4 research outputs found

    Reference values for the EORTC QLQ‐C30 in patients with advanced stage Hodgkin lymphoma and in Hodgkin lymphoma survivors

    No full text
    To provide reference values for the European Organisation for Treatment and Research of Cancer (EORTC) Quality of Life Questionnaire (QLQ-C30) in advanced-stage Hodgkin Lymphoma (HL) patients and 5-year HL survivors. The QLQ-C30 is the most widely used cancer-specific questionnaire to assess Health-Related Quality of Life (HRQoL). The EORTC database was searched to identify HL RCTs in which patients' and survivors' HRQoL was assessed by the QLQ-C30. HRQoL mean scores were calculated and stratified by age and gender. Minimal important differences were used to assess the clinical relevance of the findings. Data from one RCT with HRQoL scores available at baseline (n = 343) and four RCTs with HRQoL scores available at follow-up (n = 1665) were analysed. Patients reported worse HRQoL scores than survivors across most functioning scales and symptoms' scales. These scores varied as a function of gender but not age. Survivors' HRQoL reports were comparable to the ones of the general population. These values provide an assessment framework for the comparison and interpretation of QLQ-C30 scores in advanced-stage HL. Our findings suggest that although HL patients' HRQoL scores are worse than the general population, HRQoL scores may normalize over long-term survival

    Qual Life Res

    No full text
    PURPOSE: Health-related quality of life (HRQoL) is assessed by self-administered questionnaires throughout the care process. Classically, two longitudinal statistical approaches were mainly used to study HRQoL: linear mixed models (LMM) or time-to-event models for time to deterioration/time until definitive deterioration (TTD/TUDD). Recently, an alternative strategy based on generalized linear mixed models for categorical data has also been proposed: the longitudinal partial credit model (LPCM). The objective of this article is to evaluate these methods and to propose recommendations to standardize longitudinal analysis of HRQoL data in cancer clinical trials. METHODS: The three methods are first described and compared through statistical, methodological, and practical arguments, then applied on real HRQoL data from clinical cancer trials or published prospective databases. In total, seven French studies from a collaborating group were selected with longitudinal collection of QLQ-C30. Longitudinal analyses were performed with the three approaches using SAS, Stata and R software. RESULTS: We observed concordant results between LMM and LPCM. However, discordant results were observed when we considered the TTD/TUDD approach compared to the two previous methods. According to methodological and practical arguments discussed, the approaches seem to provide additional information and complementary interpretations. LMM and LPCM are the most powerful methods on simulated data, while the TTD/TUDD approach gives more clinically understandable results. Finally, for single-item scales, LPCM is more appropriate. CONCLUSION: These results pledge for the recommendation to use of both the LMM and TTD/TUDD longitudinal methods, except for single-item scales, establishing them as the consensual methods for publications reporting HRQoL

    Determining clinically important differences in health-related quality of life in older patients with cancer undergoing chemotherapy or surgery

    No full text
    PURPOSE: Using the EORTC Global Health Status (GHS) scale, we aimed to determine minimal clinically important differences (MCID) in health-related quality of life (HRQOL) changes for older cancer patients with a geriatric risk profile, as defined by the geriatric 8 (G8) health screening tool, undergoing treatment. Simultaneously, we assessed baseline patient characteristics prognostic for HRQOL changes. METHODS: Our analysis included 1424 (G8 ≤ 14) older patients with cancer scheduled to receive chemotherapy (n = 683) or surgery (n = 741). Anchor-based methods, linking the GHS score to clinical indicators, were used to determine MCID between baseline and follow-up at 3 months. A threshold of 0.2 standard deviation (SD) was used to exclude MCID estimates too small for interpretation. Logistic regressions analysed baseline patient characteristics prognostic for HRQOL changes. RESULTS: The 15-item Geriatric Depression Scale (GDS15), Visual Analogue Scale (VAS) for Fatigue and ECOG Performance Status (PS) were selected as clinical anchors. In the surgery group, MCID estimates for improvement and deterioration were ECOG PS (5*, 11*), GDS15 (5*, 2) and VAS Fatigue (3, 9*). In the chemotherapy group, MCID estimates for improvement and deterioration were ECOG PS (8*, 7*), GDS15 (5, 4) and VAS Fatigue (5, 5*). Estimates with * were > 0.2 SD threshold. Patients experiencing pain or malnutrition (surgery group) or fatigue (chemotherapy group) at baseline showed a significantly stable or improved HRQOL (p < 0.05) after their treatment. CONCLUSION: The reported MCID for improvement and deterioration depended on the anchor used and treatment received. The estimates can be used to evaluate significant changes in HRQOL and to determine sample sizes in clinical trials
    corecore