Condition-specific or generic preference-based measures in oncology? A comparison of the EORTC-8D and the EQ-5D-3L.
Purpose: It has been argued that generic health-related quality of life measures are not sensitive to certain disease-specific improvements; condition-specific preference-based measures may offer a better alternative. This paper assesses the validity, responsiveness and sensitivity of a cancer-speci...
| Publicado en: | Quality of Life Research Vol. 26; no. 5; pp. 1163 - 1177 |
|---|---|
| Autores principales: | , , , |
| Formato: | research Journal Article |
| Publicado: |
Springer Nature
May2017
|
| Acceso en línea: | Ver este registro en EBSCOhost |
| fields | @attributes: recordID: 1 pdfLink: plink: https://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=ccm&AN=122289200&site=ehost-live header: @attributes: shortDbName: ccm uiTerm: 122289200 longDbName: CINAHL Complete uiTag: AN controlInfo: bkinfo: dissinfo: jinfo: jid: 09629343 GPQ jtl: Quality of Life Research issn: 09629343 maglogo: N pubinfo: dt: May2017 vid: 26 iid: 5 pid: 237 pub: Springer Nature place: New York, New York artinfo: ui: 122289200 122289200 144094011 NLM27830513 122289200 10.1007/s11136-016-1443-y NLM27830513 122289200 ppf: 1163 ppct: 14 formats: fmt: @attributes: type: P tig: atl: Condition-specific or generic preference-based measures in oncology? A comparison of the EORTC-8D and the EQ-5D-3L. aug: au: Lorgelly, Paula K. Doble, Brett Rowen, Donna Brazier, John affil: Office of Health Economics, 7th Floor, 105 Victoria Street, London SW1E 6QT, UK sug: subj: Oncology Methods Quality of Life Psychosocial Factors Female Prospective Studies Male Middle Age Aged Questionnaires Human Middle Aged: 45-64 years Aged: 65+ years Female Male ab: Purpose: It has been argued that generic health-related quality of life measures are not sensitive to certain disease-specific improvements; condition-specific preference-based measures may offer a better alternative. This paper assesses the validity, responsiveness and sensitivity of a cancer-specific preference-based measure, the EORTC-8D, relative to the EQ-5D-3L.Methods: A longitudinal prospective population-based cancer genomic cohort, Cancer 2015, was utilised in the analysis. EQ-5D-3L and the EORTC QLQ-C30 (which gives EORTC-8D values) were asked at baseline (diagnosis) and at various follow-up points (3 months, 6 months, 12 months). Baseline values were assessed for convergent validity, ceiling effects, agreement and sensitivity. Quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) were estimated and similarly assessed. Multivariate regression analyses were employed to understand the determinants of the difference in QALYs.Results: Complete case analysis of 1678 patients found that the EQ-5D-3L values at baseline were significantly lower than the EORTC-8D values (0.748 vs 0.829, p < 0.001). While the correlation between the instruments was high, agreement between the instruments was poor. The baseline health state values using both instruments were found to be sensitive to a number of patient and disease characteristics, and discrimination between disease states was found to be similar. Mean generic QALYs (estimated using the EQ-5D-3L) were significantly lower than condition-specific QALYs (estimated using the EORTC-8D) (0.860 vs 0.909, p < 0.001). The discriminatory power of both QALYs was similar.Conclusions: When comparing a generic and condition-specific preference-based instrument, divergences are apparent in both baseline health state values and in the estimated QALYs over time for cancer patients. The variability in sensitivity between the baseline values and the QALY estimations means researchers and decision makers are advised to be cautious if using the instruments interchangeably. pubtype: Academic Journal doctype: research Journal Article ougenre: Article language: English refInfo: holdings: @attributes: islocal: N |
|---|