• 文献检索
  • 文档翻译
  • 深度研究
  • 学术资讯
  • Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件
  • 邀请有礼
  • 套餐&价格
  • 历史记录
应用&插件
Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件浏览器插件Mac 客户端Windows 客户端微信小程序
定价
高级版会员购买积分包购买API积分包
服务
文献检索文档翻译深度研究API 文档MCP 服务
关于我们
关于 Suppr公司介绍联系我们用户协议隐私条款
关注我们

Suppr 超能文献

核心技术专利:CN118964589B侵权必究
粤ICP备2023148730 号-1Suppr @ 2026

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验

估算癌症患者 EQ-5D-5L 和 EORTC QLQ-C30 的最小重要差异。

Estimating the minimally important difference for the EQ-5D-5L and EORTC QLQ-C30 in cancer.

机构信息

Putnam, 22-24 Torrington Place, Fitzrovia, London, WC1E 7HJ, UK.

Bristol Myers Squibb, Uxbridge, England, UK.

出版信息

Health Qual Life Outcomes. 2024 Sep 20;22(1):81. doi: 10.1186/s12955-024-02294-3.

DOI:10.1186/s12955-024-02294-3
PMID:39304893
原文链接:https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC11416011/
Abstract

BACKGROUND

The minimal important difference (MID) is a useful tool to interpret changes in patients' health-related quality of life. This study aims to estimate MIDs for interpreting within-patient change for both components of the EQ-5D-5L questionnaire [EQ-Visual Analogue Scale (EQ-VAS) and utility index] and domains of the European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Questionnaire Core 30 (EORTC QLQ-C30) for cancer patients.

METHODS

Data were obtained from the Cancer 2015 dataset, a longitudinal cohort of Australian cancer patients. Anchor-based approaches were used to estimate MIDs for the EQ-5D-5L index-based utility index [Australia and the United States (US) tariff sets], EQ-VAS scores, and the EORTC QLQ-C30. Clinical [Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) performance status] and patient-reported (items 29 and 30 of the EORTC QLQ-C30 and the EQ-VAS) anchors were assessed for appropriateness by their correlation strength. Clinical change groups (CCGs) were defined a priori for improvement and deterioration based on estimates used in previous literature. MIDs were estimated via linear regression and distribution-based methods.

RESULTS

For the index-based utility scores in Australia, the anchor-defined MID estimates were 0.01 to 0.06 for improvement and - 0.04 to -0.03 for deterioration, with a weighted value of 0.03 for improvement and deterioration. The EQ-VAS MID estimate was 5 points for both improvement and deterioration. For the EORTC QLQ-C30, changes of at least 3.64 (improvement) and - 4.28 (deterioration) units on the physical functioning scale, 6.31 (improvement) and - 7.11 (deterioration) units on the role functioning scale, 4.65 (improvement) and - 3.41 (deterioration) units on the emotional functioning scale, and 5.41 (improvement) and - 5.56 (deterioration) units on the social functioning scale were estimated to be meaningful.

CONCLUSION

This study identified lower MIDs for the EQ-5D-5L utility index, EQ-VAS, and EORTC QLQ-C30 domain scores, than those reported previously. The use of a real-world cancer-specific panel dataset may reflect smaller MID estimates that are more applicable to cancer patients in the clinical practice, rather than using MIDs that have been estimated from clinical trials.

摘要

背景

最小有意义差异(MID)是解释患者健康相关生活质量变化的有用工具。本研究旨在为澳大利亚癌症患者的 EQ-5D-5L 问卷[EQ-视觉模拟量表(EQ-VAS)和效用指数]和欧洲癌症研究与治疗组织生活质量问卷核心 30 项(EORTC QLQ-C30)的各个领域的患者内变化,估算 MID。

方法

数据来自澳大利亚癌症 2015 年数据集,这是一个澳大利亚癌症患者的纵向队列。使用基于锚定的方法来估算 EQ-5D-5L 指数效用指数[澳大利亚和美国(US)关税集]、EQ-VAS 评分和 EORTC QLQ-C30 的 MID。临床[东部合作肿瘤学组(ECOG)表现状态]和患者报告(EORTC QLQ-C30 的项目 29 和 30 和 EQ-VAS)锚定通过其相关性强度来评估是否合适。根据以前文献中的估计,预先定义了临床变化组(CCG)用于改善和恶化。MID 通过线性回归和基于分布的方法来估算。

结果

对于澳大利亚的指数效用评分,锚定定义的 MID 估计值为改善 0.01 至 0.06,恶化-0.04 至-0.03,加权值为改善 0.03 和恶化。EQ-VAS MID 估计值为改善和恶化均为 5 分。对于 EORTC QLQ-C30,身体功能量表上至少改善 3.64(改善)和恶化-4.28(恶化)单位,角色功能量表上至少改善 6.31(改善)和恶化-7.11(恶化)单位,情绪功能量表上至少改善 4.65(改善)和恶化-3.41(恶化)单位,社交功能量表上至少改善 5.41(改善)和恶化-5.56(恶化)单位,被认为具有意义。

结论

本研究确定了 EQ-5D-5L 效用指数、EQ-VAS 和 EORTC QLQ-C30 域评分的较低 MID,低于之前报道的 MID。使用真实世界的癌症特定面板数据集可能反映了更小的 MID 估计值,这些估计值更适用于临床实践中的癌症患者,而不是使用从临床试验中估算出的 MID。

相似文献

1
Estimating the minimally important difference for the EQ-5D-5L and EORTC QLQ-C30 in cancer.估算癌症患者 EQ-5D-5L 和 EORTC QLQ-C30 的最小重要差异。
Health Qual Life Outcomes. 2024 Sep 20;22(1):81. doi: 10.1186/s12955-024-02294-3.
2
Minimally important differences for interpreting European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) Quality of life Questionnaire core 30 scores in patients with ovarian cancer.解释欧洲癌症研究与治疗组织(EORTC)生活质量问卷核心 30 评分在卵巢癌患者中的最小重要差异。
Gynecol Oncol. 2020 Nov;159(2):515-521. doi: 10.1016/j.ygyno.2020.09.007. Epub 2020 Sep 21.
3
Mapping EORTC QLQ-C30 and FACT-G onto EQ-5D-5L index for patients with cancer.将 EORTC QLQ-C30 和 FACT-G 量表映射到癌症患者的 EQ-5D-5L 索引上。
Health Qual Life Outcomes. 2020 Nov 3;18(1):354. doi: 10.1186/s12955-020-01611-w.
4
Health-related quality of life in patients with triple-class exposed relapsed and refractory multiple myeloma treated with idecabtagene vicleucel or standard regimens: patient-reported outcomes from the phase 3, randomised, open-label KarMMa-3 clinical trial.接受idecabtagene vicleucel或标准方案治疗的三重暴露复发难治性多发性骨髓瘤患者的健康相关生活质量:3期随机开放标签KarMMa-3临床试验的患者报告结局
Lancet Haematol. 2024 Mar;11(3):e216-e227. doi: 10.1016/S2352-3026(24)00005-X.
5
Minimally important differences for interpreting the EORTC QLQ-C30 in patients with advanced colorectal cancer treated with chemotherapy.在接受化疗的晚期结直肠癌患者中解释 EORTC QLQ-C30 的最小有意义差异。
Colorectal Dis. 2020 Dec;22(12):2278-2287. doi: 10.1111/codi.15295. Epub 2020 Aug 28.
6
Establishing anchor-based minimally important differences for the EORTC QLQ-C30 in glioma patients.建立基于锚定的 EORTC QLQ-C30 在脑胶质瘤患者中的最小重要差异。
Neuro Oncol. 2021 Aug 2;23(8):1327-1336. doi: 10.1093/neuonc/noab037.
7
Interpreting European Organisation for Research and Treatment for Cancer Quality of life Questionnaire core 30 scores as minimally importantly different for patients with malignant melanoma.将欧洲癌症研究与治疗组织生活质量问卷核心 30 评分解释为恶性黑色素瘤患者的最小重要差异。
Eur J Cancer. 2018 Nov;104:169-181. doi: 10.1016/j.ejca.2018.09.005. Epub 2018 Oct 22.
8
Minimal important differences of EORTC QLQ-C30 for metastatic breast cancer patients: Results from a randomized clinical trial.EORTC QLQ-C30 在转移性乳腺癌患者中的最小有意义差异:一项随机临床试验的结果。
Qual Life Res. 2022 Jun;31(6):1829-1836. doi: 10.1007/s11136-021-03074-y. Epub 2022 Jan 4.
9
Minimally important differences for the EORTC QLQ-C30 in prostate cancer clinical trials.EORTC QLQ-C30 在前列腺癌临床试验中的最小重要差异。
BMC Cancer. 2021 Oct 7;21(1):1083. doi: 10.1186/s12885-021-08609-7.
10
Minimally Important Differences for Interpreting EORTC QLQ-C30 Scores in Patients With Advanced Breast Cancer.晚期乳腺癌患者中用于解释欧洲癌症研究与治疗组织核心生活质量问卷C30评分的最小重要差异
JNCI Cancer Spectr. 2019 Jun 4;3(3):pkz037. doi: 10.1093/jncics/pkz037. eCollection 2019 Sep.

引用本文的文献

1
Translating the EORTC CAT core and the QLQ-C30 to the EQ-5D-5L in patients with metastatic breast cancer: A comparison of direct and indirect mapping algorithms.将欧洲癌症研究与治疗组织核心癌症治疗问卷(EORTC CAT)核心版和QLQ-C30问卷转换为转移性乳腺癌患者的EQ-5D-5L问卷:直接映射算法与间接映射算法的比较
Eur J Health Econ. 2025 Aug 21. doi: 10.1007/s10198-025-01824-0.
2
User Experiences of the Cue2walk Smart Cueing Device for Freezing of Gait in People with Parkinson's Disease.帕金森病患者使用Cue2walk智能提示装置应对步态冻结的用户体验
Sensors (Basel). 2025 Jul 30;25(15):4702. doi: 10.3390/s25154702.
3
Global evidence on the effectiveness of task-shifting and task-sharing strategies for managing individuals with multimorbidity: systematic review and meta-analysis.关于任务转移和任务分担策略对管理患有多种疾病的个体有效性的全球证据:系统评价与荟萃分析。
Fam Med Community Health. 2025 Aug 12;13(3):e003390. doi: 10.1136/fmch-2025-003390.
4
Factors associated with participation in a proton therapy clinical trial: a cross-sectional survey of Danish patients with head and neck cancer.与参与质子治疗临床试验相关的因素:丹麦头颈癌患者的横断面调查
Acta Oncol. 2025 Jul 10;64:879-888. doi: 10.2340/1651-226X.2025.43912.
5
The REVIVE Project: From Survival to Holistic Recovery-A Prospective Multicentric Evaluation of Cognitive, Emotional, and Quality-of-Life Outcomes in Out-of-Hospital Cardiac Arrest Survivors.复苏项目:从生存到全面康复——院外心脏骤停幸存者认知、情绪及生活质量结局的前瞻性多中心评估
J Clin Med. 2025 May 22;14(11):3631. doi: 10.3390/jcm14113631.

本文引用的文献

1
The Use of a Discrete Choice Experiment Including Both Duration and Dead for the Development of an EQ-5D-5L Value Set for Australia.使用包含持续时间和死亡的离散选择实验来开发澳大利亚的 EQ-5D-5L 值集。
Pharmacoeconomics. 2023 Apr;41(4):427-438. doi: 10.1007/s40273-023-01243-0. Epub 2023 Jan 31.
2
Triangulation of multiple meaningful change thresholds for patient-reported outcome scores.患者报告结局评分的多个有意义变化阈值的三角剖分。
Qual Life Res. 2021 Oct;30(10):2755-2764. doi: 10.1007/s11136-021-02957-4. Epub 2021 Jul 28.
3
Test-retest reliability of the EQ-5D-5L and the reworded QOLIBRI-OS in the general population of Italy, the Netherlands, and the United Kingdom.EQ-5D-5L 和重新措辞的 QOLIBRI-OS 在意大利、荷兰和英国普通人群中的重测信度。
Qual Life Res. 2021 Oct;30(10):2961-2971. doi: 10.1007/s11136-021-02893-3. Epub 2021 Jun 1.
4
Estimation of minimally important difference of the EQ-5D-5L utility scores among patients with either hypertension or diabetes or both: a cross-sectional study in Hong Kong.评估香港高血压或糖尿病或两者并存患者的 EQ-5D-5L 效用评分的最小重要差异:一项横断面研究。
BMJ Open. 2020 Nov 26;10(11):e039397. doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2020-039397.
5
Minimum important difference of the EQ-5D-5L and EQ-VAS in fibrotic interstitial lung disease.纤维化间质性肺疾病中 EQ-5D-5L 和 EQ-VAS 的最小重要差异。
Thorax. 2021 Jan;76(1):37-43. doi: 10.1136/thoraxjnl-2020-214944. Epub 2020 Oct 6.
6
Responsiveness and minimal clinically important difference of the EQ-5D-5L in cervical intraepithelial neoplasia: a longitudinal study.宫颈上皮内瘤变患者的 EQ-5D-5L 反应性和最小临床重要差异:一项纵向研究。
Health Qual Life Outcomes. 2020 Oct 2;18(1):324. doi: 10.1186/s12955-020-01578-8.
7
Minimally important differences for interpreting European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Questionnaire Core 30 scores in patients with head and neck cancer.解读头颈部癌症患者欧洲癌症研究与治疗组织生活质量核心 30 问卷评分的最小有意义差异。
Head Neck. 2020 Nov;42(11):3141-3152. doi: 10.1002/hed.26363. Epub 2020 Jul 6.
8
Which multi-attribute utility instruments are recommended for use in cost-utility analysis? A review of national health technology assessment (HTA) guidelines.哪些多属性效用仪器推荐用于成本效用分析?国家卫生技术评估(HTA)指南的回顾。
Eur J Health Econ. 2020 Nov;21(8):1245-1257. doi: 10.1007/s10198-020-01195-8. Epub 2020 Jun 8.
9
How is the minimal clinically important difference established in health-related quality of life instruments? Review of anchors and methods.健康相关生活质量量表中的最小临床重要差异是如何确定的?对锚定物和方法的综述。
Health Qual Life Outcomes. 2020 May 12;18(1):136. doi: 10.1186/s12955-020-01344-w.
10
United States Valuation of EQ-5D-5L Health States Using an International Protocol.美国使用国际协议对 EQ-5D-5L 健康状态进行评估。
Value Health. 2019 Aug;22(8):931-941. doi: 10.1016/j.jval.2019.02.009. Epub 2019 May 25.