Dataset Information

Time to health-related quality of life score deterioration as a modality of longitudinal analysis for health-related quality of life studies in oncology: do we need RECIST for quality of life to achieve standardization?

ABSTRACT:

Purpose

Longitudinal analysis of health-related quality of life (HRQoL) remains unstandardized and compromises comparison of results between trials. In oncology, despite available statistical approaches, results are poorly used to change standards of care, mainly due to lack of standardization and the ability to propose clinical meaningful results. In this context, the time to deterioration (TTD) has been proposed as a modality of longitudinal HRQoL analysis for cancer patients. As for tumor response and progression, we propose to develop RECIST criteria for HRQoL.

Methods

Several definitions of TTD are investigated in this paper. We applied this approach in early breast cancer and metastatic pancreatic cancer with a 5-point minimal clinically important difference. In breast cancer, TTD was defined as compared to the baseline score or to the best previous score. In pancreatic cancer (arm 1: gemcitabine with FOLFIRI.3, arm 2: gemcitabine alone), the time until definitive deterioration (TUDD) was investigated with or without death as event.

Results

In the breast cancer study, 381 women were included. The median TTD was influenced by the choice of the reference score. In pancreatic cancer study, 98 patients were enrolled. Patients in Arm 1 presented longer TUDD than those in Arm 2 for most of HRQoL scores. Results of TUDD were slightly different according to the definition of deterioration applied.

Conclusion

Currently, the international ARCAD group supports the idea of developing RECIST for HRQoL in pancreatic and colorectal cancer with liver metastasis, with a view to using HRQoL as a co-primary endpoint along with a tumor parameter.

SUBMITTER: Anota A

PROVIDER: S-EPMC4282717 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundBefore outcomes-based measures of quality can be used to compare and improve care, they must be risk-standardized to account for variations in patient characteristics. Despite the importance of health-related quality of life (HRQL) outcomes among patients with acute myocardial infarction (AMI), no risk-standardized models have been developed.Methods and resultsWe assessed disease-specific HRQL using the Seattle Angina Questionnaire at baseline and 1 year later in 2693 unselected AMI patients from 24 hospitals enrolled in the Translational Research Investigating Underlying disparities in acute Myocardial infarction Patients' Health status (TRIUMPH) registry. Using 57 candidate sociodemographic, economic, and clinical variables present on admission, we developed a parsimonious, hierarchical linear regression model to predict HRQL. Eleven variables were independently associated with poor HRQL after AMI, including younger age, previous coronary artery bypass graft surgery, depressive symptoms, and financial difficulties (R(2)=20%). The model demonstrated excellent internal calibration and reasonable calibration in an independent sample of 1890 AMI patients in a separate registry, although the model slightly overpredicted HRQL scores in the higher deciles. Among the 24 TRIUMPH hospitals, 1-year unadjusted HRQL scores ranged from 67-89. After risk-standardization, HRQL score variability narrowed substantially (range=79-83), and the group of hospital performance (bottom 20%/middle 60%/top 20%) changed in 14 of the 24 hospitals (58% reclassification with risk-standardization).ConclusionsIn this predictive model for HRQL after AMI, we identified risk factors, including economic and psychological characteristics, associated with HRQL outcomes. Adjusting for these factors substantially altered the rankings of hospitals as compared with unadjusted comparisons. Using this model to compare risk-standardized HRQL outcomes across hospitals may identify processes of care that maximize this important patient-centered outcome.