are important to help interpret patient-reported outcome scores. To date, meaningful within-patient change (MWPC) thresholds have only been proposed for NSCLC-SAQ total score. This study proposed clinically MWPC thresholds, and group-level minimal important change/difference (MIC/MID) thresholds for both improvement and worsening for the Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer- Symptom Assessment Questionnaire (NSCLC-SAQ) total and symptom scores.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Blinded patient data (N = 246) from the Phase 3 LIBRETTO-431 clinical trial were used in a pre-specified meaningful change analysis. A combination of anchor- and supportive distribution-based methods were used to estimate the MWPC, MIC, and MID thresholds. Triangulation across anchor estimates was then performed using a correlation-weighted average to provide a single MWPC, MIC, and MID estimate for improvement and worsening.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>NSCLC-SAQ total score and symptom scores showed moderate to high correlations with various anchors (ranging from 0.306 to 0.890), with threshold estimates being provided from multiple anchors (except for cough). Triangulation suggested MWPC, MIC, and MID thresholds for improved total score were - 2.5, -3.5, and - 2.0, respectively. For worsening, the proposed thresholds were 2.0, 0.5, and 2.0, respectively. The MWPC, MIC, and MID thresholds for improved symptom scores ranged from - 0.5 to -1.5, and the worsening thresholds for symptom scores ranged from 0.5 to 1.0.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>This study provides the first worsening and improvement estimates of MWPC, MIC, and MID for NSCLC-SAQ total and symptom scores. The thresholds proposed in this study can be used to inform interpretation of NSCLC-SAQ scores in clinical trials.</p>","PeriodicalId":20748,"journal":{"name":"Quality of Life Research","volume":" ","pages":"1137-1146"},"PeriodicalIF":2.7000,"publicationDate":"2025-04-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Quality of Life Research","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s11136-025-03895-1","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/1/23 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Purpose: Meaningful change thresholds are important to help interpret patient-reported outcome scores. To date, meaningful within-patient change (MWPC) thresholds have only been proposed for NSCLC-SAQ total score. This study proposed clinically MWPC thresholds, and group-level minimal important change/difference (MIC/MID) thresholds for both improvement and worsening for the Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer- Symptom Assessment Questionnaire (NSCLC-SAQ) total and symptom scores.

Methods: Blinded patient data (N = 246) from the Phase 3 LIBRETTO-431 clinical trial were used in a pre-specified meaningful change analysis. A combination of anchor- and supportive distribution-based methods were used to estimate the MWPC, MIC, and MID thresholds. Triangulation across anchor estimates was then performed using a correlation-weighted average to provide a single MWPC, MIC, and MID estimate for improvement and worsening.

Results: NSCLC-SAQ total score and symptom scores showed moderate to high correlations with various anchors (ranging from 0.306 to 0.890), with threshold estimates being provided from multiple anchors (except for cough). Triangulation suggested MWPC, MIC, and MID thresholds for improved total score were - 2.5, -3.5, and - 2.0, respectively. For worsening, the proposed thresholds were 2.0, 0.5, and 2.0, respectively. The MWPC, MIC, and MID thresholds for improved symptom scores ranged from - 0.5 to -1.5, and the worsening thresholds for symptom scores ranged from 0.5 to 1.0.

Conclusion: This study provides the first worsening and improvement estimates of MWPC, MIC, and MID for NSCLC-SAQ total and symptom scores. The thresholds proposed in this study can be used to inform interpretation of NSCLC-SAQ scores in 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
非小细胞肺癌症状评估问卷(NSCLC-SAQ)的有意义变化阈值估计:来自3期试验(LIBRETTO-431)的心理测量学分析。
目的:有意义的变化阈值对于帮助解释患者报告的结果评分很重要。迄今为止,仅针对NSCLC-SAQ总分提出了有意义的患者内变化(MWPC)阈值。本研究提出了非小细胞肺癌-症状评估问卷(NSCLC-SAQ)总分和症状评分的临床MWPC阈值和组水平最小重要变化/差异(MIC/MID)阈值。方法:对来自LIBRETTO-431三期临床试验的盲法患者数据(N = 246)进行预先指定的有意义变化分析。基于锚点和支持分布的方法组合用于估计MWPC、MIC和MID阈值。然后使用相关加权平均值对锚点估计值进行三角测量,以提供单个MWPC、MIC和MID的改善和恶化估计值。结果:NSCLC-SAQ总分和症状评分与各种锚点显示中度至高度相关性(范围为0.306至0.890),阈值估计来自多个锚点(咳嗽除外)。三角测量显示,提高总分的MWPC、MIC和MID阈值分别为- 2.5、-3.5和- 2.0。对于恶化,建议的阈值分别为2.0、0.5和2.0。改善症状评分的MWPC、MIC和MID阈值范围为- 0.5至-1.5,症状评分的恶化阈值范围为0.5至1.0。结论:本研究为NSCLC-SAQ总分和症状评分提供了MWPC、MIC和MID的首次恶化和改善估计。本研究提出的阈值可用于临床试验中NSCLC-SAQ评分的解释。
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
Quality of Life Research
Quality of Life Research 医学-公共卫生、环境卫生与职业卫生
CiteScore
6.50
自引率
8.60%
发文量
224
审稿时长
3-8 weeks
期刊介绍: Quality of Life Research is an international, multidisciplinary journal devoted to the rapid communication of original research, theoretical articles and methodological reports related to the field of quality of life, in all the health sciences. The journal also offers editorials, literature, book and software reviews, correspondence and abstracts of conferences. Quality of life has become a prominent issue in biometry, philosophy, social science, clinical medicine, health services and outcomes research. The journal''s scope reflects the wide application of quality of life assessment and research in the biological and social sciences. All original work is subject to peer review for originality, scientific quality and relevance to a broad readership. This is an official journal of the International Society of Quality of Life Research.
期刊最新文献
Correction: Exploring the lived experiences of women with metastatic breast cancer and their HRQoL questionnaire preferences: a qualitative study. Correction: Validity of EQ-5D-5L breathing and cognition bolt-ons in non-hospitalized patients after COVID-19. Balancing ideals and realities: health care professionals' perspectives of and attitudes toward digital patient-centered cancer care. The association among psychological factors, pain severity and quality of life in people living beyond adolescent and young adult cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Needs and health-related quality of life domains relevant to people in Europe with advanced cancer in need of palliative care: a systematic review of qualitative research.
×
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:604180095
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