Minimally important differences for interpreting European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Questionnaire Core 30 scores in patients with head and neck cancer.
Détails
ID Serval
serval:BIB_743AF4D4BAA9
Type
Article: article d'un périodique ou d'un magazine.
Collection
Publications
Institution
Titre
Minimally important differences for interpreting European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Questionnaire Core 30 scores in patients with head and neck cancer.
Périodique
Head & neck
Collaborateur⸱rice⸱s
EORTC Head and Neck and Quality of Life Groups
ISSN
1097-0347 (Electronic)
ISSN-L
1043-3074
Statut éditorial
Publié
Date de publication
11/2020
Peer-reviewed
Oui
Volume
42
Numéro
11
Pages
3141-3152
Langue
anglais
Notes
Publication types: Journal Article ; Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't
Publication Status: ppublish
Publication Status: ppublish
Résumé
We aimed to estimate minimally important difference (MID) for interpreting group-level change over time for European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Questionnaire core 30 (EORTC QLQ-C30) scores in head and neck cancer.
Data were derived retrospectively from two published EORTC trials. Clinical anchors were selected using correlation strength and clinical plausibility of the given anchor/QLQ-C30 scale pair. MIDs for within-group and between-group change were estimated via the mean change method and linear regression, respectively. Distribution-based MIDs were also examined. MIDs for two of the scales, dyspnea and nausea/vomiting, are more uncertain considering their low correlations with the anchors.
Anchor-based MIDs could be determined for deterioration in 7 of the 14 QLQ-C30 scales assessed, and in 3 scales for improvement. MIDs varied by scale, direction of change, and anchor. Absolute MID values ranged from 5 to 15 points for within-group change and 4 to 12 for between-group change. Most MIDs were within 4 to 10 points.
Our findings, if confirmed, will aid interpreting changes in selected QLQ-C30 scale scores over time and inform sample size calculations in future clinical trials in head and neck cancer.
Data were derived retrospectively from two published EORTC trials. Clinical anchors were selected using correlation strength and clinical plausibility of the given anchor/QLQ-C30 scale pair. MIDs for within-group and between-group change were estimated via the mean change method and linear regression, respectively. Distribution-based MIDs were also examined. MIDs for two of the scales, dyspnea and nausea/vomiting, are more uncertain considering their low correlations with the anchors.
Anchor-based MIDs could be determined for deterioration in 7 of the 14 QLQ-C30 scales assessed, and in 3 scales for improvement. MIDs varied by scale, direction of change, and anchor. Absolute MID values ranged from 5 to 15 points for within-group change and 4 to 12 for between-group change. Most MIDs were within 4 to 10 points.
Our findings, if confirmed, will aid interpreting changes in selected QLQ-C30 scale scores over time and inform sample size calculations in future clinical trials in head and neck cancer.
Mots-clé
Head and Neck Neoplasms/therapy, Humans, Quality of Life, Research Design, Retrospective Studies, Surveys and Questionnaires, EORTC QLQ-C30, head and neck cancer, health-related quality of life, minimally important difference
Pubmed
Web of science
Création de la notice
08/07/2020 12:32
Dernière modification de la notice
05/11/2021 7:39
Données d'usage
