Financial toxicity and health-related quality of life in long-term survivors of acute promyelocytic leukaemia.

OBJECTIVES: We aimed to investigate the association between financial toxicity (FT) and the health-related quality of life profile of long-term survivors of acute promyelocytic leukaemia (APL) treated within a universal healthcare system. METHODS: We evaluated FT using the financial difficulties item of the European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Questionnaire-Core 30 (EORTC QLQ-C30). We also compared the prevalence of clinically important problems and symptoms between the survivors of APL with or without FT, using evidence-based thresholds for the EORTC QLQ-C30. A multivariable logistic regression analysis was performed to explore potential risk factors associated with FT. RESULTS: Overall, 352 long-term survivors of APL, with a median age of 53.9 years and a median time since diagnosis of 12.2 years, were analysed. Of these, 71 (20.2%) reported having FT. The prevalence of clinically important problems and symptoms was generally higher across most EORTC QLQ-C30 scales for those survivors who reported FT. The three largest differences between patients with and without FT were observed for emotional functioning (+35.4 percentage points), dyspnoea (+33.1 percentage points) and physical functioning (+27.0 percentage points). The presence of FT was independently associated with having comorbidities and not receiving a salary/pension. CONCLUSIONS: These findings suggest that even many years after being diagnosed, one-fifth of long-term survivors of APL experience FT. Interventions to assist with employment may be critical to minimise the risk of FT in the most vulnerable survivors.

Recommendations to address respondent burden associated with patient-reported outcome assessment.

Patient-reported outcomes (PROs) are increasingly used in healthcare research to provide evidence of the benefits and risks of interventions from the patient perspective and to inform regulatory decisions and health policy. The use of PROs in clinical practice can facilitate symptom monitoring, tailor care to individual needs, aid clinical decision-making and inform value-based healthcare initiatives. Despite their benefits, there are concerns that the potential burden on respondents may reduce their willingness to complete PROs, with potential impact on the completeness and quality of the data for decision-making. We therefore conducted an initial literature review to generate a list of candidate recommendations aimed at reducing respondent burden. This was followed by a two-stage Delphi survey by an international multi-stakeholder group. A consensus meeting was held to finalize the recommendations. The final consensus statement includes 19 recommendations to address PRO respondent burden in healthcare research and clinical practice. If implemented, these recommendations may reduce PRO respondent burden.

Financial Toxicity and Health-Related Quality of Life Profile of Patients With Hematologic Malignancies Treated in a Universal Health Care System.

PURPOSE: We investigated the association of financial toxicity (FT) with the health-related quality of life (HRQoL) profile of patients with hematologic malignancies treated in a universal health care system. METHODS: We did a secondary analysis of six multicenter studies enrolling patients with hematologic malignancies. FT was evaluated using the financial difficulties item of the European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Questionnaire Core 30 (EORTC QLQ-C30). Multivariable linear regression models were used to assess the mean differences in HRQoL scores between patients with or without FT, while adjusting for key potential confounding factors. We also examined the prevalence of clinically important problems and symptoms by the experience of FT, using established thresholds for the EORTC QLQ-C30. Multivariable binary logistic regression analysis was performed to explore the risk factors associated with FT. RESULTS: Overall, 1,847 patients were analyzed, of whom 441 (23.9%) reported FT. We observed statistically and clinically relevant worse scores for patients with FT compared with those without FT for all the EORTC QLQ-C30 scales. The three largest clinically relevant mean differences between patients with and without FT were observed in pain (∆ = 19.6 [95% CI, 15.7 to 23.5]; P < .001), social functioning (∆ = -18.9 [95% CI, -22.5 to -15.2]; P < .001), and role functioning (Δ = -17.7 [95% CI, -22.1 to -13.3]; P < .001). Patients with FT tended to report a higher prevalence of clinically important problems and symptoms across all EORTC QLQ-C30 scales. In the univariable and multivariable analyses, the presence of FT was associated with the presence of comorbidities, an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status ≥1, and not receiving a salary. CONCLUSION: Patients with hematologic malignancies treated in the setting of a universal health care system who experience FT have a worse HRQoL profile compared with those without FT.

Classification, risk stratification and response assessment in myelodysplastic syndromes/neoplasms (MDS): A state-of-the-art report on behalf of the International Consortium for MDS (icMDS).

The guidelines for classification, prognostication, and response assessment of myelodysplastic syndromes/neoplasms (MDS) have all recently been updated. In this report on behalf of the International Consortium for MDS (icMDS) we summarize these developments. We first critically examine the updated World Health Organization (WHO) classification and the International Consensus Classification (ICC) of MDS. We then compare traditional and molecularly based risk MDS risk assessment tools. Lastly, we discuss limitations of criteria in measuring therapeutic benefit and highlight how the International Working Group (IWG) 2018 and 2023 response criteria addressed these deficiencies and are endorsed by the icMDS. We also address the importance of patient centered care by discussing the value of quality-of-life assessment. We hope that the reader of this review will have a better understanding of how to classify MDS, predict clinical outcomes and evaluate therapeutic outcomes.

Global impacts of COVID-19 on lifestyles and health and preparation preferences: An international survey of 30 countries.

Background: The health area being greatest impacted by coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) and residents' perspective to better prepare for future pandemic remain unknown. We aimed to assess and make cross-country and cross-region comparisons of the global impacts of COVID-19 and preparation preferences of pandemic. Methods: We recruited adults in 30 countries covering all World Health Organization (WHO) regions from July 2020 to August 2021. 5 Likert-point scales were used to measure their perceived change in 32 aspects due to COVID-19 (-2 = substantially reduced to 2 = substantially increased) and perceived importance of 13 preparations (1 = not important to 5 = extremely important). Samples were stratified by age and gender in the corresponding countries. Multidimensional preference analysis displays disparities between 30 countries, WHO regions, economic development levels, and COVID-19 severity levels. Results: 16 512 adults participated, with 10 351 females. Among 32 aspects of impact, the most affected were having a meal at home (mean (m) = 0.84, standard error (SE) = 0.01), cooking at home (m = 0.78, SE = 0.01), social activities (m = -0.68, SE = 0.01), duration of screen time (m = 0.67, SE = 0.01), and duration of sitting (m = 0.59, SE = 0.01). Alcohol (m = -0.36, SE = 0.01) and tobacco (m = -0.38, SE = 0.01) consumption declined moderately. Among 13 preparations, respondents rated medicine delivery (m = 3.50, SE = 0.01), getting prescribed medicine in a hospital visit / follow-up in a community pharmacy (m = 3.37, SE = 0.01), and online shopping (m = 3.33, SE = 0.02) as the most important. The multidimensional preference analysis showed the European Region, Region of the Americas, Western Pacific Region and countries with a high-income level or medium to high COVID-19 severity were more adversely impacted on sitting and screen time duration and social activities, whereas other regions and countries experienced more cooking and eating at home. Countries with a high-income level or medium to high COVID-19 severity reported higher perceived mental burden and emotional distress. Except for low- and lower-middle-income countries, medicine delivery was always prioritised. Conclusions: Global increasing sitting and screen time and limiting social activities deserve as much attention as mental health. Besides, the pandemic has ushered in a notable enhancement in lifestyle of home cooking and eating, while simultaneously reducing the consumption of tobacco and alcohol. A health care system and technological infrastructure that facilitate medicine delivery, medicine prescription, and online shopping are priorities for coping with future pandemics.

International validation of two EORTC questionnaires for assessment of health-related quality of life for patients with high-grade non-Hodgkin lymphoma (QLQ-NHL-HG29) and low-grade non-Hodgkin lymphoma (QLQ-NHL-LG20).

BACKGROUND: Health-related quality of life (HRQOL) is a critical aspect to consider when making treatment decisions for patients with non-Hodgkin-lymphoma (NHL). This international study by the European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) tested the psychometric properties of two newly developed measures for patients with high-grade (HG)- and low-grade (LG)-NHL: the EORTC QLQ-NHL-HG29 and the EORTC QLQ-NHL-LG20 to supplement the core questionnaire (EORTC QLQ-C30). METHODS: Overall, 768 patients with HG-NHL (N = 423) and LG-NHL (N = 345) from 12 countries completed the QLQ-C30, QLQ-NHL-HG29/QLQ-NHL-LG20 and a debriefing questionnaire at baseline, and a subset at follow-up for either retest (N = 125/124) or responsiveness to change (RCA; N = 98/49). RESULTS: Confirmatory factor analysis showed an acceptable to good fit of the 29 items of the QLQ-NHL-HG29 on its five scales (symptom burden [SB], neuropathy, physical condition/fatigue [PF], emotional impact [EI], and worries about health/functioning [WH]), and of the 20 items of the QLQ-NHL-LG20 on its four scales (SB, PF, EI, and WH). Completion took on average 10 minutes. Test-retest reliability, convergent validity, known-group comparisons, and RCA find satisfactory results of both measures. A total of 31%-78% of patients with HG-NHL and 22%-73% of patients with LG-NHL reported symptoms and/or worries (e.g., tingling in hands/feet, lack of energy, and worries about recurrence). Patients reporting symptoms/worries had substantially lower HRQOL compared to those without. DISCUSSION: The use of the EORTC QLQ-NHL-HG29 and QLQ-NHL-LG20 questionnaires in clinical research and practice will provide clinically relevant data to better inform treatment decision-making. PLAIN LANGUAGE SUMMARY: The European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) Quality of Life Group developed two questionnaires. These questionnaires measure health-related quality of life. The questionnaires are for patients with high-grade or low-grade non-Hodgkin lymphoma. They are called the EORTC QLQ-NHL-HG29 and QLQ-NHL-LG20. The questionnaires are now internationally validated. This study demonstrates that the questionnaires are reliably and valid, which are important aspects of a questionnaire. The questionnaires can now be used in clinical trials and practice. With the information gathered from the questionnaires, patients and clinicians can better evaluate treatments and discuss the best choice for a patient.

Physicians' Perceptions of Clinical Utility of a Digital Health Tool for Electronic Patient-Reported Outcome Monitoring in Real-Life Hematology Practice. Evidence From the GIMEMA-ALLIANCE Platform.

Digital health tools are increasingly being used in cancer care and may include electronic patient-reported outcome (ePRO) monitoring systems. We examined physicians' perceptions of usability and clinical utility of a digital health tool (GIMEMA-ALLIANCE platform) for ePRO monitoring in the real-life practice of patients with hematologic malignancies. This tool allows for the collection and assessment of ePROs with real-time graphical presentation of results to medical staff. Based on a predefined algorithm, automated alerts are sent to medical staff. Participating hematologists completed an online survey on their experience with the platform. Of the 201 patients invited to participate between December 2020 and June 2021 (cut-off date for current analysis), 180 (90%) agreed to enter the platform and had a median age of 57 years. Twenty-three hematologists with a median age of 42 years and an average of 17 years of experience in clinical practice were surveyed. All hematologists agreed or strongly agreed that the platform was easy to use, and 87%, agreed or strongly agreed that ePROs data were useful to enhance communication with their patients. The majority of physicians (78%) accessed the platform at least once per month to consult the symptom and health status profile of their patients. The frequency of access was independent of physician sex (p=0.393) and years of experience in clinical practice (p=0.404). In conclusion, our preliminary results support the clinical utility, from the perspective of the treating hematologist, of integrating ePROs into the routine cancer care of patients with hematologic malignancies.

International validation of the EORTC QLQ-CLL17 questionnaire for assessment of health-related quality of life for patients with chronic lymphocytic leukaemia.

Selecting the most appropriate chronic lymphocytic leukaemia (CLL) treatment is challenging. Patient-reported health-related quality of life (HRQoL) is therefore a critical aspect to consider. This international study by the European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) tested the psychometric properties of a newly developed measure for CLL patients: the EORTC QLQ-CLL17 to supplement the core questionnaire (EORTC QLQ-C30). Patients with CLL (n = 341) from 12 countries completed the QLQ-C30, QLQ-CLL17 and a debriefing questionnaire. Sociodemographic and clinical data were recorded from medical records. A high percentage (30%-66%) reported symptoms and/or worries (e.g. aches/pains in muscles, lack of energy and worry/fears about health). Confirmatory factor analysis showed an acceptable to good fit of the 17 items on the three scales (i.e. symptom burden, physical condition/fatigue and worries/fears about health and functioning). Completion took on average 8 min. Test-retest and convergent validity was demonstrated. The QLQ-CLL17 differentiated between patients with an Eastern Cooperative Oncology group (ECOG) performance of 0 versus 1-3 (p's < 0.01 and clinically relevant). The newly developed EORTC QLQ-CLL17 will increase sensitivity of HRQoL assessment in patients with CLL. Implementation of this questionnaire both in clinical research and practice will help to generate unique clinically relevant data to better inform CLL treatment decision-making.

Cross-sectional study to develop and describe psychometric characteristics of a patient-reported instrument (PROFFIT) for measuring financial toxicity of cancer within a public healthcare system.

OBJECTIVES: To measure and explain financial toxicity (FT) of cancer in Italy, where a public healthcare system exists and patients with cancer are not expected (or only marginally) to pay out-of-pocket for healthcare. SETTING: Ten clinical oncological centres, distributed across Italian macroregions (North, Centre, South and Islands), including hospitals, university hospitals and national research institutes. PARTICIPANTS: From 8 October 2019 to 11 December 2019, 184 patients, aged 18 or more, who were receiving or had received within the previous 3 months active anticancer treatment were enrolled, 108 (59%) females and 76 (41%) males. INTERVENTION: A 30-item prefinal questionnaire, previously developed within the qualitative tasks of the project, was administered, either electronically (n=115) or by paper sheet (n=69). PRIMARY AND SECONDARY OUTCOME MEASURES: According to the protocol and the International Society for Pharmacoeconomics and Outcomes Research methodology, the final questionnaire was developed by mean of explanatory factor analysis and tested for reliability, internal consistency (Cronbach's α test and item-total correlation) and stability of measurements over time (test-retest reliability by intraclass correlation coefficient and weighted Cohen's kappa coefficient). RESULTS: After exploratory factor analysis, a score measuring FT (FT score) was identified, made by seven items dealing with outcomes of FT. The Cronbach's alpha coefficient for the FT score was 0.87 and the item-total correlation coefficients ranged from 0.53 to 0.74. Further, nine single items representing possible determinants of FT were also retained in the final instrument. Test-retest analysis revealed a good internal validity of the FT score and of the 16 items retained in the final questionnaire. CONCLUSIONS: The Patient-Reported Outcome for Fighting FInancial Toxicity (PROFFIT) instrument consists of 16 items and is the first reported instrument to assess FT of cancer developed in a country with a fully public healthcare system. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT03473379.

Health-Related Quality of Life Assessment in Patients with Myelodysplastic Syndromes: Evidence from Randomized Clinical Trials.

Myelodysplastic syndromes (MDS) are characterized by ineffective hematopoiesis and blood cytopenia with a variable risk of progression to acute myeloid leukemia. The main goal of therapy for the large majority of patients is to improve health-related quality of life (HRQoL). Its rigorous assessment is now recommended in international MDS guidelines. Our review provides an overview of HRQoL results from randomized controlled trials (RCTs) in MDS patients. The literature search undertaken in PubMed identified 10 RCTs with HRQoL endpoints (all secondary) published between August 2008 and September 2020. These RCTs have helped to better understand the impact of therapies from the patient perspective and have generated valuable information that can be used to further support clinical decisions. However, the number of RCTs in MDS patients, including HRQoL endpoints, is still low. Given the importance of symptom relief and HRQoL improvement in the treatment of MDS patients, the assessment of the patient perspective in future RCTs is highly recommended to keep expanding the knowledge of the impact of new MDS therapies.

A qualitative analysis and development of a conceptual model assessing financial toxicity in cancer patients accessing the universal healthcare system.

PURPOSE: This paper illustrates a conceptual model for a new patient-reported outcome measure (PROM) aimed at measuring financial toxicity (FT) in oncological setting in Italy, where citizens are provided universal healthcare coverage. METHODS: Focus groups with overall 34 patients/caregivers in three different Italian centers (from Northern, Centre, and Southern Italy) and an open-ended survey with 97 medical oncologists were undertaken. Transcripts from focus groups and the open-ended survey were analyzed to identify themes and links between themes. Themes from the qualitative research were supplemented with those reported in the literature; concepts identified formed the basis for item development that were then tested through the importance analysis (with 45 patients) and the cognitive debriefing (with other 45 patients) to test relevance and comprehension of the first draft PRO instrument. RESULTS: Ten domains were extracted by analyzing 156 concepts generated from focus groups and the open-ended survey. After controlling for redundancy, 55 items were generated and tested through the importance analysis. After controlling comprehension and feasibility through cognitive debriefing interviews, a first version of the questionnaire consisting of 30 items was devised. CONCLUSIONS: This qualitative study represents the first part of a study conducted to develop a new PROM to assess FT in Italy, by using a bottom-up approach that makes the most of patients' experiences and the health system analysis. TRIAL REGISTRATION: clinicaltrials.gov NCT03473379 first posted on March 22, 2018.

Early Palliative Home Care versus Hospital Care for Patients with Hematologic Malignancies: A Cost-Effectiveness Study.

Background: There is paucity of data on the potential value of early palliative home care for patients with hematologic malignancies. Objective: To compare costs, use of resources, and clinical outcomes between an early palliative home care program and standard hospital care for active-advanced or terminal phase patients. Patients and Methods: In this real-life, nonrandomized comparative study, the allocation of advanced/terminal phase patients to either home or hospital was based on pragmatic considerations. Analysis focused on resources use, events requiring blood unit transfusions or parenteral therapy, patient-reported symptom burden, mean weekly cost of care (MWC), cost-minimization difference, and incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER). Results: Of 119 patients, 59 patients cared at home were more debilitated and had a shorter survival than the 60 in hospital group (p = 0.001). Nevertheless, symptom burden was similar in both groups. At home the mean weekly number of transfusions (1.45) was lower than that at hospital (2.77). Higher rate of infections occurred at hospital (54%) versus home (21%; <0.001). MWC for hospitalization was significantly higher in a 3:1 ratio versus home care. Compared with hospital, domiciliary assistance produced a weekly saving of € 2314.9 for the health provider, with a charge of € 85.9 for the family, and was cost-effective by an ICER of € -7013.9 of prevented days of care for avoided infections. Conclusions: Current findings suggest that costs of early palliative home care for patients with hematologic malignancies are lower than standard hospital care costs. Domiciliary assistance may also be cost-effective by reducing the number of days to treat infections.

Differences in Patient-Reported Outcomes That Are Most Frequently Detected in Randomized Controlled Trials in Patients With Solid Tumors: A Pooled Analysis of 229 Trials.

OBJECTIVES: Patient-reported outcome (PRO) measurements used in cancer research can assess a number of health domains. Our primary objective was to investigate which broad types of PRO domains (namely, functional health, symptoms, and global quality of life [QoL]) most frequently yielded significant differences between treatments in randomized controlled trials (RCTs). METHODS: A total of 229 RCTs published between January 2004 and February 2019, conducted on patients diagnosed with the most common solid malignancies and assessed using the European Organization for the Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) Quality of Life Questionnaire (QLQ)-C30, were considered. Studies were identified systematically using literature searches in key electronic databases. Unlike other PRO measurements typically used in RCTs, the scoring algorithm of the multidimensional EORTC QLQ-C30 allowed us to clearly distinguish the 3 broad types of PRO domains. RESULTS: In total, 134 RCTs (58.5%) reported statistically significant differences between treatment arms for at least 1 of the QLQ-C30 domains. Most frequently, differences were reported for 2 or all 3 broad types of PRO domains (78 of 134 trials; 58.2%). In particular, 35 trials (26.1%) found significant differences for symptoms, functional health, and global QoL, 24 trials (17.9%) for symptoms and functional health, 11 trials (8.2%) for functional health and global QoL, and 8 trials (6.0%) for symptoms and global QoL. The likelihood of finding a statistically significant difference between treatment arms was not associated with key study characteristics, such as study design (ie, open-label vs blinded trials) and industry support. CONCLUSIONS: Our findings emphasize the importance of a multidimensional PRO assessment to most comprehensively capture the overall burden of therapy from the patients' standpoint.

Validation of the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-Leukemia instrument in patients with acute myeloid leukemia who are not candidates for intensive therapy.

BACKGROUND: The objective of this study was to validate the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-Leukemia (FACT-Leu) in patients with acute myeloid leukemia (AML) who are not candidates for intensive therapy. METHODS: A sample of 317 patients with AML who were not eligible for intensive chemotherapy completed the FACT-Leu and EuroQol 5-Dimension (EQ-5D) measures (Utility Index and Visual Analogue Scale) every 28 days until the end of treatment. Internal consistency reliability was estimated with Cronbach's α. Concurrent validity was examined with correlations between FACT-Leu and EQ-5D scales, and known-groups validity was examined by determining whether FACT-Leu scales distinguished between Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) performance status ratings (PSRs) and between maximum adverse event toxicities at the baseline. This study examined responsiveness to change by anchoring change in the FACT-Leu scales to a 0.10 change in the EQ-5D Health Utility Index. RESULTS: Cronbach's α usually exceeded the threshold for good (≥0.80) or excellent reliability (≥0.90). Correlations between FACT-Leu and EQ-5D scales were moderate (r > 0.50) or high (r > 0.70). FACT-Leu scales distinguished between ECOG PSR groups with large effect sizes for an ECOG PSR of 0 versus an ECOG PSR of 2 (0.50 ≤ d < 0.80). In addition, Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-General, Additional Concerns, FACT-Leu Total, and Trial Outcomes Index scales distinguished between patients with grade 3 or lower maximum adverse event toxicities and those with maximum adverse event toxicities higher than grade 3, but effect sizes were small (d < 0.50). Finally, FACT-Leu scale coefficients for a 0.10 change in the 5-level version of the EQ-5D HUI ranged between -0.01 and 4.30. CONCLUSIONS: The FACT-Leu is a suitable outcome measure for AML clinical trials among patients not eligible for intensive therapy, and it may have value for clinical monitoring.

Development and validation of a patient-reported outcome tool to assess cancer-related financial toxicity in Italy: a protocol.

INTRODUCTION: Financial toxicity (FT) is a well-recognised problem in oncology. US-based studies have shown that: (a) cancer patients have a 2.7 times risk of bankruptcy; (b) patients who declare bankruptcy have a 79% greater hazard of death; (c) financial burden significantly impairs quality of life (QoL) and (d) reduces compliance and adherence to treatment prescriptions. The aim of the project is to develop and validate a patient-reported-outcome (PRO) measure to assess FT of cancer patients in Italy, where, despite the universal health coverage provided by the National Health Service, FT is an emerging issue. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: Our hypothesis is that a specific FT measure, which considers the relevant sociocultural context and healthcare system, would allow us to understand the main determinants of cancer-related FT in Italy, in order to address and reduce these factors. According to the International Society for Pharmaco-economics and Outcomes Research guidelines on PROs, the project will include the following steps: (1) concept elicitation (from focus groups with patients and caregivers; literature; oncologists; nurses) and analysis, creating a coding library; (2) item generation (using a format that includes a question and a response on a 4-point Likert scale) and analysis through patients' cognitive interviews of item importance within different coding categories to produce the draft instrument; (3) factor analysis and internal validation (with Cronbach's alpha and test-retest for reliability) to produce the final instrument; (4) external validation with QoL anchors and depression scales. The use of the FT measure in prospective trials is also planned. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: The protocol is approved by the ethical committees of all the participating centres. The project will tentatively produce a validated tool by the spring 2021. The project might also represent a model and the basis for future cooperation with other European countries, with different healthcare systems and socioeconomic conditions. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT03473379.

Propensity score methods and regression adjustment for analysis of nonrandomized studies with health-related quality of life outcomes.

PURPOSE: The aim of this study was to investigate the potential added value of combining propensity score (PS) methods with multivariable linear regression (MLR) in estimating the average treatment effect on the treated (ATT) in nonrandomized studies with health-related quality of life (HRQoL) outcomes. METHODS: We first used simulations to compare the performances of different PS-based methods, either alone or in combination with further MLR adjustment, in estimating ATT. PS methods were, respectively, optimal pair (OPM) and full (OFM) PS matching, subclassification on the PS (SBC), and the inverse probability of treatment weighting (IPTW). We simulated several scenarios, according to different sample sizes, proportions of treated vs untreated subjects, and types of HRQoL outcomes. We also applied the same methods to a real clinical data set. RESULTS: OPM and IPTW provided the closest Type I error to the nominal threshold α = 0.05 across all scenarios. Overall, both methods showed also lower variability in estimates than SBC and OFM. SBC performed worst, generally providing the highest levels of bias. Further MLR adjustment lessened bias for all methods, however providing higher Type I error for SBC and OFM. In the real case, all methods provided similar ATT estimates except for one outcome. CONCLUSIONS: Our findings suggest that for sample sizes up to n = 200, OPM and IPTW are to be preferred to OFM and SBC in estimating ATT on HRQoL outcomes. Specifically, OPM performed best in sample sizes of n ≥ 80, IPTW for smaller sample sizes. Additional MLR adjustment can further improve ATT estimates.