Skip to main content
Erschienen in: Supportive Care in Cancer 7/2013

01.07.2013 | Original Article

Minimal clinically important differences in the brief pain inventory in patients with bone metastases

verfasst von: Karrie Wong, Liang Zeng, Liying Zhang, Gillian Bedard, Erin Wong, May Tsao, Elizabeth Barnes, Cyril Danjoux, Arjun Sahgal, Lori Holden, Natalie Lauzon, Edward Chow

Erschienen in: Supportive Care in Cancer | Ausgabe 7/2013

Einloggen, um Zugang zu erhalten

Abstract

Purpose

The brief pain inventory (BPI) is often used to assess pain and functional interference as a result of pain in cancer patients. Minor improvements or deteriorations in BPI may be statistically significant due to large sample sizes but may not necessarily be clinically relevant. The purpose of this study was to determine the minimal clinically important differences (MCID) in the functional BPI in patients with pain due to bone metastases.

Methods

BPI scores were collected from patients with painful bone metastases who visited the Rapid Response Radiotherapy Program for palliative radiotherapy. Pain and functional interferences scores were also collected monthly for three months. Patients were categorized into “complete or partial response,” “pain progression,” and “indeterminate response” based on their pain scores as recommended by the latest consensus definitions. Anchor-based determination of MCIDs of functional interference scores was calculated by determining the difference between the mean follow-up scores and the mean baseline scores for patients from each of the three response groups. Distribution-based estimates were obtained utilizing 0.2, 0.3, and 0.5 standard deviation (SD) effect sizes and the standard error of measurement. The anchor-based method results were compared with the distribution-based method results.

Results

Statistically significant MCIDs were determined for all of the functional interference items of BPI for patients with “complete or partial response”; whereas, no statistically significant MCIDs in BPI scores could be determined for patients with “pain progression.” Some of the functional interference items of BPI had statistically significant MCIDs for patients with “indeterminate response,” although these were generally smaller than patients with complete or partial response. Using the distribution-based approach, an effect size of 0.5 SD was the closest estimate for determining the MCID for both patients with complete or partial response and those with indeterminate response.

Conclusions

The MCIDs determined for pain improvement were rather large, where as statistically significant MCIDs could not be detected for pain deterioration. Knowledge of MCIDs utilizing the BPI will allow physicians to evaluate the impact of treatment (or no treatment) on a patient’s functional abilities. Knowledge of MCIDs may allow for sample size determination in future clinical trials.
Literatur
1.
Zurück zum Zitat Twycross R, Harcourt J, Bergl S (1996) A survey of pain in patients with advanced cancer. J Pain Symptom Manage 12:273–282PubMedCrossRef Twycross R, Harcourt J, Bergl S (1996) A survey of pain in patients with advanced cancer. J Pain Symptom Manage 12:273–282PubMedCrossRef
2.
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 22:2107–2112PubMedCrossRef 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 22:2107–2112PubMedCrossRef
3.
Zurück zum Zitat Cook C (2008) Clinimetrics corner: the minimal clinically important change score (MCID): a necessary pretense. J Man Manip Ther 16(4):E82–E83PubMedCrossRef Cook C (2008) Clinimetrics corner: the minimal clinically important change score (MCID): a necessary pretense. J Man Manip Ther 16(4):E82–E83PubMedCrossRef
4.
Zurück zum Zitat Bedard G, Zeng L, Lam H et al (2012) Meaningful change in oncology quality of life instruments: a systematic literature review. Expert Rev Pharmacoecon Outcomes Res 12(4):475–483PubMedCrossRef Bedard G, Zeng L, Lam H et al (2012) Meaningful change in oncology quality of life instruments: a systematic literature review. Expert Rev Pharmacoecon Outcomes Res 12(4):475–483PubMedCrossRef
5.
Zurück zum Zitat Sloan J, Symonds T, Vargas-Chanes D, Fridley B (2003) Practical guidelines for assessing the clinical significant of health-related quality of life changes within clinical trials. Drug Inform J 37:23–32 Sloan J, Symonds T, Vargas-Chanes D, Fridley B (2003) Practical guidelines for assessing the clinical significant of health-related quality of life changes within clinical trials. Drug Inform J 37:23–32
6.
Zurück zum Zitat Chow E, Hoskin P, Mitera G et al (2012) Update of the international consensus on palliative radiotherapy endpoints for future clinical trials in bone metastases. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 82:1730–1737PubMedCrossRef Chow E, Hoskin P, Mitera G et al (2012) Update of the international consensus on palliative radiotherapy endpoints for future clinical trials in bone metastases. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 82:1730–1737PubMedCrossRef
7.
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 11:207–221PubMedCrossRef Cella D, Hahn EA, Dineen K (2002) Meaningful change in cancer–specific quality of life scores: differences between improvement and worsening. Qual Life Res 11:207–221PubMedCrossRef
8.
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 16:139–144PubMed Osoba D, Rodrigues G, Myles J et al (1998) Interpreting the significance of changes in health related quality-of-life scores. J Clin Oncol 16:139–144PubMed
9.
Zurück zum Zitat Ringash J, O’Sullivan B, Bezjak A, Redelmeier DA (2007) Interpreting clinically significant changes in patient-reported outcomes. Cancer 110(1):196–202PubMedCrossRef Ringash J, O’Sullivan B, Bezjak A, Redelmeier DA (2007) Interpreting clinically significant changes in patient-reported outcomes. Cancer 110(1):196–202PubMedCrossRef
10.
Zurück zum Zitat Maringwa J, Quinten C, King M (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 J, Quinten C, King M (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 Wu C, Chuang L, Lin K et al (2011) Responsiveness, minimal detectable change, and minimal clinically important difference of the Nottingham extended activities of daily living scale in patients with improved performance after stroke rehabilitation. Arch Phys Med Rehabil 92:1281–1287PubMedCrossRef Wu C, Chuang L, Lin K et al (2011) Responsiveness, minimal detectable change, and minimal clinically important difference of the Nottingham extended activities of daily living scale in patients with improved performance after stroke rehabilitation. Arch Phys Med Rehabil 92:1281–1287PubMedCrossRef
12.
Zurück zum Zitat Walters S, Brazier J (2003) What is the relationship between the minimally important difference and health state utility values? The case of the SF-6D. Health Qual Life Outcomes 1:4PubMedCrossRef Walters S, Brazier J (2003) What is the relationship between the minimally important difference and health state utility values? The case of the SF-6D. Health Qual Life Outcomes 1:4PubMedCrossRef
13.
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
14.
Zurück zum Zitat Revicki D, Cella D, Hays R et al (2006) Responsiveness and minimal important differences for patient reported outcomes. Health Qual Life Outcomes 4:70PubMedCrossRef Revicki D, Cella D, Hays R et al (2006) Responsiveness and minimal important differences for patient reported outcomes. Health Qual Life Outcomes 4:70PubMedCrossRef
Metadaten
Titel
Minimal clinically important differences in the brief pain inventory in patients with bone metastases
verfasst von
Karrie Wong
Liang Zeng
Liying Zhang
Gillian Bedard
Erin Wong
May Tsao
Elizabeth Barnes
Cyril Danjoux
Arjun Sahgal
Lori Holden
Natalie Lauzon
Edward Chow
Publikationsdatum
01.07.2013
Verlag
Springer-Verlag
Erschienen in
Supportive Care in Cancer / Ausgabe 7/2013
Print ISSN: 0941-4355
Elektronische ISSN: 1433-7339
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s00520-013-1731-9

Weitere Artikel der Ausgabe 7/2013

Supportive Care in Cancer 7/2013 Zur Ausgabe

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.