Back to Search Start Over

Measuring change in health-related quality of life: the impact of different analytical methods on the interpretation of treatment effects in glioma patients

Authors :
Coomans, Marijke B.
Taphoorn, Martin J. B.
Aaronson, Neil K.
Baumert, Brigitta G.
van den Bent, Martin
Bottomley, Andrew
Brandes, Alba A.
Chinot, Olivier
Coens, Corneel
Gorlia, Thierry
Herrlinger, Ulrich
Keime-Guibert, Florence
Malmström, Annika
Martinelli, Francesca
Stupp, Roger
Talacchi, Andrea
Weller, Michael
Wick, Wolfgang
Reijneveld, Jaap C.
Dirven, Linda
Coomans, Marijke B.
Taphoorn, Martin J. B.
Aaronson, Neil K.
Baumert, Brigitta G.
van den Bent, Martin
Bottomley, Andrew
Brandes, Alba A.
Chinot, Olivier
Coens, Corneel
Gorlia, Thierry
Herrlinger, Ulrich
Keime-Guibert, Florence
Malmström, Annika
Martinelli, Francesca
Stupp, Roger
Talacchi, Andrea
Weller, Michael
Wick, Wolfgang
Reijneveld, Jaap C.
Dirven, Linda
Publication Year :
2020

Abstract

Background. Different analytical methods may lead to different conclusions about the impact of treatment on health-related quality of life (HRQoL). This study aimed to examine 3 different methods to evaluate change in HRQoL and to study whether these methods result in different conclusions. Methods. HRQoL data from 15 randomized clinical trials were combined (CODAGLIO project). Change in HRQoL scores, measured with the European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Questionnaire Core 30 and BN20 questionnaires, was analyzed in 3 ways: (1) at the group level, comparing mean changes in scale/item scores between treatment arms, (2) at the patient level per scale/item, calculating the percentage of patients that deteriorated, improved, or remained stable per scale/item, and (3) at the individual patient level, combining all scales/items. Results. Baseline and first follow-up HRQoL data were available for 3727 patients. At the group scale/item level, only the item "hair loss" showed a significant and clinically relevant change (ie, >= 10 points) over time, whereas change scores on the other scales/items were statistically significant only (all P <.001; range in change score, 0.1-6.2). Although a large proportion of patients had stable HRQoL over time (range, 27%-84%) on the patient level per scale/item, many patients deteriorated (range, 6%-43%) or improved (range, 8%-32%) on a specific scale/item. At the individual patient level, the majority of patients (86%) showed both deterioration and improvement, whereas only 1% remained stable on all scales. Conclusions. Different analytical methods of changes in HRQoL result in distinct conclusions of treatment effects, all of which may be relevant for informing clinical decision making.<br />Funding Agencies|European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) Quality of Life Group [1515]

Details

Database :
OAIster
Notes :
application/pdf, English
Publication Type :
Electronic Resource
Accession number :
edsoai.on1235739200
Document Type :
Electronic Resource
Full Text :
https://doi.org/10.1093.nop.npaa033