Comparative Study

. 2024 Dec 2;22(1):104.

doi: 10.1186/s12955-024-02316-0.

Comparing the contents of patient-reported outcome measures for fatigue: EORTC CAT Core, EORTC QLQ-C30, EORTC QLQ-FA12, FACIT, PRO-CTCAE, PROMIS, Brief Fatigue Inventory, Multidimensional Fatigue Inventory, and Piper Fatigue Scale

Maria Rothmund^{1

2}, Micha J Pilz¹, Nathalie Egeter¹, Emma Lidington³, Claire Piccinin⁴, Juan I Arraras⁵, Mogens Groenvold^{6

7}, Bernhard Holzner⁸, Marieke van Leeuwen⁹, Morten Aa Petersen⁶, John Ramage¹⁰, Heike Schmidt¹¹, Teresa Young¹², Johannes M Giesinger¹³; EORTC Quality of Life Group

Affiliations

¹ Department of Psychiatry, Psychotherapy, Psychosomatics, and Medical Psychology, BA, University Clinic of Psychiatry II, Innsbruck Medical University, Anichstraße 35, Innsbruck, A-6020, Austria.
² Institute of Psychology, University of Innsbruck, Innrain 52, Innsbruck, A-6020, Austria.
³ Cancer Prevention Trials Unit, Queen Mary University of London, Empire House, 67-75 New Rd, London, E1 1HH, UK.
⁴ Quality of Life Department, EORTC, Avenue E. Mounier, 83/11, Brussels, 1200, Belgium.
⁵ Medical Oncology Department, Hospital Universitario de Navarra, C/Irunlarrea 3, Pamplona, ES-31008, Spain.
⁶ Palliative Care Research Unit, Department of Geriatrics and Palliative Medicine GP, Bispebjerg & Frederiksberg Hospital, Bispebjerg bakke 23, Copenhagen, DK-2400, Denmark.
⁷ University of Copenhagen, Copenhagen, DK-1353, Denmark.
⁸ Department of Psychiatry, Psychotherapy, Psychosomatics, and Medical Psychology, Innsbruck Medical University, University Clinic of Psychiatry I, Anichstraße 35, Innsbruck, A-6020, Austria.
⁹ Division of Psychosocial Research & Epidemiology, The Netherlands Cancer Institute, Plesmanlaan 121, 1066 CX, Amsterdam, SO22 4NR, The Netherlands.
¹⁰ Department Gastroenterology, Hampshire Hospitals Foundation Trust, University of Winchester, Sparkford Rd, Winchester SO22 4NR, Hampshire, RG24 9NA, UK.
¹¹ University Clinic and Outpatient Clinic for Radiotherapy and Institute of Health and Nursing Science, Medical Faculty, Martin Luther University Halle-Wittenberg, Halle (Saale), DE-06108, Germany.
¹² Lynda Jackson Macmillan Centre, Mount Vernon Cancer Centre, Northwood, Middlesex, Rickmansworth Rd, HA6 2RN, UK.
¹³ Department of Psychiatry, Psychotherapy, Psychosomatics, and Medical Psychology, BA, University Clinic of Psychiatry II, Innsbruck Medical University, Anichstraße 35, Innsbruck, A-6020, Austria. johannes.giesinger@i-med.ac.at.

PMID: 39623483
PMCID: PMC11613840
DOI: 10.1186/s12955-024-02316-0

Comparative Study

Comparing the contents of patient-reported outcome measures for fatigue: EORTC CAT Core, EORTC QLQ-C30, EORTC QLQ-FA12, FACIT, PRO-CTCAE, PROMIS, Brief Fatigue Inventory, Multidimensional Fatigue Inventory, and Piper Fatigue Scale

Maria Rothmund et al. Health Qual Life Outcomes. 2024.

. 2024 Dec 2;22(1):104.

doi: 10.1186/s12955-024-02316-0.

Authors

Affiliations

¹ Department of Psychiatry, Psychotherapy, Psychosomatics, and Medical Psychology, BA, University Clinic of Psychiatry II, Innsbruck Medical University, Anichstraße 35, Innsbruck, A-6020, Austria.
² Institute of Psychology, University of Innsbruck, Innrain 52, Innsbruck, A-6020, Austria.
³ Cancer Prevention Trials Unit, Queen Mary University of London, Empire House, 67-75 New Rd, London, E1 1HH, UK.
⁴ Quality of Life Department, EORTC, Avenue E. Mounier, 83/11, Brussels, 1200, Belgium.
⁵ Medical Oncology Department, Hospital Universitario de Navarra, C/Irunlarrea 3, Pamplona, ES-31008, Spain.
⁶ Palliative Care Research Unit, Department of Geriatrics and Palliative Medicine GP, Bispebjerg & Frederiksberg Hospital, Bispebjerg bakke 23, Copenhagen, DK-2400, Denmark.
⁷ University of Copenhagen, Copenhagen, DK-1353, Denmark.
⁸ Department of Psychiatry, Psychotherapy, Psychosomatics, and Medical Psychology, Innsbruck Medical University, University Clinic of Psychiatry I, Anichstraße 35, Innsbruck, A-6020, Austria.
⁹ Division of Psychosocial Research & Epidemiology, The Netherlands Cancer Institute, Plesmanlaan 121, 1066 CX, Amsterdam, SO22 4NR, The Netherlands.
¹⁰ Department Gastroenterology, Hampshire Hospitals Foundation Trust, University of Winchester, Sparkford Rd, Winchester SO22 4NR, Hampshire, RG24 9NA, UK.
¹¹ University Clinic and Outpatient Clinic for Radiotherapy and Institute of Health and Nursing Science, Medical Faculty, Martin Luther University Halle-Wittenberg, Halle (Saale), DE-06108, Germany.
¹² Lynda Jackson Macmillan Centre, Mount Vernon Cancer Centre, Northwood, Middlesex, Rickmansworth Rd, HA6 2RN, UK.
¹³ Department of Psychiatry, Psychotherapy, Psychosomatics, and Medical Psychology, BA, University Clinic of Psychiatry II, Innsbruck Medical University, Anichstraße 35, Innsbruck, A-6020, Austria. johannes.giesinger@i-med.ac.at.

PMID: 39623483
PMCID: PMC11613840
DOI: 10.1186/s12955-024-02316-0

Abstract

Background: To assess fatigue in cancer patients, several patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) are available that differ in content. To support the selection of suitable measures for specific applications and to evaluate possibilities of quantitative linking, the present study provides a content comparison of common fatigue measures, scales, and item banks. We included the EORTC CAT Core, EORTC QLQ-FA12, EORTC QLQ-C30, FACIT-F, PROMIS Fatigue (Cancer item bank v1.0), Brief Fatigue Inventory (BFI), Multidimensional Fatigue Inventory (MFI-20), Piper Fatigue Scale (PFS-12), and PRO-CTCAE.

Methods: All items of the included measures were linked to the International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health (ICF). Additionally, they were categorized as assessing general, physical, emotional, or cognitive fatigue. Descriptive statistics were used to display the contents covered in each measure and to allow for a qualitative comparison.

Results: The measures consist of 160 items in total and covered primarily contents of the ICF components 'Body functions', 'Activities and participation', and 'Environmental Factors'. Most ICF codings refer to 'b1300 Energy level' (9-67% of the codings per instrument; 47% of all coded content). Within the broad categorization of types of fatigue, most items were classified as general fatigue (33-100% of the codings per instrument; 49% of the overall item pool). While the EORTC CAT Core focuses exclusively on physical and general fatigue, FACIT and BFI additionally assess emotional fatigue. The EORTC QLQ-FA12, PROMIS, MFI-20, and PFS-12 cover all fatigue components, including cognitive fatigue.

Discussion: The review provides an in-depth content comparison of PROMs assessing cancer-related fatigue. This can inform the selection of suitable measures in different clinical contexts. Furthermore, it will inform quantitative analyses to facilitate comparison of scores obtained with different PROMs.

Keywords: Cancer; Content analysis; EORTC CAT; FACIT; Fatigue; Oncology; PRO-CTCAE; PROMIS; Patient-reported outcome measures; QLQ-C30.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

Declarations. Ethics approval and consent to participate: Was not required for this study since no patients were involved. Competing interests: The authors declare no competing interests.

Figures

**Fig. 1**
Proportion of different codings from the International Classification of Functioning, Disability, and Health (ICF) assigned to each instument

**Fig. 2**
Items covering general, physical, cognitive, and emotional fatigue per instrument

See this image and copyright information in PMC

References

1. Ma Y, He B, Jiang M, Yang Y, Wang C, Huang C, et al. Prevalence and risk factors of cancer-related fatigue: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Int J Nurs Stud. 2020;111:103707. 10.1016/j.ijnurstu.2020.103707. - PubMed
1. Wang XS, Zhao F, Fisch MJ, O’Mara AM, Cella D, Mendoza TR, et al. Prevalence and characteristics of moderate to severe fatigue: a multicenter study in cancer patients and survivors. Cancer. 2014;120(3):425–32. 10.1002/cncr.28434. - PMC - PubMed
1. Berger AM, Mooney K, Alvarez-Perez A, Breitbart WS, Carpenter KM, Cella D, et al. Cancer-Related Fatigue, Version 2.2015, Clinical Practice Guidelines in Oncology. J Natl Compr Canc Netw. 2015;13(8):1012–39. 10.6004/jnccn.2015.0122. - PMC - PubMed
1. Poulson MJ. Not just tired. J Clin Oncol. 2001;19(21):4180–1. 10.1200/JCO.2001.19.21.4180. - PubMed
1. Yeo TPCS. Cancer-related fatigue: impact on patient quality of life and management approaches. Nursing: Res Reviews. 2015;5:65–76.

Publication types

Actions

MeSH terms

Actions
Actions
Actions
Actions
Actions
Actions
Actions
Actions
Actions
Actions
Actions

Grants and funding

011-2016/EORTC Quality of Life Group

LinkOut - more resources

Full Text Sources
- BioMed Central
- PubMed Central
Medical
- MedlinePlus Health Information
Miscellaneous
- NCI CPTAC Assay Portal

Save citation to file

Email citation

Add to Collections

Add to My Bibliography

Your saved search

Create a file for external citation management software

Your RSS Feed

Comparing the contents of patient-reported outcome measures for fatigue: EORTC CAT Core, EORTC QLQ-C30, EORTC QLQ-FA12, FACIT, PRO-CTCAE, PROMIS, Brief Fatigue Inventory, Multidimensional Fatigue Inventory, and Piper Fatigue Scale

Affiliations

Comparing the contents of patient-reported outcome measures for fatigue: EORTC CAT Core, EORTC QLQ-C30, EORTC QLQ-FA12, FACIT, PRO-CTCAE, PROMIS, Brief Fatigue Inventory, Multidimensional Fatigue Inventory, and Piper Fatigue Scale

Authors

Affiliations

Abstract

Conflict of interest statement

Figures

References

Publication types

MeSH terms

Grants and funding

LinkOut - more resources

Full Text Sources

Medical

Miscellaneous