Skip to main content
Erschienen in: Supportive Care in Cancer 12/2012

01.12.2012 | Original Article

An international prospective study establishing minimal clinically important differences in the EORTC QLQ-BM22 and QLQ-C30 in cancer patients with bone metastases

verfasst von: Liang Zeng, Edward Chow, Liying Zhang, Ling-Ming Tseng, Ming-Feng Hou, Alysa Fairchild, Vassilios Vassiliou, Reynaldo Jesus-Garcia, Mohamed A. Alm El-Din, Aswin Kumar, Fabien Forges, Wei-Chu Chie, Gillian Bedard, Andrew Bottomley

Erschienen in: Supportive Care in Cancer | Ausgabe 12/2012

Einloggen, um Zugang zu erhalten

Abstract

Purpose

Quality of life (QOL) is frequently an endpoint in clinical trials involving patients with advanced cancer. Statistical significance of minimal differences can be achieved with sufficient sample size, yet the actual clinical relevance is unknown. The purpose of this study was to establish the minimal clinically important difference (MCID) for the European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) bone metastases module (EORTC QLQ-BM22).

Methods

Patients with bone metastases across seven countries were prospectively enrolled in a trial validating the EORTC QLQ-BM22 and completed the QLQ-BM22 and core measure (QLQ-C30) at baseline and 1-month follow-up. MCIDs were calculated for each QOL scale for both improvement and deterioration using both an anchor- (performance status) and distribution-based approach.

Results

A total of 93 patients completed both baseline and follow-up QOL and had recorded performance status at both intervals. Statistically significant meaningful differences were seen in seven scales. There were improvements of 30.5 (95 % confidence interval, 9.0 to 52.0), 20.1 (7.1 to 33.2), 30.5 (13.8 to 47.3) and 19.6 (5.0 to 34.3) in the pain, painful site, painful characteristic and functional interference scales, respectively, demonstrated clinical relevance. Decreases of 12.4 (0.3 to 24.6), 22.4 (11.8 to 32.9) and 13.5 (1.9 to 25.1) were required to represent clinically relevant deterioration in emotional functioning, global health status and financial issues, respectively. Minimal differences for improvement were closest to 0.5 standard deviations (SD) while for deterioration, closer to 0.3 SD on the QLQ-BM22.

Conclusion

Identification of requirements for clinical significance can assist in determining the relevance of QOL changes after treatment and in sample size determination in future trials. Our study is limited by the small sample size. Future studies should continue to determine MCID and confirm our findings using a variety of appropriate anchors and in a larger sample.
Literatur
1.
Zurück zum Zitat Walsh D, Donnelly S, Rybicki L (2000) The symptoms of advanced cancer: relationship to age, gender, and performance status in 1,000 patients. Support Care Canc 8(3):175–179CrossRef Walsh D, Donnelly S, Rybicki L (2000) The symptoms of advanced cancer: relationship to age, gender, and performance status in 1,000 patients. Support Care Canc 8(3):175–179CrossRef
2.
Zurück zum Zitat Jacobsen PB, Weitzner MA (1999) Evaluation of palliative endpoints in oncology clinical trials. Cancer Control 6(5):471–477PubMed Jacobsen PB, Weitzner MA (1999) Evaluation of palliative endpoints in oncology clinical trials. Cancer Control 6(5):471–477PubMed
3.
Zurück zum Zitat Chow E, Nguyen J, Zhang L et al (2012) International field testing of the reliability and validity of the EORTC QLQ-BM22 module to assess health-related quality of life in patients with bone metastases. Cancer 118(5):1457–1465PubMedCrossRef Chow E, Nguyen J, Zhang L et al (2012) International field testing of the reliability and validity of the EORTC QLQ-BM22 module to assess health-related quality of life in patients with bone metastases. Cancer 118(5):1457–1465PubMedCrossRef
4.
Zurück zum Zitat Crosby RD, Kolotkin RL, Williams GR (2003) Defining clinically meaningful change in health-related quality of life. J Clin Epidemiol 56(5):395–407PubMedCrossRef Crosby RD, Kolotkin RL, Williams GR (2003) Defining clinically meaningful change in health-related quality of life. J Clin Epidemiol 56(5):395–407PubMedCrossRef
5.
Zurück zum Zitat Samsa G, Edelman D, Rothman ML et al (1999) Determining clinically important differences in health status measures: a general approach with illustration to the health utilities index mark II. PharmacoEconomics 15(2):141–155PubMedCrossRef Samsa G, Edelman D, Rothman ML et al (1999) Determining clinically important differences in health status measures: a general approach with illustration to the health utilities index mark II. PharmacoEconomics 15(2):141–155PubMedCrossRef
6.
Zurück zum Zitat Eton DT, Cella D, Yost KJ et al (2004) A combination of distribution- and anchor-based approaches determined minimally important differences (MIDs) for four endpoints in a breast cancer scale. J Clin Epidemiol 57(9):898–910PubMedCrossRef Eton DT, Cella D, Yost KJ et al (2004) A combination of distribution- and anchor-based approaches determined minimally important differences (MIDs) for four endpoints in a breast cancer scale. J Clin Epidemiol 57(9):898–910PubMedCrossRef
7.
Zurück zum Zitat Norman GR, Sloan JA, Wyrwich KW (2003) Interpretation of changes in health-related quality of life: the remarkable universality of half a standard deviation. Med Care 41(5):582–592PubMed Norman GR, Sloan JA, Wyrwich KW (2003) Interpretation of changes in health-related quality of life: the remarkable universality of half a standard deviation. Med Care 41(5):582–592PubMed
8.
Zurück zum Zitat Cella D, Eton DT, Lai JS et al (2002) Combining anchor and distribution-based methods to derive minimal clinically important differences on the functional assessment of cancer therapy (FACT) anemia and fatigue scales. J Pain Symptom Manag 24(6):547–561CrossRef Cella D, Eton DT, Lai JS et al (2002) Combining anchor and distribution-based methods to derive minimal clinically important differences on the functional assessment of cancer therapy (FACT) anemia and fatigue scales. J Pain Symptom Manag 24(6):547–561CrossRef
9.
Zurück zum Zitat Maringwa J, Quinten C, King M et al (2011) Minimal clinically meaningful differences for the EORTC QLQ-C30 and EORTC QLQ-BN20 scales in brain cancer patients. Ann Oncol 22(9):2107–2112PubMedCrossRef Maringwa J, Quinten C, King M et al (2011) Minimal clinically meaningful differences for the EORTC QLQ-C30 and EORTC QLQ-BN20 scales in brain cancer patients. Ann Oncol 22(9):2107–2112PubMedCrossRef
10.
Zurück zum Zitat Maringwa JT, Quinten C, King M et al (2011) Minimal important differences for interpreting health-related quality of life scores from the EORTC QLQ-C30 in lung cancer patients participating in randomized controlled trials. Support Care Cancer 19(11):1753–1760PubMedCrossRef Maringwa JT, Quinten C, King M et al (2011) Minimal important differences for interpreting health-related quality of life scores from the EORTC QLQ-C30 in lung cancer patients participating in randomized controlled trials. Support Care Cancer 19(11):1753–1760PubMedCrossRef
11.
Zurück zum Zitat Chow E, Hird A, Velikova G et al (2009) The european organisation for research and treatment of cancer quality of life questionnaire for patients with bone metastases: the EORTC QLQ-BM22. Eur J Cancer 45(7):1146–1152PubMedCrossRef Chow E, Hird A, Velikova G et al (2009) The european organisation for research and treatment of cancer quality of life questionnaire for patients with bone metastases: the EORTC QLQ-BM22. Eur J Cancer 45(7):1146–1152PubMedCrossRef
12.
Zurück zum Zitat Chow E, Hoskin P, Mitera G et al (2011) Update of the international consensus on palliative radiotherapy endpoints for future clinical trials in bone metastases. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 82(5):1730–1737PubMedCrossRef Chow E, Hoskin P, Mitera G et al (2011) Update of the international consensus on palliative radiotherapy endpoints for future clinical trials in bone metastases. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 82(5):1730–1737PubMedCrossRef
13.
Zurück zum Zitat Aaronson NK, Ahmedzai S, Bergman B et al (1993) The European organization for research and treatment of cancer QLQ-C30: a quality-of-life instrument for use in international clinical trials in oncology. J Natl Cancer Inst 85(5):365–376PubMedCrossRef Aaronson NK, Ahmedzai S, Bergman B et al (1993) The European organization for research and treatment of cancer QLQ-C30: a quality-of-life instrument for use in international clinical trials in oncology. J Natl Cancer Inst 85(5):365–376PubMedCrossRef
14.
Zurück zum Zitat Fayers PM, Aaronson NK, Bjordal K, Groenvold M, Curran D, Bottomley A, on behalf of the EORTC Quality of Life Group (2001) The EORTC QLQ-C30 scoring manual (3rd edition). European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer, Brussels Fayers PM, Aaronson NK, Bjordal K, Groenvold M, Curran D, Bottomley A, on behalf of the EORTC Quality of Life Group (2001) The EORTC QLQ-C30 scoring manual (3rd edition). European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer, Brussels
15.
Zurück zum Zitat Revicki D, Hays RD, Cella D et al (2008) Recommended methods for determining responsiveness and minimally important differences for patient-reported outcomes. J Clin Epidemiol 61(2):102–109PubMedCrossRef Revicki D, Hays RD, Cella D et al (2008) Recommended methods for determining responsiveness and minimally important differences for patient-reported outcomes. J Clin Epidemiol 61(2):102–109PubMedCrossRef
16.
Zurück zum Zitat Scott NW, Fayers PM, Aaronson NK, et al. (2008) EORTC QLQ-C30 reference values. EORTC Quality of Life Group Scott NW, Fayers PM, Aaronson NK, et al. (2008) EORTC QLQ-C30 reference values. EORTC Quality of Life Group
17.
Zurück zum Zitat Ringash J, Bezjak A, O’Sullivan B et al (2004) Interpreting differences in quality of life: the FACT-H&N in laryngeal cancer patients. Qual Life Res 13(4):725–733PubMedCrossRef Ringash J, Bezjak A, O’Sullivan B et al (2004) Interpreting differences in quality of life: the FACT-H&N in laryngeal cancer patients. Qual Life Res 13(4):725–733PubMedCrossRef
18.
Zurück zum Zitat Osoba D, Rodrigues G, Myles J et al (1998) Interpreting the significance of changes in health-related quality-of-life scores. J Clin Oncol 16(1):139–144PubMed Osoba D, Rodrigues G, Myles J et al (1998) Interpreting the significance of changes in health-related quality-of-life scores. J Clin Oncol 16(1):139–144PubMed
19.
Zurück zum Zitat Ringash J, O’Sullivan B, Bezjak A et al (2007) Interpreting clinically significant changes in patient-reported outcomes. Cancer 110(1):196–202PubMedCrossRef Ringash J, O’Sullivan B, Bezjak A et al (2007) Interpreting clinically significant changes in patient-reported outcomes. Cancer 110(1):196–202PubMedCrossRef
20.
Zurück zum Zitat Cella D, Hahn EA, Dineen K (2002) Meaningful change in cancer-specific quality of life scores: differences between improvement and worsening. Qual Life Res 11(3):207–221PubMedCrossRef Cella D, Hahn EA, Dineen K (2002) Meaningful change in cancer-specific quality of life scores: differences between improvement and worsening. Qual Life Res 11(3):207–221PubMedCrossRef
21.
Zurück zum Zitat King MT (1996) The interpretation of scores from the EORTC quality of life questionnaire QLQ-C30. Qual Life Res 5(6):555–567PubMedCrossRef King MT (1996) The interpretation of scores from the EORTC quality of life questionnaire QLQ-C30. Qual Life Res 5(6):555–567PubMedCrossRef
22.
Zurück zum Zitat Lydick E, Epstein RS (1993) Interpretation of quality of life changes. Qual Life Res 2(3):221–226PubMedCrossRef Lydick E, Epstein RS (1993) Interpretation of quality of life changes. Qual Life Res 2(3):221–226PubMedCrossRef
Metadaten
Titel
An international prospective study establishing minimal clinically important differences in the EORTC QLQ-BM22 and QLQ-C30 in cancer patients with bone metastases
verfasst von
Liang Zeng
Edward Chow
Liying Zhang
Ling-Ming Tseng
Ming-Feng Hou
Alysa Fairchild
Vassilios Vassiliou
Reynaldo Jesus-Garcia
Mohamed A. Alm El-Din
Aswin Kumar
Fabien Forges
Wei-Chu Chie
Gillian Bedard
Andrew Bottomley
Publikationsdatum
01.12.2012
Verlag
Springer-Verlag
Erschienen in
Supportive Care in Cancer / Ausgabe 12/2012
Print ISSN: 0941-4355
Elektronische ISSN: 1433-7339
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s00520-012-1484-x

Weitere Artikel der Ausgabe 12/2012

Supportive Care in Cancer 12/2012 Zur Ausgabe

Letter to the Editor

Reply to Letter to the Editor

Adjuvante Immuntherapie verlängert Leben bei RCC

25.04.2024 Nierenkarzinom Nachrichten

Nun gibt es auch Resultate zum Gesamtüberleben: Eine adjuvante Pembrolizumab-Therapie konnte in einer Phase-3-Studie das Leben von Menschen mit Nierenzellkarzinom deutlich verlängern. Die Sterberate war im Vergleich zu Placebo um 38% geringer.

Alectinib verbessert krankheitsfreies Überleben bei ALK-positivem NSCLC

25.04.2024 NSCLC Nachrichten

Das Risiko für Rezidiv oder Tod von Patienten und Patientinnen mit reseziertem ALK-positivem NSCLC ist unter einer adjuvanten Therapie mit dem Tyrosinkinase-Inhibitor Alectinib signifikant geringer als unter platinbasierter Chemotherapie.

Bei Senioren mit Prostatakarzinom auf Anämie achten!

24.04.2024 DGIM 2024 Nachrichten

Patienten, die zur Behandlung ihres Prostatakarzinoms eine Androgendeprivationstherapie erhalten, entwickeln nicht selten eine Anämie. Wer ältere Patienten internistisch mitbetreut, sollte auf diese Nebenwirkung achten.

ICI-Therapie in der Schwangerschaft wird gut toleriert

Müssen sich Schwangere einer Krebstherapie unterziehen, rufen Immuncheckpointinhibitoren offenbar nicht mehr unerwünschte Wirkungen hervor als andere Mittel gegen Krebs.

Update Onkologie

Bestellen Sie unseren Fach-Newsletter und bleiben Sie gut informiert.