United States Value Set for the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-General Eight Dimensions (FACT-8D), a Cancer-Specific Preference-Based Quality of Life Instrument

Objectives: To develop a value set reflecting the United States (US) general population’s preferences for health states described by the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy (FACT) eight-dimensions preference-based multi-attribute utility instrument (FACT-8D), derived from the FACT-General cancer-specific health-related quality-of-life (HRQL) questionnaire. Methods: A US online panel was quota-sampled to achieve a general population sample representative by sex, age (≥ 18 years), race and ethnicity. A discrete choice experiment (DCE) was used to value health states. The valuation task involved choosing between pairs of health states (choice-sets) described by varying levels of the FACT-8D HRQL dimensions and survival (life-years). The DCE included 100 choice-sets; each respondent was randomly allocated 16 choice-sets. Data were analysed using conditional logit regression parameterized to fit the quality-adjusted life-year framework, weighted for sociodemographic variables that were non-representative of the US general population. Preference weights were calculated as the ratio of HRQL-level coefficients to the survival coefficient. Results: 2562 panel members opted in, 2462 (96%) completed at least one choice-set and 2357 (92%) completed 16 choice-sets. Pain and nausea were associated with the largest utility weights, work and sleep had more moderate utility weights, and sadness, worry and support had the smallest utility weights. Within dimensions, more severe HRQL levels were generally associated with larger weights. A preference-weighting algorithm to estimate US utilities from responses to the FACT-General questionnaire was generated. The worst health state’s value was −0.33. Conclusions: This value set provides US population utilities for health states defined by the FACT-8D for use in evaluating oncology treatments

The health-related quality of life in a Swedish sample of HIV-infected persons

The purposes of the present study are (1) to assess the health-related quality of life (HRQOL) and the subjective health status in a sample of human immunodeficiency virus (HIV)-infected persons (2) to relate the results to different population groups and (3) to investigate the relationship of medical and demographic variables with HRQOL. A total of 72 HIV-infected men were included. They answered the Swedish health-related quality of life questionnaire and the health index. Demographic and medical data were obtained from the medical records. The data collection took place before entering a therapeutic HIV vaccine trial. The results showed a more negative impact on the HRQOL and subjective health status in the HIV-positive subjects, compared with male population groups. The dimensions of emotional well-being were most affected. When comparisons were made according to the medical and demographic variables for different subgroups within the HIV sample, differences in the physical-dimension scales were most prominent. Symptomatic HIV infection or acquired immunodeficiency syndrome (AIDS), anti-retroviral treatment, sick leave or disability pension, low income and basic education were associated with worse HRQOL and health status. In conclusion, it is of utmost importance to take into account, aspects of the patients' emotional well-being in nursing, as well as in medical care and interventions. Moreover, individualized caring programs are needed because the disruptions in HRQOL fluctuated within the HIV sample

Health-related quality of life outcomes of lenalidomide in transfusion-dependent patients with Low- or Intermediate-1-risk myelodysplastic syndromes with a chromosome 5q deletion: results from a randomized clinical trial.

Item does not contain fulltextWe report health-related quality of life (HRQL) outcomes assessed using the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-Anemia (FACT-An) among 167 RBC transfusion-dependent patients with IPSS Low-/Intermediate-1-risk del5q31 MDS treated with lenalidomide versus placebo in a randomized phase 3 clinical trial, MDS-004. Mean baseline to 12 week changes in FACT-An Total scores improved following treatment with lenalidomide 5 and 10mg (+5.7 and +5.7, respectively) versus placebo (-2.8) (both p/=26 week responders in both treatment groups. Lenalidomide treatment may be effective in improving HRQL outcomes.1 maart 201

Gastroparesis Cardinal Symptom Index (GCSI): development and validation of a patient reported assessment of severity of gastroparesis symptoms.

BACKGROUND: Patient-rated symptom assessments are needed for evaluating the effectiveness of medical treatments and for monitoring outcomes in gastroparesis. OBJECTIVE: This paper summarizes the development and psychometric evaluation of a new instrument, the Gastroparesis Cardinal Symptom Index (GCSI), for assessing severity of symptoms associated with gastroparesis. METHODS: The GCSI was based on reviews of the medical literature, patient focus groups, and interviews with clinicians. A sample of 169 patients with a documented diagnosis of gastroparesis participated in the psychometric evaluation study. Patients completed the GCSI, the SF-36 Health Survey, and disability days questions at baseline and after 8 weeks. A randomly selected sub-sample of 30 subjects returned at 2 weeks to assess test retest reliability. Clinicians rated severity of symptoms, and both clinicians and patients rated change in gastroparesis-related symptoms over the 8 week study. RESULTS: The GCSI is based on three subscales: post-prandial fullness/early satiety (4 items); nausea/vomiting (3 items), and bloating (2 items). Internal consistency reliability was 0.84 for the GCSI total score and ranged from 0.83 to 0.85 for the subscale scores. Two week test retest reliability was 0.76 for the total score and ranged from 0.68 to 0.81 for subscale scores. Construct validity was supported, given that we observed significant relationships between clinician assessed symptom severity and GCSI total score, significant differences between gastroparesis and dyspepsia patients (n = 760) on GCSI total (p < 0.0001) and subscale scores (p < 0.03 to p < 0.0001), moderate and significant relationships between GCSI total and SF-36 scores, and significant associations between GCSI total score and reports of restricted activity and bed disability days. Patients with greater symptom severity, as rated by clinicians, reported more symptom severity on GCSI total score. GSCI total scores were responsive to changes in overall gastroparesis symptoms as assessed by clinicians (p < 0.0001) and patients (p = 0.0004). CONCLUSION: The findings of this study indicate that the GCSI is a reliable and valid instrument for measuring symptom severity in patients with gastroparesis