Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2011 Nov 28:9:106.
doi: 10.1186/1477-7525-9-106.

The ability of cancer-specific and generic preference-based instruments to discriminate across clinical and self-reported measures of cancer severities

Paulos Teckle  1 , Stuart Peacock, Helen McTaggart-Cowan, Kim van der Hoek, Stephen Chia, Barb Melosky, Karen Gelmon
Affiliations

The ability of cancer-specific and generic preference-based instruments to discriminate across clinical and self-reported measures of cancer severities

Paulos Teckle et al. Health Qual Life Outcomes. .

Abstract

Objective: To evaluate the validity of cancer-specific and generic preference-based instruments to discriminate across different measures of cancer severities.

Methods: Patients with breast (n = 66), colorectal (n = 57), and lung (n = 61) cancer completed the EORTC QLQ-C30 and the FACT-G, as well as three generic instruments: the EQ-5D, the SF-6D, and the HUI2/3. Disease severity was quantified using cancer stage, Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group Performance Status (ECOG-PS) score, and self-reported health status. Comparative analyses confirmed the multi-dimensional conceptualization of the instruments in terms of construct and convergent validity.

Results: In general, the instruments were able to discriminate across severity measures. The instruments demonstrated moderate to strong correlation with each other (r = 0.37-0.73). Not all of the measures could discriminate between different groups of disease severity: the EQ-5D and SF-6D were less discriminative than the HUI2/3 and the cancer-specific instruments.

Conclusion: The cancer-specific and generic preference-based instruments demonstrated to be valid in discriminating across levels of ECOG-PS scores and self-reported health states. However, the usefulness of the generic instruments may be limited if they are not able to detect small changes in health status within cancer patients. This raises concerns regarding the appropriateness of these instruments when comparing different cancer treatments within an economic evaluation framework.

PubMed Disclaimer

References

    1. Canadian Cancer Society. Canadian Cancer Statistics 2010. Toronto, Canada; 2010.
    1. Canadian Cancer Society. Canadian Cancer Statistics 2007. Toronto, Canada; 2007.
    1. Wiebe S, Guyatt G, Weaver B, Matijevic S, Sidwell C. Comparative responsiveness of generic and specific quality-of-life instruments. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology. 2003;56(1):52–60. doi: 10.1016/S0895-4356(02)00537-1. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Aaronson NK, Ahmedzai S, Bergman B, Bullinger M, Cull A, Duez NJ. et al. The European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer QLQ-C30: A Quality-of-Life Instrument for Use in International Clinical Trials in Oncology. J Natl Cancer Inst. 1993;85(5):365–376. doi: 10.1093/jnci/85.5.365. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Cella DF, Tulsky DS, Gray G, Sarafian B, Linn E, Bonomi A. et al. The Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy Scale: Development and validation of the general measure. J Clin Oncol. 1993;11:570–579. - PubMed

Publication types