Skip to main content
Erschienen in: Supportive Care in Cancer 9/2015

01.09.2015 | Original Article

Minimal clinically important differences in the EORTC QLQ-BN20 in patients with brain metastases

verfasst von: Erin Wong, Liying Zhang, Marc Kerba, Palmira Foro Arnalot, Brita Danielson, May Tsao, Gillian Bedard, Nemica Thavarajah, Paul Cheon, Cyril Danjoux, Natalie Pulenzas, Edward Chow

Erschienen in: Supportive Care in Cancer | Ausgabe 9/2015

Einloggen, um Zugang zu erhalten

Abstract

Introduction

Quality of life (QOL) is an important treatment endpoint in advanced cancer patients with brain metastases. In clinical trials, statistically significant changes can be reached in a large enough population; however, these changes may not be clinically relevant.

Objective

The objective of this study was to determine the minimal clinically important difference (MCID) for the European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Questionnaire brain module (EORTC QLQ-BN20) in patients with brain metastases.

Methods

Patients undergoing radiotherapy for brain metastases completed the EORTC QLQ-BN20 and QLQ-C30/C15-PAL at baseline and 1-month follow-up. MCIDs were calculated for both improvement and deterioration using anchor- and distribution-based approaches. The anchor of overall QOL (as assessed by question 30 or question 15 on the QLQ-C30 and QLQ-C15-PAL, respectively) was used to determine meaningful change.

Results

A total of 99 patients were included. The average age was 61 years, and the most common primary cancer sites were the lung and breast. Statistically significant meaningful differences were seen on two scales. A decrease of 6.1 (95 % confidence interval (CI) 0.8 to 11.4) units and 13.8 (0.2 to 27.4) units was required to represent clinically relevant deterioration of seizures and weakness of legs, respectively. Distribution-based MCID estimates tended to be closer to 0.5 SD on the EORTC QLQ-BN20.

Conclusion

Understanding MCIDs allows physicians to determine the impact of treatment on patients’ QOL and allows for determination of sample sizes for clinical trials. Future studies should be conducted to validate our findings in a larger population of patients with brain metastases.
Literatur
1.
Zurück zum Zitat Gavrilovic IT, Posner JB (2005) Brain metastases: epidemiology and pathophysiology. J Neurooncol 75(1):5–14PubMedCrossRef Gavrilovic IT, Posner JB (2005) Brain metastases: epidemiology and pathophysiology. J Neurooncol 75(1):5–14PubMedCrossRef
2.
Zurück zum Zitat Bezjak A, Adam J, Barton R, Panzarella T, Laperriere N, Wong CS et al (2002) Symptom response after palliative radiotherapy for patients with brain metastases. Eur J Cancer 38(4):487–496PubMedCrossRef Bezjak A, Adam J, Barton R, Panzarella T, Laperriere N, Wong CS et al (2002) Symptom response after palliative radiotherapy for patients with brain metastases. Eur J Cancer 38(4):487–496PubMedCrossRef
3.
Zurück zum Zitat Tsao MN, Lloyd N, Wong RK, Chow E, Rakovitch E, Laperriere N et al (2012) Whole brain radiotherapy for the treatment of newly diagnosed multiple brain metastases. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 4, CD003869PubMed Tsao MN, Lloyd N, Wong RK, Chow E, Rakovitch E, Laperriere N et al (2012) Whole brain radiotherapy for the treatment of newly diagnosed multiple brain metastases. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 4, CD003869PubMed
4.
5.
Zurück zum Zitat Tsao MN, Rades D, Wirth A, Lo SS, Danielson BL, Gaspar LE et al (2012) Radiotherapeutic and surgical management for newly diagnosed brain metastasis(es): an American Society for Radiation Oncology evidence-based guideline. Pract Radiat Oncol 2(3):210–225PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRef Tsao MN, Rades D, Wirth A, Lo SS, Danielson BL, Gaspar LE et al (2012) Radiotherapeutic and surgical management for newly diagnosed brain metastasis(es): an American Society for Radiation Oncology evidence-based guideline. Pract Radiat Oncol 2(3):210–225PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRef
6.
Zurück zum Zitat Mehta MP, Paleologos NA, Mikkelsen T, Robinson PD, Ammirati M, Andrews DW et al (2010) The role of chemotherapy in the management of newly diagnosed brain metastases: a systematic review and evidence-based clinical practice guideline. J Neurooncol 96(1):71–83PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRef Mehta MP, Paleologos NA, Mikkelsen T, Robinson PD, Ammirati M, Andrews DW et al (2010) The role of chemotherapy in the management of newly diagnosed brain metastases: a systematic review and evidence-based clinical practice guideline. J Neurooncol 96(1):71–83PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRef
7.
Zurück zum Zitat Wong J, Hird A, Kirou-Mauro A, Napolskikh J, Chow E (2008) Quality of life in brain metastases radiation trials: a literature review. Curr Oncol 15(5):25–45PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRef Wong J, Hird A, Kirou-Mauro A, Napolskikh J, Chow E (2008) Quality of life in brain metastases radiation trials: a literature review. Curr Oncol 15(5):25–45PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRef
8.
Zurück zum Zitat Leung A, Lien K, Zeng L, Nguyen J, Caissie A, Culleton S et al (2011) The EORTC QLQ-BN20 for assessment of quality of life in patients receiving treatment or prophylaxis for brain metastases: a literature review. Expert Rev Pharmacoecon Outcomes Res 11(6):693–700PubMedCrossRef Leung A, Lien K, Zeng L, Nguyen J, Caissie A, Culleton S et al (2011) The EORTC QLQ-BN20 for assessment of quality of life in patients receiving treatment or prophylaxis for brain metastases: a literature review. Expert Rev Pharmacoecon Outcomes Res 11(6):693–700PubMedCrossRef
9.
Zurück zum Zitat Jaeschke R, Singer J, Guyatt GH (1989) Measurement of health status. Ascertaining the minimal clinically important difference. Control Clin Trials 10(4):407–415PubMedCrossRef Jaeschke R, Singer J, Guyatt GH (1989) Measurement of health status. Ascertaining the minimal clinically important difference. Control Clin Trials 10(4):407–415PubMedCrossRef
10.
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
11.
Zurück zum Zitat Maringwa J, Quinten C, King M, Ringash J, Osoba D, Coens C 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, Ringash J, Osoba D, Coens C 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
12.
Zurück zum Zitat Neymark N, Kiebert W, Torfs K, Davies L, Fayers P, Hillner B et al (1998) Methodological and statistical issues of quality of life (QoL) and economic evaluation in cancer clinical trials: report of a workshop. Eur J Cancer 34(9):1317–1333PubMedCrossRef Neymark N, Kiebert W, Torfs K, Davies L, Fayers P, Hillner B et al (1998) Methodological and statistical issues of quality of life (QoL) and economic evaluation in cancer clinical trials: report of a workshop. Eur J Cancer 34(9):1317–1333PubMedCrossRef
13.
Zurück zum Zitat Maringwa JT, Quinten C, King M, Ringash J, Osoba D, Coens C 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, Ringash J, Osoba D, Coens C 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
14.
Zurück zum Zitat Revicki D, Hays RD, Cella D, Sloan J (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, Sloan J (2008) Recommended methods for determining responsiveness and minimally important differences for patient-reported outcomes. J Clin Epidemiol 61(2):102–109PubMedCrossRef
15.
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
16.
Zurück zum Zitat Cella D, Eton DT, Fairclough DL, Bonomi P, Heyes AE, Silberman C et al (2002) What is a clinically meaningful change on the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-Lung (FACT-L) Questionnaire? Results from Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) Study 5592. J Clin Epidemiol 55(3):285–295PubMedCrossRef Cella D, Eton DT, Fairclough DL, Bonomi P, Heyes AE, Silberman C et al (2002) What is a clinically meaningful change on the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-Lung (FACT-L) Questionnaire? Results from Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) Study 5592. J Clin Epidemiol 55(3):285–295PubMedCrossRef
17.
Zurück zum Zitat Osoba D (1992) The Quality of Life Committee of the Clinical Trials Group of the National Cancer Institute of Canada: organization and functions. Qual Life Res 1(3):211–218PubMedCrossRef Osoba D (1992) The Quality of Life Committee of the Clinical Trials Group of the National Cancer Institute of Canada: organization and functions. Qual Life Res 1(3):211–218PubMedCrossRef
18.
Zurück zum Zitat Osoba D (2002) A taxonomy of the uses of health-related quality-of-life instruments in cancer care and the clinical meaningfulness of the results. Med Care 40(6 Suppl):III31–III38PubMed Osoba D (2002) A taxonomy of the uses of health-related quality-of-life instruments in cancer care and the clinical meaningfulness of the results. Med Care 40(6 Suppl):III31–III38PubMed
19.
Zurück zum Zitat Bedard G, Zeng L, Zhang L, Lauzon N, Holden L, Tsao M, Danjoux C, Barnes E, Sahgal A, Poon M, Hicks K, Chow E (2013) Minimal important differences in the EORTC QLQ-C15-PAL to determine meaningful change in palliative advanced cancer patients. Asia Pac J Clin Oncol. doi:10.1111/ajco.12069 Bedard G, Zeng L, Zhang L, Lauzon N, Holden L, Tsao M, Danjoux C, Barnes E, Sahgal A, Poon M, Hicks K, Chow E (2013) Minimal important differences in the EORTC QLQ-C15-PAL to determine meaningful change in palliative advanced cancer patients. Asia Pac J Clin Oncol. doi:10.​1111/​ajco.​12069
21.
Zurück zum Zitat Zeng L, Chow E, Zhang L, Tseng LM, Hou MF, Fairchild A et al (2012) An international prospective study establishing minimal clinically important differences in the EORTC QLQ-BM22 and QLQ-C30 in cancer patients with bone metastases. Support Care Cancer 20(12):3307–3313PubMedCrossRef Zeng L, Chow E, Zhang L, Tseng LM, Hou MF, Fairchild A et al (2012) An international prospective study establishing minimal clinically important differences in the EORTC QLQ-BM22 and QLQ-C30 in cancer patients with bone metastases. Support Care Cancer 20(12):3307–3313PubMedCrossRef
22.
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
23.
Zurück zum Zitat Eton DT, Cella D, Yost KJ, Yount SE, Peterman AH, Neuberg DS 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, Yount SE, Peterman AH, Neuberg DS 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
24.
Zurück zum Zitat Osoba D, Rodrigues G, Myles J, Zee B, Pater J (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, Zee B, Pater J (1998) Interpreting the significance of changes in health-related quality-of-life scores. J Clin Oncol 16(1):139–144PubMed
25.
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
26.
Zurück zum Zitat Cella D, Nichol MB, Eton D, Nelson JB, Mulani P (2009) Estimating clinically meaningful changes for the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy–Prostate: results from a clinical trial of patients with metastatic hormone-refractory prostate cancer. Value Health 12(1):124–129PubMedCrossRef Cella D, Nichol MB, Eton D, Nelson JB, Mulani P (2009) Estimating clinically meaningful changes for the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy–Prostate: results from a clinical trial of patients with metastatic hormone-refractory prostate cancer. Value Health 12(1):124–129PubMedCrossRef
Metadaten
Titel
Minimal clinically important differences in the EORTC QLQ-BN20 in patients with brain metastases
verfasst von
Erin Wong
Liying Zhang
Marc Kerba
Palmira Foro Arnalot
Brita Danielson
May Tsao
Gillian Bedard
Nemica Thavarajah
Paul Cheon
Cyril Danjoux
Natalie Pulenzas
Edward Chow
Publikationsdatum
01.09.2015
Verlag
Springer Berlin Heidelberg
Erschienen in
Supportive Care in Cancer / Ausgabe 9/2015
Print ISSN: 0941-4355
Elektronische ISSN: 1433-7339
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s00520-015-2637-5

Weitere Artikel der Ausgabe 9/2015

Supportive Care in Cancer 9/2015 Zur Ausgabe

Update Onkologie

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