IntroductionEarly guidelines for minimally important differences (MIDs) for the EORTC QLQ-C30 proposed ≥10 points change as clinically meaningful for all scales. Increasing evidence that MIDs can... Show moreIntroductionEarly guidelines for minimally important differences (MIDs) for the EORTC QLQ-C30 proposed ≥10 points change as clinically meaningful for all scales. Increasing evidence that MIDs can vary by scale, direction of change, cancer type and estimation method has raised doubt about a single global standard. This paper identifies MID patterns for interpreting group-level change in EORTC QLQ-C30 scores across nine cancer types.MethodsData were obtained from 21 published EORTC Phase III trials that enroled 13,015 patients across nine cancer types (brain, colorectal, advanced breast, head/neck, lung, mesothelioma, melanoma, ovarian, and prostate). Anchor-based MIDs for within-group change and between-group differences in change over time were obtained via mean change method and linear regression, respectively. Separate MIDs were estimated for improvements and deteriorations. Distribution-based estimates were derived and compared with anchor-based MIDs.ResultsAnchor-based MIDs mostly ranged from 5 to 10 points. Differences in MIDs for improvement vs deterioration, for both within-group and between-group, were mostly within a 2-points range. Larger differences between within-group and between-group MIDs were observed for several scales in ovarian, lung and head/neck cancer. Most anchor-based MIDs ranged between 0.3 SD and 0.5 SD distribution-based estimates.ConclusionsOur results reinforce recent claims that no single MID can be applied to all EORTC QLQ-C30 scales and disease settings. MIDs varied by scale, improvement/deterioration, within/between comparisons and by cancer type. Researchers applying commonly used rules of thumb must be aware of the risk of dismissing changes that are clinically meaningful or underpowering analyses when smaller MIDs apply. Show less
Background: The European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) Quality of Life Group developed a questionnaire to assess sexual health in patients with cancer and cancer... Show moreBackground: The European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) Quality of Life Group developed a questionnaire to assess sexual health in patients with cancer and cancer survivors. This study evaluates the psychometric properties of the questionnaire. Methods: The 22-item EORTC sexual health questionnaire (EORTC QLQ-SH22) was administered with the EORTC QLQ-C30 to 444 patients with cancer. The hypothesised scale structure, reliability and validity were evaluated through standardised psychometric procedures. Results: The cross-cultural field study showed that the majority of patients (94.7%) were able to complete the QLQ-SH22 in less than 20 min; 89% of the study participants did not need any help to fill in the questionnaire. Multi-item multi-trait scaling analysis confirmed the hypothesised scale structure with two multi-item scales (sexual satisfaction, sexual pain) and 11 single items (including five conditional items and four gender-specific items). The internal consistency yielded acceptable Cronbach's alpha coefficients (.90 for the sexual satisfaction scale, .80 for the sexual pain scale). The test-retest correlations (Pearson's r) ranged from .70 to .93 except for the scale communication with professionals (.67) and male body image (.69). The QLQ-SH22 discriminates well between subgroups of patients differing in terms of their performance and treatment status. Conclusion: The study supports the reliability, the content and construct validity of the QLQSH22. The newly developed questionnaire is clinically applicable to assess sexual health of patients with cancer at different treatment stages and during survivorship for clinical trials and for clinical practice. 2021 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved. Show less
Bottomley, A.; Reijneveld, J.C.; Koller, M.; Flechtner, H.; Tomaszewski, K.A.; Greimel, E.; ... ; 5th EORTC Quality Life Canc 2019
Introduction The PENELOPE trial evaluated pertuzumab added to chemotherapy for biomarker-selected platinum-resistant ovarian cancer. As previously reported, pertuzumab did not statistically... Show moreIntroduction The PENELOPE trial evaluated pertuzumab added to chemotherapy for biomarker-selected platinum-resistant ovarian cancer. As previously reported, pertuzumab did not statistically significantly improve progression-free survival (primary end point: HR 0.74, 95% CI 0.50 to 1.11), although results in the paclitaxel and gemcitabine cohorts suggested activity. Here, we report final overall survival and patient-reported outcomes.Patients and methods Eligible patients had ovarian carcinoma that progressed during/within 6 months of completing >= 4 platinum cycles, low tumor human epidermal growth factor receptor 3 (HER3) mRNA expression, and <= 2 prior chemotherapy lines. Investigators selected single-agent topotecan, gemcitabine or weekly paclitaxel before patients were randomized to either placebo or pertuzumab (840 -> 420mg every 3 weeks), stratified by selected chemotherapy, prior anti-angiogenic therapy, and platinum-free interval. Final overall survival analysis (key secondary end point) was pre-specified after 129 deaths. Patient-reported outcomes (secondary end point) were assessed at baseline and every 9 weeks until disease progression.Results At database lock (June 9, 2016), 130 (83%) of 156 randomized patients had died. Median follow-up was 27 months in the pertuzumab arm versus 26 months in the control arm. In the intent-to-treat population there was no overall survival difference between treatment arms (stratified HR 0.90, 95% CI 0.61 to 1.32; p=0.60). Results in subgroups defined by stratification factors indicated heterogeneity similar to previous progression-free survival results. Updated safety was similar to previously published results. Compliance with patient-reported outcomes questionnaire completion was >75% for all validated patient-reported outcomes measures. Pertuzumab demonstrated neither beneficial nor detrimental effects on patient-reported outcomes compared with placebo, except for increased diarrhea symptoms.Discussion Consistent with the primary results, adding pertuzumab to chemotherapy for low tumor HER3 mRNA-expressing platinum-resistant ovarian cancer did not improve overall survival, but showed trends in some cohorts. Except for increased diarrhea symptoms, pertuzumab had no impact on patient-reported outcomes.ClinicalTrials.gov: ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT01684878. Show less
Bottomley, A.; Pe, M.; Sloan, J.; Basch, E.; Bonnetain, F.; Calvert, M.; ... ; Setting Int Stand Analyzing 2018
Aim: A validation study was conducted to evaluate the psychometric properties of the European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) Quality of Life Questionnaire-Endometrial... Show moreAim: A validation study was conducted to evaluate the psychometric properties of the European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) Quality of Life Questionnaire-Endometrial Cancer Module (EORTC QLQ-EN24). This module was designed to assess disease and treatment specific aspects of the quality of life (QoL) of patients with endometrial cancer. Methods: Two hundred and sixty-eight women with endometrial cancer were recruited in different phases of treatment: after pelvic surgery (Group 1); during adjuvant chemotherapy and/or radiotherapy (Group 2); after completion of treatment (Group 3). Patients completed the EORTC QLQ-C30, the endometrial cancer module and a short debriefing questionnaire. Results: Multi-trait scaling analyses confirmed the hypothesised scale structure of the QLQ-EN24. Internal consistency reliability was good with Cronbach's alpha coefficients ranging from 0.74 to 0.86 (lymphoedema 0.80, urological symptoms 0.75, gastrointestinal symptoms 0.74, body image problems 0.86 and sexual/vaginal problems 0.86). Convergent and discriminant validity did not show any scaling errors for the subscales. The QLQ-EN24 module discriminated well between clinically different groups of patients. All items exhibited a high completion rate with less than 2% missing values except for the sexuality items (19%). Conclusion: The validation study supports the reliability, the convergent and divergent validity of the EORTC QLQ-EN24. This newly developed QLQ-EN24 module is a useful instrument for the assessment of the QoL in patients treated for endometrial cancer in clinical trials. (C) 2010 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved. Show less
