Treatment strategy optimization for patients with non-small-cell lung cancer harboring EGFR mutation: a Delphi consensus

Table 6 Delphi Rounds correlation analysis

A. Correlation of the total questionnaire and of the domains between two Delphi Rounds
	Spearman’s c (p)^a	Kappa index (p)^b
TOTAL (33 ítems)	0.909 (< 0.001)	0.880 (< 0.001)
Domain 1. Molecular diagnosis on aNSCLC (10 items)	0.954 (< 0.001)	0.939 (< 0.001)
Domain 2. Histologic profile and patient clinical characteristics (7 items)	0.856 (< 0.001)	0.829 (< 0.001)
Domain 3. First-line treatment in aNSCLC with EGFRm positive (8 items)	1 (< 0.001)	1 (< 0.001)
Domain 4. Second and subsequent-lines treatment in aNSCLC with EGFRm positive (8 items)	0.849 (< 0.001)	0.867 (< 0.001)

B. Correlation of the statements between the two Delphi Rounds
Statement	Spearman’s c (p)^a	Kappa index (p)^b
Domain 1. Molecular diagnosis on aNSCLC
Item 1	0.318 (0.125)	0.359 (0.137)
Domain 2. Histologic profile and patient clinical characteristics
Item 1	0.892 (< 0.001)	0.860 (< 0.001)
Item 3	0.902 (< 0.001)	0.899 (< 0.001)
Item 4	0.738 (0.006)	0.708 (0.008)
Item 5	0.561 (0.162)	0.569 (0.156)
Item 6	0.856 (< 0.001)	0.842 (< 0.001)
Domain 3. First-line treatment in aNSCLC with EGFRm positive
Domain 4. Second and subsequent-lines treatment in aNSCLC with EGFRm positive
Item 2	0.662 (0.016)	0.641 (0.022)
Item 6	0.692 (0.019)	0.715 (0.011)

aNSCLC Advanced non–small-cell lung cancer, EGFRm epidermal growth factor receptor mutation, Spearman's c Spearman's correlation coefficient
^aCuantitative correlation score: [0—0.25] poor correlation; [0.26–0.50] weak correlation; [0.51–0.75- moderate/strong; [0.76–1] strong/very strong correlation
^bCualitative correlation score: < 0.00 no agreement; 0.00–0.20- poor concordance; 0.21–0.40- weak concordance; 0.41–0.60- moderate concordance; 0.61–0.80- good concordance; 0.81–1- very good concordance