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
Review
. 2024 Sep 20;22(1):81.
doi: 10.1186/s12955-024-02294-3.

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

Siobhan Bourke  1 , Bryan Bennett #  2 , Yemi Oluboyede  3 , Tara Li #  3 , Louise Longworth #  3 , Sian Bissell O'Sullivan #  3 , Julia Braverman #  4 , Ioana-Alexandra Soare #  3 , James W Shaw #  4
Affiliations
Review

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

Siobhan Bourke et al. Health Qual Life Outcomes. .

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.

Keywords: Cancer; EORTC QLQ-C30; EQ-5D-5L; Health-related quality of life; Minimally important difference; Oncology.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

The authors declare no competing interests.

Similar articles

See all similar articles

Cited by

References

    1. CONSTITUTION of the World Health Organization. Chron World Health Organ. 1947;1:29–43. - PubMed
    1. US Food and Drug Administration. Discussion Document for Patient-Focused Drug Development Public Workshop on Guidance 4: Incorporating clinical outcome assessments into endpoints for regulatory decision-making. 2019.
    1. Kennedy-Martin M, Slaap B, Herdman M, van Reenen M, Kennedy-Martin T, Greiner W, Busschbach J, Boye KS. Which multi-attribute utility instruments are recommended for use in cost-utility analysis? A review of national health technology assessment (HTA) guidelines. Eur J Health Econ. 2020;21:1245–57. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Remenschneider AK, D’Amico L, Gray ST, Holbrook EH, Gliklich RE, Metson R. The EQ-5D: a new tool for studying clinical outcomes in chronic rhinosinusitis. Laryngoscope. 2015;125:7–15. - PubMed
    1. European Medicines Agency. Appendix 2 to the guideline on the evaluation of anticancer medicinal products in man - the use of patient-reported outcome (PRO) measures in oncology studies. 2016.

LinkOut - more resources