The EORTC QLU-C10D distinguished better between cancer patients and the general population than PROPr and EQ-5D-5L in a cross-sectional study.
Health state utility (HSU) instruments for calculating quality-adjusted life years, such as the European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) Quality of Life Utility - Core 10 Dimensions (QLU-C10D), derived from the EORTC QLQ-30 questionnaire, the Patient-Reported Outcome Measurement Information System (PROMIS) preference score (PROPr), and the EuroQoL-5-Dimensions-5-Levels (EQ-5D-5L), yield different HSU values due to different modeling and different underlying descriptive scales. For example the QLU-C10D includes cancer-relevant dimensions such as nausea. This study aimed to investigate how these differences in descriptive scales contribute to differences in HSU scores by comparing scores of cancer patients receiving chemotherapy to those of the general population.
EORTC QLU-C10D, PROPr, and EQ-5D-5L scores were obtained for a convenience sample of 484 outpatients of the Department of Oncology, Charité - Universitätsmedizin Berlin, Germany. Convergent and known group's validity were assessed using Pearson's correlation and intraclass correlation coefficients (ICC). We assessed each descriptive dimension score's discriminatory power and compared them to those of the general population (n > 1000) using effect size (ES; Cohen's d) and area under the curve (AUC).
The mean scores of QLU-C10D (0.64; 95% CI 0.62-0.67), PROPr (0.38; 95% CI 0.36-0.40), and EQ-5D-5L (0.72; 95% CI 0.70-0.75) differed significantly, irrespective of sociodemographic factors, condition, or treatment. Conceptually similar descriptive scores as obtained from the HSU instruments showed varying degrees of discrimination in terms of ES and AUC between patients and the general population. The QLU-C10D and its dimensions showed the largest ES and AUC.
The QLU-C10D and its domains distinguished best between health states of the two populations, compared to the PROPr and EQ-5D-5L. As the EORTC Core Quality of Life Questionnaire (QLQ-C30) is widely used in clinical practice, its data are available for economic evaluation.
The assessment of dimensions of health-related quality of life (HRQoL), such as physical functioning or depression, is important to cancer patients and physicians for treatment and side effect monitoring. Descriptive HRQoL is measured by patient-reported outcomes measures (PROM). The European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) QLQ-C30 questionnaire and the Patient-Reported Outcome Measurement Information System (PROMIS) are the most common PROM in the clinical HRQoL assessment. In recent years, multidimensional preference-based HRQoL measures were developed using these PROM as dimensions. These preference-based measures, also referred to as health state utility (HSU) scores, are needed for economic evaluations of treatments. The QLQ-C30's corresponding HSU score is the Quality of Life Utility measure-Core 10 Dimensions (QLU-C10D), and PROMIS' HSU score is the PROMIS preference score (PROPr). Both new HSU scores are frequently compared to the well-established EuroQoL-5-dimensions-5-levels (EQ-5D-5L). They all conceptualize HSU differently, as they assess different dimensions of HRQoL und use different models. Both the QLU-C10D and the PROPr have thus shown systematic differences to the EQ-5D-5L but these were largely consistent across the subgroups. Convergent and known groups validity can therefore be considered established. However, as HSU is a multidimensional construct, it remains unclear how differences in its dimensions, for example, its descriptive scales, contribute to differences in HSU scores. This is of importance as it is the descriptive scales that measure clinical HRQoL. We investigated this question by assessing each dimension's ability to distinguish between a sample of 484 cancer patients and the German general population. We could show that the ability to distinguish depended on the domain: for example, for depression, the QLU-C10D and EQ-5D-5L distinguished clearer, while for physical function, PROMIS did. Overall, the QLU-C10D and its dimensions distinguish best between cancer patients and general population.
Döhmen A
，Obbarius A
，Kock M
，Nolte S
，Sidey-Gibbons CJ
，Valderas JM
，Rohde J
，Rieger K
，Fischer F
，Keilholz U
，Rose M
，Klapproth CP
... -
《-》
Assessing the reliability of a novel cancer-specific multi-attribute utility instrument (FACT-8D) and comparing its validity to EQ-5D-5L in colorectal cancer patients.
To examine the test-retest reliability of the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy - 8 Dimension (FACT-8D) for the first time, and to conduct a head-to-head comparison of the distribution properties and validity between the FACT-8D and EQ-5D-5L in Colorectal Cancer (CRC) Patients.
We conducted a longitudinal study on Chinese CRC patients, employing Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-General (FACT-G) and EQ-5D-5L at baseline, and FACT-G during follow-up (2-7 days from baseline). Utility scores for FACT-8D were derived from all available value sets (Australia, Canada and USA), while EQ-5D-5L scores were obtained from corresponding value sets for various countries. We assessed convergent validity using pairwise polychoric correlations between the FACT-8D and EQ-5D-5L; known-groups validity by discriminating participants' clinical characteristics, and effect size (ES) was tested; test-retest reliability for FACT-8D using kappa and weighted Kappa for choice consistency, and intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) and Bland-Altman method for utility consistency.
Among the 287 patients with CRC at baseline, 131 were included in the retest analysis. The utility scores of FACT-8D were highly positively correlated with EQ-5D-5L across various country value sets (r = 0.65-0.77), and most of the dimensions of FACT-8D and EQ-5D-5L were positively correlated. EQ-5D-5L failed to discriminate known-groups in cancer stage across all value sets, whereas both were significant in FACT-8D (ES = 0.35-0.48, ES = 0.38-0.52). FACT-8D showed good test-retest reliability (Cohen's weighted Kappa = 0.494-0.722, ICC = 0.748-0.786).
The FACT-8D can be used as a valid and reliable instrument for clinical evaluation of patients with CRC, outperforming EQ-5D-5L in differentiating clinical subgroups and showing promise for cancer practice and research.
Cao Y
，Zhang H
，Luo N
，Li H
，Cheng LJ
，Huang W
... -
《-》
Valuation of the EORTC Quality of Life Utility Core 10 Dimensions (QLU-C10D) in a Multi-ethnic Asian Setting: How Does Having Cancer Matter?
The aim of the study was to develop and compare utility value sets for the EORTC QLU-C10D, a cancer-specific utility instrument based on the EORTC QLQ-C30, using the preferences of the general public and cancer patients in Singapore, and to assess their measurement properties.
A total of 600 individuals from the general public were recruited using a multi-stage random sampling, along with 626 cancer patients with clinically confirmed diagnoses from outpatient clinics of the largest tertiary cancer hospital. Each participant valued 16 pairs of EORTC QLU-C10D health states using a discrete choice experiment (DCE). Conditional logit models were used to analyze the DCE responses of the general public and cancer patients separately. Utility values were assessed for known-group validity and responsiveness in the cancer patients by comparing mean values across subgroups of patients and calculating standardized response means using longitudinal EORTC QLQ-C30 data, respectively.
Physical functioning and pain had the most impact on utility for both cancer patients and general public groups. Worst health state utility values were -0.821 and -0.463 for the general public and cancer patients, respectively. Cancer patients' values were lower for mild-to-moderate health states but higher for moderately-to-highly impaired states compared with the general public's values. Both value sets discriminated between patients with differing characteristics and responded equally well to improved health status, but the cancer patients' value set was slightly more responsive to deteriorated health.
EORTC QLU-C10D value sets based on the preferences of the Singaporean general public and cancer patients exhibited differences in values but similar psychometric properties.
Gandhi M
，Kanesvaran R
，Rashid MFBH
，Chong DQ
，Chay WY
，Tan RL
，Norman R
，King MT
，Luo N
... -
《-》
Chinese utility weights for the EORTC cancer-specific utility instrument QLU-C10D.
The aim of this study is to provide Chinese utility weights for the European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Utility Measure-Core 10 Dimensions (EORTC QLU-C10D) which is a preference-based cancer-specific utility instrument derived from the EORTC QLQ-C30.
We conducted an online survey of the general population in China, with quota sampling for age and gender. Each respondent was asked to complete a discrete choice experimental survey consisting of 16 randomly selected choice sets. The conditional logit model and mixed logit model were used to analyze respondents' preferences, and the goodness of fit of the model was tested.
A total of 2003 respondents were included in the analysis. Utility decrements within dimensions were typically monotonic. Monotonic inconsistency issues in the Fatigue, Sleep, and Nausea dimensions were normalized by monotonicity correction. Physical functioning, Pain, and Role functioning were associated with the greatest utility weights, with the smallest decrements being in Bowel problems and Emotional functioning. The utility value for the worst health state was 0.083, i.e. slightly higher than being dead.
This study provides the first China-specific set of value for the QLU-C10D based on societal preferences of the Chinese adult general population. The value set can be used as a cancer-specific scoring system for economic evaluations of new oncology therapies and technologies in China.
Cao Y
，Xu J
，Norman R
，King MT
，Kemmler G
，Huang W
，Luo N
... -
《-》
ResearchGate
(全网免费下载)
钛学术
(全网免费下载)
