Cargando…

Minimally Important Differences for Interpreting EORTC QLQ-C30 Scores in Patients With Advanced Breast Cancer

BACKGROUND: We aimed to estimate the minimally important difference (MID) for interpreting group-level change over time, both within a group and between groups, for the European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Questionnaire core 30 (EORTC QLQ-C30) scores in patients...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Musoro, Jammbe Z, Coens, Corneel, Fiteni, Frederic, Katarzyna, Pogoda, Cardoso, Fatima, Russell, Nicola S, King, Madeleine T, Cocks, Kim, Sprangers, Mirjam Ag, Groenvold, Mogens, Velikova, Galina, Flechtner, Hans-Henning, Bottomley, Andrew
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Oxford University Press 2019
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7050000/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32328553
http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/jncics/pkz037
_version_ 1783502550900670464
author Musoro, Jammbe Z
Coens, Corneel
Fiteni, Frederic
Katarzyna, Pogoda
Cardoso, Fatima
Russell, Nicola S
King, Madeleine T
Cocks, Kim
Sprangers, Mirjam Ag
Groenvold, Mogens
Velikova, Galina
Flechtner, Hans-Henning
Bottomley, Andrew
author_facet Musoro, Jammbe Z
Coens, Corneel
Fiteni, Frederic
Katarzyna, Pogoda
Cardoso, Fatima
Russell, Nicola S
King, Madeleine T
Cocks, Kim
Sprangers, Mirjam Ag
Groenvold, Mogens
Velikova, Galina
Flechtner, Hans-Henning
Bottomley, Andrew
author_sort Musoro, Jammbe Z
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: We aimed to estimate the minimally important difference (MID) for interpreting group-level change over time, both within a group and between groups, for the European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Questionnaire core 30 (EORTC QLQ-C30) scores in patients with advanced breast cancer. METHODS: Data were derived from two published EORTC trials. Clinical anchors (eg, performance status [PS]) were selected using correlation strength and clinical plausibility of their association with a particular QLQ-C30 scale. Three change status groups were formed: deteriorated by one anchor category, improved by one anchor category, and no change. Patients with greater anchor changes were excluded. The mean change method was used to estimate MIDs for within-group change, and linear regression was used to estimate MIDs for between-group differences in change over time. For a given QLQ-C30 scale, MID estimates from multiple anchors were triangulated to a single value via a correlation-based weighted average. RESULTS: MIDs varied by QLQ-C30 scale, direction (improvement vs deterioration), and anchor. MIDs for within-group change ranged from 5 to 14 points (improvement) and −14 to −4 points (deterioration), and MIDs for between-group change over time ranged from 4 to 11 points and from −18 to −4 points. Correlation-weighted MIDs for most QLQ-C30 scales ranged from 4 to 10 points in absolute values. CONCLUSIONS: Our findings aid interpretation of changes in EORTC QLQ-C30 scores over time, both within and between groups, and for performing more accurate sample size calculations for clinical trials in advanced breast cancer.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-7050000
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2019
publisher Oxford University Press
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-70500002020-04-23 Minimally Important Differences for Interpreting EORTC QLQ-C30 Scores in Patients With Advanced Breast Cancer Musoro, Jammbe Z Coens, Corneel Fiteni, Frederic Katarzyna, Pogoda Cardoso, Fatima Russell, Nicola S King, Madeleine T Cocks, Kim Sprangers, Mirjam Ag Groenvold, Mogens Velikova, Galina Flechtner, Hans-Henning Bottomley, Andrew JNCI Cancer Spectr Article BACKGROUND: We aimed to estimate the minimally important difference (MID) for interpreting group-level change over time, both within a group and between groups, for the European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Questionnaire core 30 (EORTC QLQ-C30) scores in patients with advanced breast cancer. METHODS: Data were derived from two published EORTC trials. Clinical anchors (eg, performance status [PS]) were selected using correlation strength and clinical plausibility of their association with a particular QLQ-C30 scale. Three change status groups were formed: deteriorated by one anchor category, improved by one anchor category, and no change. Patients with greater anchor changes were excluded. The mean change method was used to estimate MIDs for within-group change, and linear regression was used to estimate MIDs for between-group differences in change over time. For a given QLQ-C30 scale, MID estimates from multiple anchors were triangulated to a single value via a correlation-based weighted average. RESULTS: MIDs varied by QLQ-C30 scale, direction (improvement vs deterioration), and anchor. MIDs for within-group change ranged from 5 to 14 points (improvement) and −14 to −4 points (deterioration), and MIDs for between-group change over time ranged from 4 to 11 points and from −18 to −4 points. Correlation-weighted MIDs for most QLQ-C30 scales ranged from 4 to 10 points in absolute values. CONCLUSIONS: Our findings aid interpretation of changes in EORTC QLQ-C30 scores over time, both within and between groups, and for performing more accurate sample size calculations for clinical trials in advanced breast cancer. Oxford University Press 2019-06-04 /pmc/articles/PMC7050000/ /pubmed/32328553 http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/jncics/pkz037 Text en © The Author(s) 2019. Published by Oxford University Press. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/ This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Non-Commercial License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/), which permits non-commercial re-use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. For commercial re-use, please contact journals.permissions@oup.com.
spellingShingle Article
Musoro, Jammbe Z
Coens, Corneel
Fiteni, Frederic
Katarzyna, Pogoda
Cardoso, Fatima
Russell, Nicola S
King, Madeleine T
Cocks, Kim
Sprangers, Mirjam Ag
Groenvold, Mogens
Velikova, Galina
Flechtner, Hans-Henning
Bottomley, Andrew
Minimally Important Differences for Interpreting EORTC QLQ-C30 Scores in Patients With Advanced Breast Cancer
title Minimally Important Differences for Interpreting EORTC QLQ-C30 Scores in Patients With Advanced Breast Cancer
title_full Minimally Important Differences for Interpreting EORTC QLQ-C30 Scores in Patients With Advanced Breast Cancer
title_fullStr Minimally Important Differences for Interpreting EORTC QLQ-C30 Scores in Patients With Advanced Breast Cancer
title_full_unstemmed Minimally Important Differences for Interpreting EORTC QLQ-C30 Scores in Patients With Advanced Breast Cancer
title_short Minimally Important Differences for Interpreting EORTC QLQ-C30 Scores in Patients With Advanced Breast Cancer
title_sort minimally important differences for interpreting eortc qlq-c30 scores in patients with advanced breast cancer
topic Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7050000/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32328553
http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/jncics/pkz037
work_keys_str_mv AT musorojammbez minimallyimportantdifferencesforinterpretingeortcqlqc30scoresinpatientswithadvancedbreastcancer
AT coenscorneel minimallyimportantdifferencesforinterpretingeortcqlqc30scoresinpatientswithadvancedbreastcancer
AT fitenifrederic minimallyimportantdifferencesforinterpretingeortcqlqc30scoresinpatientswithadvancedbreastcancer
AT katarzynapogoda minimallyimportantdifferencesforinterpretingeortcqlqc30scoresinpatientswithadvancedbreastcancer
AT cardosofatima minimallyimportantdifferencesforinterpretingeortcqlqc30scoresinpatientswithadvancedbreastcancer
AT russellnicolas minimallyimportantdifferencesforinterpretingeortcqlqc30scoresinpatientswithadvancedbreastcancer
AT kingmadeleinet minimallyimportantdifferencesforinterpretingeortcqlqc30scoresinpatientswithadvancedbreastcancer
AT cockskim minimallyimportantdifferencesforinterpretingeortcqlqc30scoresinpatientswithadvancedbreastcancer
AT sprangersmirjamag minimallyimportantdifferencesforinterpretingeortcqlqc30scoresinpatientswithadvancedbreastcancer
AT groenvoldmogens minimallyimportantdifferencesforinterpretingeortcqlqc30scoresinpatientswithadvancedbreastcancer
AT velikovagalina minimallyimportantdifferencesforinterpretingeortcqlqc30scoresinpatientswithadvancedbreastcancer
AT flechtnerhanshenning minimallyimportantdifferencesforinterpretingeortcqlqc30scoresinpatientswithadvancedbreastcancer
AT bottomleyandrew minimallyimportantdifferencesforinterpretingeortcqlqc30scoresinpatientswithadvancedbreastcancer
AT minimallyimportantdifferencesforinterpretingeortcqlqc30scoresinpatientswithadvancedbreastcancer