Psychosocial Burden and Quality of Life of Lung Cancer Patients: Results of the EORTC QLQ-C30/QLQ-LC29 Questionnaire and Hornheide Screening Instrument.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT: Background
Overall survival is the ultimate criterion for the therapy of lung cancer, but psychosocial care, which helps the patient to cope with the disease, becomes a more and more important issue in the treatment of this life-threatening disease.Methods
We report the satellite project within a prospective, international, cross-cultural, multicenter study to validate the EORTC QLQ-LC29, a new designed module to assess the quality of life of lung cancer patients. The participants filled in the EORTC QLQ-C30, the recently updated lung cancer module QLQ-LC29 and the Hornheide questionnaire (HSI).Results
A total of 81 patients (32 female and 49 male, mean age 65.2 years, SD = 9.7) were enrolled in this study by completing the questionnaires. Fatigue (mean 55.4, SD = 26.3) and dyspnea (mean 46.3, SD = 36.2) were the most prominent symptoms. Thirty-nine patients (48.1%) according to the HSI needed psychosocial support. When using the EORTC questionnaires as screening instrument with 50 as cut-off in contrast only 29.5% of our patients needed psychosocial support. The need for psychosocial support according to the HSI correlated most with the EORTC scales "fatigue" (38.3% overlap between the two questionnaires), "existential fear" (38.3% overlap between the two questionnaires) and worse "global quality of life" (27.2% overlap between the two questionnaires).Conclusion
If psychosocial distress is at the core, the HSI is a suitable instrument for quick screening. The EORTC measures help to specify impaired quality of life areas and also cover somatic symptoms that are specific for cancer patients. Once psychosocial distress has been ascertained, clinicians should be particularly aware of specific problems regarding "fatigue", "existential fear" and diminished "global quality of life".Trial registration
clinicaltrials.gov, reference number NCT02745691. Registered 20 April 2016.
SUBMITTER: Koch M
PROVIDER: S-EPMC8357622 | biostudies-literature |
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Similar Datasets
Project description:The EORTC QLU-C10D is a new multi-attribute utility instrument derived from the widely used cancer-specific quality-of-life (QOL) questionnaire, EORTC QLQ-C30. The QLU-C10D contains ten dimensions (Physical, Role, Social and Emotional Functioning; Pain, Fatigue, Sleep, Appetite, Nausea, Bowel Problems), each with four levels. To be used in cost-utility analysis, country-specific valuation sets are required.The aim of this study was to provide Australian utility weights for the QLU-C10D.An Australian online panel was quota-sampled to ensure population representativeness by sex and age (? 18 years). Participants completed a discrete choice experiment (DCE) consisting of 16 choice-pairs. Each pair comprised two QLU-C10D health states plus life expectancy. Data were analysed using conditional logistic regression, parameterised to fit the quality-adjusted life-year framework. Utility weights were calculated as the ratio of each QOL dimension-level coefficient to the coefficient on life expectancy.A total of 1979 panel members opted in, 1904 (96%) completed at least one choice-pair, and 1846 (93%) completed all 16 choice-pairs. Dimension weights were generally monotonic: poorer levels within each dimension were generally associated with greater utility decrements. The dimensions that impacted most on choice were, in order, Physical Functioning, Pain, Role Functioning and Emotional Functioning. Oncology-relevant dimensions with moderate impact were Nausea and Bowel Problems. Fatigue, Trouble Sleeping and Appetite had relatively small impact. The value of the worst health state was -0.096, somewhat worse than death.This study provides the first country-specific value set for the QLU-C10D, which can facilitate cost-utility analyses when applied to data collected with the EORTC QLQ-C30, prospectively and retrospectively.
| S-EPMC5805814 | biostudies-other
Project description:BackgroundMobile apps are evolving in the medical field. However, ongoing discussions have questioned whether such apps are really valuable and whether patients will accept their use in day-to-day clinical life. Therefore, we initiated a usability study in our department.ObjectiveWe present our results of the first app prototype and patient testing of health-related quality of life (HRQoL) assessment in oncological patients.MethodsWe developed an app prototype for the iOS operating system within eight months in three phases: conception, initial development, and pilot testing. For the HRQoL assessment, we chose to implement only the European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) Quality of Life Questionnaire-Core 30 (QLQ-C30; German version 3). Usability testing was conducted for three months. Participation was voluntary and pseudonymized. After completion of the QLQ-C30 questionnaire using iPads provided by our department, we performed a short survey with 10 questions. This survey inquired about patients' opinions regarding general aspects, including technical advances in medicine, mobile and app assistance during cancer treatment, and the app-specific functions (eg, interface and navigation).ResultsAfter logging into the app, the user can choose between starting a questionnaire, reviewing answers (administrators only), and logging out. The questionnaire is displayed with the same information, questions, and answers as on the original QLQ-C30 sheet. No alterations in wording were made. Usability was tested with 81 patients; median age was 55 years. The median time for completing the HRQoL questionnaire on the iPad was 4.0 minutes. Of all participants, 84% (68/81) owned a mobile device. Similarly, 84% (68/81) of participants would prefer a mobile version of the HRQoL questionnaire instead of a paper-based version. Using the app in daily life during and after cancer treatment would be supported by 83% (67/81) of participants. In the prototype version of the app, data were stored on the device; in the future, 79% (64/81) of the patients would agree to transfer data via the Internet.ConclusionsOur usability test showed good results regarding attractiveness, operability, and understandability. Moreover, our results demonstrate a high overall acceptance of mobile apps and telemedicine in oncology. The HRQoL assessment via the app was accepted thoroughly by patients, and individuals are keen to use it in clinical routines, while data privacy and security must be ensured.
| S-EPMC5840479 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Background The impact of disease and treatment on the patient's overall well-being and functioning is a topic of growing interest in clinical research and practice. The aim of this study is to obtain reference data on quality of life of Croatian general population. Further, we aim to assess the impact of the disease and its primary systemic treatment on their health related quality of life (HrQoL) in multiple myeloma (MM) patients. Patients and methods Participants for the first part of the study were randomly selected from adult Croatian population. In the clinical part of the study MM patients were included as prospectively diagnosed within two years in two major Croatian haematological centres. The EORTC QLQ-C30 in both trials and QLQ-MY20 in MM patients only were applied for HrQoL assessment. Results Gender, age and place of residence have great impact on quality of life scores in Croatian population. The MM patients at the time of diagnosis have lower QLQ-C30 scores for global quality of life, functional and symptom scale scores, as well as single items. The type of disease followed by the choice of therapy options are important HrQoL determinants. Conclusions The norm values available now for Croatian population will help to interpret HrQoL for clinicians and aid in planning cancer care interventions. This study identified treatment effect consistent with those from other observational studies and provided new data on HrQoL across two different treatment choices for MM patients.
| S-EPMC6765165 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundPatients with newly diagnosed early stage prostate cancer (PCa) face a difficult choice of different treatment options with curative intention. They must consider both goals of optimising quantity and quality of life. The quality of life (QoL) is a psychometric outcome which is measured using validated questionnaires. Only few data are published concerning pre - and postoperative QoL.MethodsThis study investigated pre perative QoL of 185 patients who consecutively underwent open radical retropubic prostatectomy for organ-confined PCa to postoperative QoL of another 185 patients. The EORTC QLQ-C30, EORTC QLQPR25 module and 24 h ICS pad test were used (mean follow-up 28.6 months).ResultsThe examined symptom scores of the EORTC QLQ-PR25 were on lowest level. In the dyspnoea symptom score differences of age emerged: the amount of patients who are short of breath rose significantly in older patients after surgery (p < 0.05 paired, two-tailed student's t-test).. Lastly, the urinary symptom score was found postal-therapeutically low; this fact was age independent. The results of sexual symptom score need to be taken into consideration, since prostatectomy resulted in a significant reduction of sexual activity independent of age. All functioning scales postoperatively reached high values without significant changes (p > 0.05 student's t-test ), which implies a high QoL after surgery. A reliable and satisfying status of continence was found in our patients after retropubic prostatectomy. A high rate of patients (89.2%) would choose retropubic prostatectomy again.ConclusionRetropubic prostatectomy represents a reliable and accepted procedure in the treatment of organ-confined PCa. For the first time it could be shown that patients` QoL remained on a high level after retropubic prostatectomy. Nevertheless, the primary avoidance or postoperative therapy of erectile dysfunction should be in the focus of surgeons.
| S-EPMC3238231 | biostudies-literature
Project description:In oncology, health-related quality of life (HRQoL) data are often collected using disease-specific patient questionnaires while generic, patient-level utility data required for health economic modeling are often not collected.We developed a mapping algorithm for multiple myeloma that relates HRQoL scores from the European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) questionnaires QLQ-C30 and QLQ-MY20 to a utility value from the European QoL-5 Dimensions (EQ-5D) questionnaire. Data were obtained from 154 multiple myeloma patients who had participated in a multicenter cohort study in the UK or Germany. All three questionnaires were administered at a single time point. Scores from all 19 domains of the QLQ-C30 and QLQ-MY20 instruments were univariately tested against EQ-5D values and retained in a multivariate regression model if statistically significant. A 10-fold cross-validation model selection method was also used as an alternative testing means. Two models were developed: one based on QLQ-C30 plus QLQ-MY20 scores and one based on QLQ-C30 scores alone. Adjusted R-squared, correlation coefficients, and plots of observed versus predicted EQ-5D values were presented for both models.Mapping revealed that Global Health Status/QoL, Physical Functioning, Pain, and Insomnia were significant predictors of EQ-5D utility values. Similar results were observed when QLQ-MY20 scores were excluded from the model, except that Emotional Functioning and became a significant predictor and Insomnia was no longer a significant predictor. Adjusted R-squared values were of similar magnitude with or without inclusion of QLQ-MY20 scores (0.70 and 0.69, respectively), suggesting that the EORTC QLQ-MY20 adds little in terms of predicting utility values in multiple myeloma.This algorithm successfully mapped EORTC HRQoL data onto EQ-5D utility in patients with multiple myeloma. Current mapping will aid in the analysis of cost-effectiveness of novel therapies for this indication.
| S-EPMC4007827 | biostudies-other
Project description:BACKGROUND:The European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) QLQ-C30 is a widely used cancer-specific questionnaire assessing 15 domains of health-related quality of life (HRQoL). Our aim was to facilitate the interpretation of scores on this questionnaire by providing Austrian normative data based on a general population sample. METHODS:The calculation of normative data was based on the EORTC QLQ-C30 data collected from an Austrian general population sample that was part of an international online panel study on the development of European normative data. Data reported herein were stratified and weighted by age and sex. Normative data were calculated for all 15 HRQoL domains of the EORTC QLQ-C30. For precise predictions of EORTC QLQ-C30 scores, a regression model based on sex, age and the presence of health conditions was built. RESULTS:The Austrian sample comprised 1002 Austrian participants (50.1% female, 51.4% when weighted by age and sex based on United Nation statistics). The mean age was 53.7?years (weighted: 47.7?years) and 53.6% (weighted: 47.4%) reported at least one health condition. Men reported better physical (Cohen's d?=?0.17) and emotional (Cohen's d?=?0.17) functioning as well as less fatigue (Cohen's d?=?0.18) and insomnia (Cohen's d?=?0.25) compared with women. Younger individuals (<?40?years) reported less dyspnea (Cohen's d?=?0.61) and pain (Cohen's d?=?0.51), whereas older individuals (?60?years) reported better emotional functioning (Cohen's d?=?0.55). CONCLUSIONS:We present Austrian normative data for the EORTC QLQ-C30. Differences by age and sex are mostly in line with the findings of other European normative studies. The Austrian population sample shows higher HRQoL and lower morbidity compared with other European countries. The normative data in this study will facilitate the interpretation of EORTC QLQ-C30 scores in oncological practice and research at a national and international level (including cross-cultural comparisons).
| S-EPMC7425034 | biostudies-literature
Project description:INTRODUCTION:We used European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Questionnaire (EORTC QLQ-C30) data from the LUME-Colon 1 study to illustrate different methods of statistical analysis for health-related quality of life (HRQoL), and compared the results. PATIENTS AND METHODS:Patients were randomized 1:1 to receive nintedanib 200 mg twice daily plus best supportive care (n = 386) or matched placebo plus best supportive care (n = 382). Five methods (mean treatment difference averaged over time, using a mixed-effects growth curve model; mixed-effects models for repeated measurements (MMRM); time-to-deterioration (TTD); status change; and responder analysis) were used to analyze EORTC QLQ-C30 global health status (GHS)/QoL and scores from functional scales. RESULTS:Overall, GHS/QoL and physical functioning deteriorated over time. Mean treatment difference slightly favored nintedanib over placebo for physical functioning (adjusted mean, 2.66; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.97-4.34) and social functioning (adjusted mean, 2.62; 95% CI, 0.66-4.47). GHS/QoL was numerically better with nintedanib versus placebo (adjusted mean, 1.61; 95% CI, -0.004 to 3.27). MMRM analysis had similar results, with better physical functioning in the nintedanib group at all timepoints. There was no significant delay in GHS/QoL deterioration (10%) and physical functioning (16%) with nintedanib versus placebo (TTD analysis). Status change analysis showed a higher proportion of patients with markedly improved GHS/QoL and physical functioning in the nintedanib versus placebo groups. Responder analysis showed a similar, less pronounced pattern. CONCLUSION:Analyses of EORTC QLQ-C30 data showed that HRQoL was not impaired by treatment with nintedanib versus placebo. Analysis and interpretation of HRQoL endpoints should consider symptom type and severity and course of disease.
| S-EPMC7505163 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundThe aim of the study was to estimate the minimally important difference (MID) for interpreting group-level change over time, both within a group and between groups, for the European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Questionnaire Core 30 (EORTC QLQ-C30) scores in patients with prostate cancer.MethodsWe used data from two published EORTC trials. Clinical anchors were selected by strength of correlations with QLQ-C30 scales. In addition, clinicians' input was obtained with regard to plausibility of the selected anchors. The mean change method was applied for interpreting change over time within a group of patients and linear regression models were fitted to estimate MIDs for between-group differences in change over time. Distribution-based estimates were also evaluated.ResultsTwo clinical anchors were eligible for MID estimation; performance status and the CTCAE diarrhoea domain. MIDs were developed for 7 scales (physical functioning, role functioning, social functioning, pain, fatigue, global quality of life, diarrhoea) and varied by scale and direction (improvement vs deterioration). Within-group MIDs ranged from 4 to 14 points for improvement and - 13 to - 5 points for deterioration and MIDs for between-group differences in change scores ranged from 3 to 13 for improvement and - 10 to - 5 for deterioration.ConclusionsOur findings aid the meaningful interpretation of changes on a set of EORTC QLQ-C30 scale scores over time, both within and between groups, and for performing more accurate sample size calculations for clinical trials in prostate cancer.
| S-EPMC8496068 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundMinimally important differences (MIDs) allow interpretation of the clinical relevance of health-related quality of life (HRQOL) results. This study aimed to estimate MIDs for all European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) Quality of Life Questionnaire Core 30 (QLQ-C30) scales for interpreting group-level results in brain tumor patients.MethodsClinical and HRQOL data from three glioma trials were used. Clinical anchors were selected for each EORTC QLQ-C30 scale, based on correlation (>0.30) and clinical plausibility of association. Changes in both HRQOL and the anchors were calculated, and for each scale and time period, patients were categorized into one of the three clinical change groups: deteriorated by one anchor category, no change, or improved by one anchor category. Mean change method and linear regression were applied to estimate MIDs for interpreting within-group change and between-group differences in change over time, respectively. Distribution-based methods were applied to generate supportive evidence.ResultsA total of 1687 patients were enrolled in the three trials. The retained anchors were performance status and eight Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (CTCAE) scales. MIDs for interpreting within-group change ranged from 4 to 12 points for improvement and -4 to -14 points for deterioration. MIDs for between-group difference in change ranged from 4 to 9 for improvement and -4 to -16 for deterioration. Most anchor-based MIDs were closest to the 0.3 SD distribution-based estimates (range: 3-10).ConclusionsMIDs for the EORTC QLQ-C30 scales generally ranged between 4 and 11 points for both within-group mean change and between-group mean difference in change. These results can be used to interpret QLQ-C30 results from glioma trials.
| S-EPMC8328025 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundThe types of outcomes measured collected in clinical studies and those required for cost-effectiveness analysis often differ. Decision makers routinely use quality adjusted life years (QALYs) to compare the benefits and costs of treatments across different diseases and treatments using a common metric. QALYs can be calculated using preference-based measures (PBMs) such as EQ-5D-3L, but clinical studies often focus on objective clinician or laboratory measured outcomes and non-preference-based patient outcomes, such as QLQ-C30. We model the relationship between the generic, preference-based EQ-5D-3L and the cancer specific quality of life questionnaire, QLQ-C30 in patients with breast cancer. This will result in a mapping that allows users to convert QLQ-C30 scores into EQ-5D-3L scores for the purposes of cost-effectiveness analysis or economic evaluation.MethodsWe use data from a randomized trial of 602 patients with HER2-positive advanced breast cancer provided 3766 EQ-5D-3L observations. Direct mapping using adjusted, limited dependent variable mixture models (ALDVMM) is compared to a random effects linear regression and indirect mapping using seemingly unrelated ordered probit models. EQ-5D-3L was estimated as a function of the summary scales of the QLQ-C30 and other patient characteristics.ResultsA four component mixture model outperformed other models in terms of summary fit statistics. A close fit to the observed data was observed across the range of disease severity. Simulated data from the model closely aligned to the original data and showed that mapping did not significantly underestimate uncertainty. In the simulated data, 22.15% were equal to 1 compared to 21.93% in the original data. Variance was 0.0628 in the simulated data versus 0.0693 in the original data. The preferred mapping is provided in Excel and Stata files for the ease of users.ConclusionA four component adjusted mixture model provides reliable, non-biased estimates of EQ-5D-3L from the QLQ-C30, to link clinical studies to economic evaluation of health technologies for breast cancer. This work adds to a growing body of literature demonstrating the appropriateness of mixture model based approaches in mapping.
| S-EPMC8600775 | biostudies-literature