Mapping the cancer-specific EORTC QLQ-C30 and EORTC QLQ-BR23 to the generic EQ-5D in metastatic breast cancer patients
- 1k Downloads
To develop a mapping algorithm for a conversion of the EORTC QLQ-C30 and EORTC QLQ BR-23 into the EQ-5D-derived utilities in metastatic breast cancer (MBC) patients.
We enrolled 199 patients with MBC from four leading Korean hospitals in 2009. EQ-5D utility, cancer-specific (QLQ-C30) and breast cancer-specific quality of life data (QLQ-BR23) and selected clinical and demographic information were collected from the study participants. Ordinary least squares regression models were used to model the EQ-5D using QLQ-C30 and QLQ-BR23 scale scores. To select the best model specification, six different sets of explanatory variables were compared.
Regression analysis with the multiitem scale scores of QLQ-C30 was the best-performing model, explaining for 48.7% of the observed EQ-5D variation. Its mean absolute error between the observed and predicted EQ-5D utilities (0.092) and relative prediction error (2.784%) was among the smallest. Also, this mapping model showed the least systematic errors according to disease severity.
The mapping algorithms developed have good predictive validity, and therefore, they enable researchers to translate cancer-specific health-related quality of life measures to the preference-adjusted health status of MBC patients.
KeywordsEORTC QLQ-C30 EORTC QLQ-BR 23 EQ-5D Mapping Utility Quality of life
Eastern cooperative oncology group
- EORTC QLQ-BR23 (or QLQ-BR23)
European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer quality of life questionnaire breast cancer-23
- EORTC QLQ-C30 (or QLQ-C 30)
European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer quality of life questionnaire core-30
EQ-5D visual analogue scale
International society for pharmacoeconomics and outcomes research
Metastatic breast cancer
National health insurance
Ordinary least squares
Quality-adjusted life years
Quality of life
Relative prediction error
Variance inflation factor
This study was supported by an unrestricted grant from Pfizer Pharmaceuticals Korea Limited.
- 6.Aaronson, N. K., Ahmedzai, S., Bergman, B., et al. (1993). The European organization for research and treatment of cancer QLQ C-30: A quality-of-life instrument for use in international clinical trials in oncology. Journal of the National Cancer Institute, 85(6), 365–376.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 10.Korea National Cancer Information Center. (2010). Prevalence of cancer. cited August 28, 2010, from URL http://www.cancer.go.kr/cms/statistics/stat/1373001_1611.html.
- 11.Health Insurance Review and Assessment Services. (2006). Korean pharmaceutical economic evaluation guidelines. Cited December 25, 2010, from URL http://www.ispor.org/PEguidelines/source/Korean_PE_Guidelines_Korean_Version.pdf.
- 12.Fayers, P. M., Aaronson, N. K., Bjordal, K., Curan, D., & Groenvold, M. (1999). On behalf of EORTC quality of life study group. EORTC QLQ-C30 scoring manual (2nd ed.). Brussels: EORTC.Google Scholar
- 14.The EuroQol Group. EQ-5D. Cited December 25, 2010, from URL http://www.euroqol.org.
- 17.World Health Organization. (1980). WHO handbook for reporting results of cancer treatment. Neoplasma, 20, 37–46.Google Scholar
- 20.Brazier, J. E., Yang, Y., Tsuchiya, A., & Rowen, D. L. (2009). A review of studies mapping (or cross walking) non-preference based measures of health to generic preference-based measures. European Journal of Health Economics, 2010(11), 215–225.Google Scholar
- 23.Vittinghoff, E., Shiboski, S. C., Glidden, D. V., McCulloch, C. E. (2005). Regression methods in biostatistics: Linear, logistic, survival, and repeated measures models (Chap. 5, pp. 147–148). New York: Springer Science+Business Media, Inc.Google Scholar
- 24.SAS/STAT(R) 9.2 (2009). User’s Guide (2nd ed.), (Chap. 4, pp. 98). Cary, North Carolina, USA: SAS Institute Inc.Google Scholar
- 25.Korea Center for Disease Control and Prevention. (2007). The Korea national health and nutrition examination survey (KNHANES IV). Seoul: Korea Ministry of Health, Welfare, and Family Affairs, p. 290.Google Scholar