Cargando…
Estimation of minimally important differences and responder definitions for EORTC QLQ‐MY20 scores in multiple myeloma patients
OBJECTIVES: Thresholds for the minimally important difference (MID) or responder definition (RD) in health‐related quality‐of‐life (HRQoL) scores are required to interpret the impact of an intervention or change in the trajectory of the condition which is meaningful to patients. This study aimed to...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
John Wiley and Sons Inc.
2019
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6852250/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31444815 http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/ejh.13316 |
_version_ | 1783469789048471552 |
---|---|
author | Sully, Kate Trigg, Andrew Bonner, Nicola Moreno‐Koehler, Alejandro Trennery, Claire Shah, Nina Yucel, Emre Panjabi, Sumeet Cocks, Kim |
author_facet | Sully, Kate Trigg, Andrew Bonner, Nicola Moreno‐Koehler, Alejandro Trennery, Claire Shah, Nina Yucel, Emre Panjabi, Sumeet Cocks, Kim |
author_sort | Sully, Kate |
collection | PubMed |
description | OBJECTIVES: Thresholds for the minimally important difference (MID) or responder definition (RD) in health‐related quality‐of‐life (HRQoL) scores are required to interpret the impact of an intervention or change in the trajectory of the condition which is meaningful to patients. This study aimed to establish MID and RD for the European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Multiple Myeloma questionnaire (EORTC QLQ‐MY20). METHODS: A novel mixed‐methods approach was applied by utilizing both existing clinical trial data and prospective patient interviews. Anchor‐based, distribution‐based, and qualitative‐based estimates of meaningful change were triangulated to form recommended RDs for each scale of the EORTC QLQ‐MY20. Anchor‐based MIDs were summarized using weighted correlation. RESULTS: Recommended MIDs were as follows: Disease Symptoms (DS 10 points), Side Effects of Treatment (SE 10 points), Body Image (BI 13 points), and Future Perspective (FP 9 points). Recommended RDs were as follows: DS (16 improvement; 11 worsening), SE (6 improvement; 9 worsening), BI (33 improvement; 33 worsening), and FP (11 improvement; 11 worsening). CONCLUSIONS: The study generated estimates of the MID and RD for each scale of the EORTC QLQ‐MY20. Published estimates will enable investigators and clinicians to adopt these as standard for interpretation and for hypothesis testing. Consequently, analyses from trials of different interventions can be more comparable. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-6852250 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2019 |
publisher | John Wiley and Sons Inc. |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-68522502019-11-22 Estimation of minimally important differences and responder definitions for EORTC QLQ‐MY20 scores in multiple myeloma patients Sully, Kate Trigg, Andrew Bonner, Nicola Moreno‐Koehler, Alejandro Trennery, Claire Shah, Nina Yucel, Emre Panjabi, Sumeet Cocks, Kim Eur J Haematol Original Articles OBJECTIVES: Thresholds for the minimally important difference (MID) or responder definition (RD) in health‐related quality‐of‐life (HRQoL) scores are required to interpret the impact of an intervention or change in the trajectory of the condition which is meaningful to patients. This study aimed to establish MID and RD for the European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Multiple Myeloma questionnaire (EORTC QLQ‐MY20). METHODS: A novel mixed‐methods approach was applied by utilizing both existing clinical trial data and prospective patient interviews. Anchor‐based, distribution‐based, and qualitative‐based estimates of meaningful change were triangulated to form recommended RDs for each scale of the EORTC QLQ‐MY20. Anchor‐based MIDs were summarized using weighted correlation. RESULTS: Recommended MIDs were as follows: Disease Symptoms (DS 10 points), Side Effects of Treatment (SE 10 points), Body Image (BI 13 points), and Future Perspective (FP 9 points). Recommended RDs were as follows: DS (16 improvement; 11 worsening), SE (6 improvement; 9 worsening), BI (33 improvement; 33 worsening), and FP (11 improvement; 11 worsening). CONCLUSIONS: The study generated estimates of the MID and RD for each scale of the EORTC QLQ‐MY20. Published estimates will enable investigators and clinicians to adopt these as standard for interpretation and for hypothesis testing. Consequently, analyses from trials of different interventions can be more comparable. John Wiley and Sons Inc. 2019-09-05 2019-11 /pmc/articles/PMC6852250/ /pubmed/31444815 http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/ejh.13316 Text en © 2019 The Authors. European Journal of Haematology Published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd This is an open access article under the terms of the http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/ License, which permits use and distribution in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited, the use is non‐commercial and no modifications or adaptations are made. |
spellingShingle | Original Articles Sully, Kate Trigg, Andrew Bonner, Nicola Moreno‐Koehler, Alejandro Trennery, Claire Shah, Nina Yucel, Emre Panjabi, Sumeet Cocks, Kim Estimation of minimally important differences and responder definitions for EORTC QLQ‐MY20 scores in multiple myeloma patients |
title | Estimation of minimally important differences and responder definitions for EORTC QLQ‐MY20 scores in multiple myeloma patients |
title_full | Estimation of minimally important differences and responder definitions for EORTC QLQ‐MY20 scores in multiple myeloma patients |
title_fullStr | Estimation of minimally important differences and responder definitions for EORTC QLQ‐MY20 scores in multiple myeloma patients |
title_full_unstemmed | Estimation of minimally important differences and responder definitions for EORTC QLQ‐MY20 scores in multiple myeloma patients |
title_short | Estimation of minimally important differences and responder definitions for EORTC QLQ‐MY20 scores in multiple myeloma patients |
title_sort | estimation of minimally important differences and responder definitions for eortc qlq‐my20 scores in multiple myeloma patients |
topic | Original Articles |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6852250/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31444815 http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/ejh.13316 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT sullykate estimationofminimallyimportantdifferencesandresponderdefinitionsforeortcqlqmy20scoresinmultiplemyelomapatients AT triggandrew estimationofminimallyimportantdifferencesandresponderdefinitionsforeortcqlqmy20scoresinmultiplemyelomapatients AT bonnernicola estimationofminimallyimportantdifferencesandresponderdefinitionsforeortcqlqmy20scoresinmultiplemyelomapatients AT morenokoehleralejandro estimationofminimallyimportantdifferencesandresponderdefinitionsforeortcqlqmy20scoresinmultiplemyelomapatients AT trenneryclaire estimationofminimallyimportantdifferencesandresponderdefinitionsforeortcqlqmy20scoresinmultiplemyelomapatients AT shahnina estimationofminimallyimportantdifferencesandresponderdefinitionsforeortcqlqmy20scoresinmultiplemyelomapatients AT yucelemre estimationofminimallyimportantdifferencesandresponderdefinitionsforeortcqlqmy20scoresinmultiplemyelomapatients AT panjabisumeet estimationofminimallyimportantdifferencesandresponderdefinitionsforeortcqlqmy20scoresinmultiplemyelomapatients AT cockskim estimationofminimallyimportantdifferencesandresponderdefinitionsforeortcqlqmy20scoresinmultiplemyelomapatients |