Le-Rademacher Jennifer, Kanwar Rahul, Seisler Drew, Pachman Deirdre R, Qin Rui, Abyzov Alexej, Ruddy Kathryn J, Banck Michaela S, Lavoie Smith Ellen M, Dorsey Susan G, Aaronson Neil K, Sloan Jeff, Loprinzi Charles L, Beutler Andreas S
Alliance Statistics and Data Center, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN, USA.
Mayo Clinic Cancer Center, Mayo Clinic, 200 First Street SW, Rochester, MN, 55905, USA.
Support Care Cancer. 2017 Nov;25(11):3537-3544. doi: 10.1007/s00520-017-3780-y. Epub 2017 Jun 20.
Clinical practice guidelines on chemotherapy-induced peripheral neuropathy (CIPN) use the NCI Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (CTCAE), while recent clinical trials employ a potentially superior measure, the European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Questionnaire-CIPN twenty-item scale (QLQ-CIPN20), a patient-reported outcome (PRO). Practitioners and researchers lack guidance, regarding how QLQ-CIPN20 results relate to the traditional CTCAE during the serial assessment of patients undergoing chemotherapy.
Two large CIPN clinical trial datasets (538 patients) pairing QLQ-CIPN20 and CTCAE outcomes were analyzed using a multivariable linear mixed model with QLQ-CIPN20 score as the outcome variable, CTCAE grade as the main effect, and patient as random effect (accounting for internal correlation of serial measures).
The association between QLQ-CIPN20 scores and CTCAE grades was strong (p < 0.0001), whereby patients with higher CTCAE grade had worse QLQ-CIPN20 scores. Some variation of QLQ-CIPN20 scores was observed based on drug, treatment, and cycle. While there was a marked difference in the mean QLQ-CIPN20 scores between CTCAE grades, the ranges of QLQ-CIPN20 scores within each CTCAE grade were large, leading to large overlap in CIPN20 scores across CTCAE grades.
A strong positive association of QLQ-CIPN20 scores and CTCAE grade provides evidence of convergent validity as well as practical guidance, as to how to quantitatively interpret QLQ-CIPN20 scores at the study level in terms of the traditional CTCAE. The present results also highlight an important clinical caveat, specifically, that conversion of a specific QLQ-CIPN20 score to a specific CTCAE score may not be reliable at the level of an individual patient.
化疗引起的周围神经病变(CIPN)的临床实践指南使用美国国立癌症研究所不良事件通用术语标准(CTCAE),而近期的临床试验采用了一种可能更优的测量方法,即欧洲癌症研究与治疗组织生活质量问卷 - CIPN 20项量表(QLQ - CIPN20),这是一种患者报告结局(PRO)。在对接受化疗的患者进行系列评估时,从业者和研究人员缺乏关于QLQ - CIPN20结果与传统CTCAE如何关联的指导。
使用多变量线性混合模型分析两个配对了QLQ - CIPN20和CTCAE结果的大型CIPN临床试验数据集(538例患者),将QLQ - CIPN20评分作为结局变量,CTCAE分级作为主要效应,患者作为随机效应(考虑系列测量的内部相关性)。
QLQ - CIPN20评分与CTCAE分级之间的关联很强(p < 0.0001),即CTCAE分级越高的患者,QLQ - CIPN20评分越差。基于药物、治疗和周期观察到QLQ - CIPN20评分存在一些差异。虽然CTCAE分级之间的QLQ - CIPN20平均评分存在显著差异,但每个CTCAE分级内的QLQ - CIPN20评分范围很大,导致不同CTCAE分级的CIPN20评分有很大重叠。
QLQ - CIPN20评分与CTCAE分级之间的强正相关提供了收敛效度的证据以及实际指导,即如何在研究层面根据传统CTCAE对QLQ - CIPN20评分进行定量解释。目前的结果还突出了一个重要的临床注意事项,具体而言,在个体患者层面,将特定的QLQ - CIPN20评分转换为特定的CTCAE评分可能不可靠。