Interpreting the Significance of Changes in Health-Related Quality-of-Life Scores.

PURPOSE: To determine the significance to patients of changes in health-related quality-of-life (HLQ) scores assessed by the European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) Quality of Life Questionnaire (QLQ-C30). PATIENTS AND METHODS: A subjective significance questionnaire (SSQ), which asks patients about perceived changes in physical, emotional, and social functioning and in global quality of life (global QL) and the QLQ-C30 were completed by patients who received chemotherapy for either breast cancer or small-cell lung cancer (SCLC). In the SSQ, patients rated their perception of change since the last time they completed the QLQ-C30 using a 7-category scale that ranged from "much worse" through "no change" to "much better." For each category of change in the SSQ, the corresponding differences were calculated in QLQ-C30 mean scores and effect sizes were determined. RESULTS: For patients who indicated "no change" in the SSQ, the mean change in scores in the corresponding QLQ-C30 domains was not significantly different from 0. For patients who indicated "a little" change either for better or for worse, the mean change in scores was about 5 to 10; for "moderate" change, about 10 to 20; and for "very much" change, greater than 20. Effect sizes increased in concordance with increasing changes in SSQ ratings and QLQ-C30 scores. CONCLUSION: The significance of changes in QLQ-C30 scores can be interpreted in terms of small, moderate, or large changes in quality of life as reported by patients in the SSQ. The magnitude of these changes also can be used to calculate the sample sizes required to detect a specified change in clinical trials.

Minimal clinically meaningful differences for the EORTC QLQ-C30 and EORTC QLQ-BN20 scales in brain cancer patients.

BACKGROUND: We aimed to determine the smallest changes in health-related quality of life (HRQoL) scores in the European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Questionnaire core 30 and the Brain Cancer Module (QLQ-BN20), which could be considered as clinically meaningful in brain cancer patients. MATERIALS AND METHODS: World Health Organisation performance status (PS) and mini-mental state examination (MMSE) were used as clinical anchors appropriate to related subscales to determine the minimal clinically important differences (MCIDs) in HRQoL change scores (range 0-100) in the QLQ-C30 and QLQ-BN20. A threshold of 0.2 standard deviation (SD) (small effect) was used to exclude anchor-based MCID estimates considered too small to inform interpretation. RESULTS: Based on PS, our findings support the following integer estimates of the MCID for improvement and deterioration, respectively: physical (6, 9), role (14, 12), and cognitive functioning (8, 8); global health status (7, 4*), fatigue (12, 9), and motor dysfunction (4*, 5). Anchoring with MMSE, cognitive functioning MCID estimates for improvement and deterioration were (11, 2*) and for communication deficit were (9, 7). Estimates with asterisks were <0.2 SD and were excluded from our MCID range of 5-14. CONCLUSION: These estimates can help clinicians evaluate changes in HRQoL over time, assess the value of a health care intervention and can be useful in determining sample sizes in designing future clinical trials.

The prognostic value of health-related quality-of-life data in predicting survival in glioblastoma cancer patients: results from an international randomised phase III EORTC Brain Tumour and Radiation Oncology Groups, and NCIC Clinical Trials Group study.

This is one of the few studies that have explored the value of baseline symptoms and health-related quality of life (HRQOL) in predicting survival in brain cancer patients. Baseline HRQOL scores (from the EORTC QLQ-C30 and the Brain Cancer Module (BN 20)) were examined in 490 newly diagnosed glioblastoma cancer patients for the relationship with overall survival by using Cox proportional hazards regression models. Refined techniques as the bootstrap re-sampling procedure and the computation of C-indexes and R(2)-coefficients were used to try and validate the model. Classical analysis controlled for major clinical prognostic factors selected cognitive functioning (P=0.0001), global health status (P=0.0055) and social functioning (P<0.0001) as statistically significant prognostic factors of survival. However, several issues question the validity of these findings. C-indexes and R(2)-coefficients, which are measures of the predictive ability of the models, did not exhibit major improvements when adding selected or all HRQOL scores to clinical factors. While classical techniques lead to positive results, more refined analyses suggest that baseline HRQOL scores add relatively little to clinical factors to predict survival. These results may have implications for future use of HRQOL as a prognostic factor in cancer patients.

Has the quality of health-related quality of life reporting in cancer clinical trials improved over time? Towards bridging the gap with clinical decision making.

BACKGROUND: Previous work highlighted a number of methodological constraints when reporting health-related quality of life (HRQOL) outcomes from randomized controlled trials (RCTs). Given this, the objective of this study was to investigate whether the quality of such HRQOL reports has improved over time. MATERIALS AND METHODS: On the basis of a predefined set of criteria, 159 RCTs with a HRQOL end point, published between 1990 and 2004 were identified and analyzed. Each study was evaluated by a number of issues (e.g. sample size and industry sponsorship) and by the "minimum standard checklist for evaluating HRQOL outcomes in cancer clinical trials". RESULTS: The quality of HRQOL reports, as measured by the overall checklist score, was independently related to more recently published studies (P < 0.0001). This relationship was independent of industry funded, HRQOL end point (primary versus secondary), cancer disease site, size of the study and HRQOL difference between treatment arms. While only 39.3% of studies published between 1990 and 2000 (89/159 RCTs) were identified as being probably robust, thus likely to support clinical decision making, this percentage was 64.3% for studies published after 2000 (70/159 RCTs). CONCLUSION: Since we found a significant learning curve in HRQOL trial reporting since 1990, it can be expected that HRQOL data will increasingly impact on clinical decision making and treatment policies in the near future.

The relationship of changes in EORTC QLQ-C30 scores to ratings on the Subjective Significance Questionnaire in men with localized prostate cancer.

PURPOSE: To examine the relationship between changes in health-related quality-of-life (HRQOL) on the EORTC Quality of Life Questionnaire (QLQ-C30), and patients' perceptions of HRQOL changes as measured by the Subjective Significance Questionnaire (SSQ). PATIENTS AND METHODS: A total of 101 patients completed the QLQ-C30 on weeks 1, 4 and 7 of radical external-beam radiation therapy (RT) for localized cancer of the prostate. Patients rated their change in physical functioning, emotional functioning, social functioning, and overall/global quality of life (QOL) by completing a seven-category SSQ at weeks 4 and 7. The association between changes in the QLQ-C30 change and the corresponding SSQ ratings were determined by calculation of mean change scores for each SSQ category and by Spearman rank correlation coefficient analysis. RESULTS: Patients' completion of the QLQ-C30 and SSQ exceeded 95%. Statistically significant changes in fatigue, pain, appetite, diarrhea, and global QOL scores were detected during RT. For patients reporting 'a little' change in global QOL on the SSQ, absolute mean QLQ-C30 change scores ranged between 0 to 15 points with 12/16 mean change scores between 2.5 and 8.5 points. In the entire study sample, correlations between SSQ patient ratings and QLQ-C30 change scores were lower than previously reported, ranging between 0.15 and 0.24 for the four different domains, but were higher when QOL scores producing ceiling effects were omitted. CONCLUSION: The SSQ and QLQ-C30 may measure related concepts that could assist in the interpretation of changes in scores and in the calibration of the QLQ-C30. However, the nature of this relationship could not be elucidated in this data set because of a lack of variance in HRQOL scores in the study sample. Further investigation should be carried out in study samples with sufficient variance to allow more robust conclusions.

Effect of treatment on health-related quality of life in acquired immunodeficiency syndrome (AIDS)-related Kaposi's sarcoma: a randomized trial of pegylated-liposomal doxorubicin versus doxorubicin, bleomycin, and vincristine.

The purpose of this study was to determine whether health-related quality of life (HRQL) would be improved in patients with acquired immunodeficiency syndrome (AIDS)-related Kaposi's sarcoma treated by pegylated-liposomal doxorubicin (PLD) as compared to those treated by a conventional combination of doxorubicin, bleomycin, and vincristine (ABV). One hundred thirty-three patients received PLD and 125 patients received ABV every 2 weeks with a planned total of 6 cycles. Patients completed a 30-item AIDS-related HRQL questionnaire before beginning treatment (baseline), every 2 weeks while on treatment, and about 21 days after the end of treatment. Twenty-two items, involving nine domains, were analyzable. While on treatment, PLD-treated patients with partial clinical responses achieved statistically significant greater improvement (compared to baseline) in general health than did ABV-treated patients with partial clinical responses (rho = 0.008). By the end of treatment, the overall group of patients receiving PLD showed statistically significant greater improvement in pain and energy/fatigue than did the group receiving ABV (rho = 0.01-0.002). In addition, duration of clinically significant improvement in global QL was longer in the PLD arm.

Health-related quality of life in patients with anaplastic astrocytoma during treatment with temozolomide.

One of the objectives of this phase II study was to determine whether temozolomide (TMZ) improved the health-related quality of life (HRQL) of patients with recurrent anaplastic astrocytoma (AA). HRQL was assessed at baseline (pretreatment) and every 4 weeks at each treatment cycle using the European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Questionnaire (EORTC QLQ-C30) (version 2.0) and the Brain Cancer Module (BCM20). Changes from baseline in the scores of seven preselected HRQL domains (role and social functioning, global QL, visual disorder, motor dysfunction, communication deficit and drowsiness) were determined at 6 months as well as prior to, and at the time of, disease progression. The significance of the changes was assessed by calculating statistical significance, effect sizes and the proportions of patients with improvement in their HRQL scores (changes of >/=10 points). After 6 months of treatment, patients who were free of progression of disease reported either an improvement or maintenance of all the preselected HRQL domains scores. Patients with disease progression by 6 months usually experienced improvement in HRQL before progression, but there was a sharp decline in most of the preselected domains at progression. We conclude that treatment of recurrent AA with temozolomide is associated with significant HRQL benefits.

A phase II study of temozolomide vs. procarbazine in patients with glioblastoma multiforme at first relapse.

A randomized, multicentre, open-label, phase II study compared temozolomide (TMZ), an oral second-generation alkylating agent, and procarbazine (PCB) in 225 patients with glioblastoma multiforme at first relapse. Primary objectives were to determine progression-free survival (PFS) at 6 months and safety for TMZ and PCB in adult patients who failed conventional treatment. Secondary objectives were to assess overall survival and health-related quality of life (HRQL). TMZ was given orally at 200 mg/m(2)/day or 150 mg/m(2)/day (prior chemotherapy) for 5 days, repeated every 28 days. PCB was given orally at 150 mg/m(2)/day or 125 mg/m(2)/day (prior chemotherapy) for 28 days, repeated every 56 days. HRQL was assessed using the European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Questionnaire (EORTC QLQ-C30 [+3]) and the Brain Cancer Module 20 (BCM20). The 6-month PFS rate for patients who received TMZ was 21%, which met the protocol objective. The 6-month PFS rate for those who received PCB was 8% (P = 0.008, for the comparison). Overall PFS significantly improved with TMZ, with a median PFS of 12.4 weeks in the TMZ group and 8.32 weeks in the PCB group (P = 0.0063). The 6-month overall survival rate for TMZ patients was 60% vs. 44% for PCB patients (P = 0.019). Freedom from disease progression was associated with maintenance of HRQL, regardless of treatment received. TMZ had an acceptable safety profile; most adverse events were mild or moderate in severity.

Phase III comparative study of vinorelbine combined with doxorubicin versus doxorubicin alone in disseminated metastatic/recurrent breast cancer: National Cancer Institute of Canada Clinical Trials Group Study MA8.

PURPOSE: This phase III study was performed to determine the superiority of doxorubicin (DOX) and vinorelbine (VNB) (arm 1) versus DOX alone (arm 2) in metastatic breast cancer (MBC) for overall survival (OS), time to treatment failure (TTF), toxicity, and quality of life (QOL). PATIENTS AND METHODS: Three hundred three patients were randomized to DOX 50 mg/m(2) intravenously (IV) on day 1 and VNB 25 mg/m(2) IV on days 1 and 8 (arm 1) or DOX 70 mg/m(2) IV on day 1 (arm 2). Both regimens were given every 3 weeks until a cumulative DOX dose of 450 mg/m(2). After 16 of the first 65 randomized patients experienced febrile neutropenia (FN), the doses were reduced to DOX 40 mg/m(2) on day 1 and VNB 20 mg/m(2) on days 1 and 8 versus DOX 60 mg/m(2) on day 1. Eligible patients were vinca alkaloid and anthracycline naive. Chemotherapy was first-line or second-line for MBC. RESULTS: Three patients were ineligible. Thus, 300 patients were assessable for toxicity and to determine time to disease progression (TTP), TTF, and OS. Two hundred eighty-nine patients were assessable for response, and 99 responders were assessable for response duration (RD). The response rates, QOL, and median RD, TTP, and TTF were not significantly different between the arms. Median OS was 13.8 months for arm 1 versus 14.4 months for arm 2 (P =.4). Grade 3 or 4 granulocytopenia was equivalent in both arms but more grade 3/4 neurotoxicity, mild venous toxicity, and FN were seen on arm 1. CONCLUSION: The survival with DOX and VNB is not superior to DOX alone in MBC.

Health-related quality of life in patients treated with temozolomide versus procarbazine for recurrent glioblastoma multiforme.

PURPOSE: To determine whether chemotherapy with temozolomide (TMZ) versus procarbazine (PCB) for recurrent glioblastoma multiforme (GBM) was associated with improvement in health-related quality of life (HRQOL). PATIENTS AND METHODS: HRQOL was assessed at baseline and during treatment using the European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Questionnaire C30 and a Brain Cancer Module (BCM20) in two clinical trials that enrolled a total of 366 patients. Two hundred eighty-eight patients provided HRQOL data that could be used for analysis; 109 patients received TMZ in a phase II study, whereas 89 patients received TMZ and 90 received PCB in a randomized phase III study. Changes from baseline in the scores of seven preselected HRQOL domains (role and social functioning, global quality of life [QOL], visual disorders, motor dysfunction, communication deficit, and drowsiness) were calculated for all groups. Statistical significance, effect sizes, and proportions of patients with improved HRQOL scores (changes of > or = 10 points) were calculated. RESULTS: Before disease progression, patients treated with TMZ were found to have an improvement in most of the preselected HRQOL domain scores compared with their baseline (pretreatment) scores. Those who were progression-free on TMZ at 6 months had improvement in all the preselected HRQOL domains. Conversely, patients treated with PCB reported deterioration in HRQOL that was independent of whether or not the disease had progressed by 6 months. Patients with disease progression, regardless of treatment, experienced a sharp decline in all domains at the time of progression. CONCLUSION: Treatment with TMZ was associated with improvement in HRQOL scores compared with treatment with PCB. The deterioration reported by PCB-treated patients was likely because of toxicity. Delaying disease progression by treatment with TMZ is beneficial to the HRQOL status of patients with recurrent GBM.

Health-related quality-of-life assessment in clinical trials of supportive care in oncology.

A primary objective of symptom control and supportive care in clinical trials is to improve health-related quality of life. However, in the past, most such clinical trials have concentrated on limited outcomes, such as control of anorexia or pain, and have not taken into account the broader outcome of health-related quality of life. The multidimensional tools needed to carry out these trials are now available, and several studies have yielded results that are informative and useful. These include studies on ameliorating anorexia and weight loss, fatigue and anemia, postchemotherapy nausea and vomiting, and pain from bone metastases. Examples of such studies are given. However, there is still much to learn, and investigators are urged to continue to measure health-related quality of life in clinical trials of symptom control and supportive care.

Recommendations on health-related quality of life research to support labeling and promotional claims in the United States.

Health-related quality of life (HRQL) outcomes evaluation is becoming an important component of clinical trials of new pharmaceuticals and medical devices. HRQL research provides patients, providers, and decision makers with important information on the impact of disease and treatment on physical, psychological, and social functioning and well-being. These outcomes are also useful to the pharmaceutical and device industries as they attempt to understand and communicate product value to physicians, patients, health insurers and others. HRQL labeling and promotional claims in the US are likely to increase over the next few years. The evidentiary requirements to make such a claim should be based on accepted scientific standards of HRQL evaluation and consistent with the regulatory requirements for clinical efficacy. This report outlines the scientific practices that should be considered in the evaluation of evidence for an HRQL claim, including the selection of appropriate domains, evidence to support the reliability and validity of HRQL measurement, considerations in research design and statistical analyses, and the issue of clinical significance. Representatives from the pharmaceutical and device industries, regulatory agencies, and the HRQL scientific community should work together to make certain the use of HRQL in labeling and promotion are based on sound scientific evidence, and that these messages are clearly and accurately reported to the consumers.

Effect of disease burden on health-related quality of life in patients with malignant gliomas.

The burden imposed by disease recurrence in patients with high-grade gliomas is not well documented. We studied the frequency of self-report symptoms and the effects on health-related quality of life in patients who had recurrent glioblastoma multiforme or anaplastic astrocytoma and who had a Karnofsky performance score > or = 70. Patients completed the European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Questionnaire-Core 30 Items (QLQ-C30) and the Brain Cancer Module (BCM20) before initiation of treatment for first recurrence of disease. Six symptoms (fatigue, uncertainty about the future, motor difficulties, drowsiness, communication difficulties, and headache) were reported with a frequency > 50% by both groups of patients. An additional two symptoms (visual problems and pain) were also reported with frequencies of > 50% by patients with recurrent glioblastoma multiforme. Most of the symptoms were likely due to recurrence, but previous radiation therapy and on-going corticosteroid treatment may have also been casual factors for fatigue, whereas uncertainty about the future and pain were probably nonspecific for brain cancer. Problems with motor functioning, vision, leg strength, and pain were reported more frequently by patients with recurrent glioblastoma multiforme than by those with recurrent anaplastic astrocytoma. Scores on health-related quality-of-life functioning scales were similar in the two groups. Finally, the scores for patients who had recurrent high-grade gliomas and a Karnofsky performance score > or = 70 were compared with the reported health-related quality of life scores of patients with other cancers. Their scores were similar to those of patients with metastatic cancers and worse than those of patients with localized cancers.

Health-related quality of life in men with metastatic prostate cancer treated with prednisone alone or mitoxantrone and prednisone.

PURPOSE: A combination of mitoxantrone plus prednisone is preferable to prednisone alone for reduction of pain in men with metastatic, hormone-resistant, prostate cancer. The purpose of this study was to assess the effects of these treatments on health-related quality of life (HQL). PATIENTS AND METHODS: Men with metastatic prostate cancer (n = 161) were randomized to receive either daily prednisone alone or mitoxantrone (every 3 weeks) plus prednisone. Those who received prednisone alone could have mitoxantrone added after 6 weeks if there was no improvement in pain. HQL was assessed before treatment initiation and then every 3 weeks using the European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality-of-Life Questionnaire C30 (EORTC QLQ-C30) and the Quality of Life Module-Prostate 14 (QOLM-P14), a trial-specific module developed for this study. An intent-to-treat analysis was used to determine the mean duration of HQL improvement and differences in improvement duration between groups of patients. RESULTS: At 6 weeks, both groups showed improvement in several HQL domains, and only physical functioning and pain were better in the mitoxantrone-plus-prednisone group than in the prednisone-alone group. After 6 weeks, patients taking prednisone showed no improvement in HQL scores, whereas those taking mitoxantrone plus prednisone showed significant improvements in global quality of life (P =.009), four functioning domains, and nine symptoms (.001 < P <. 01), and the improvement (> 10 units on a scale of 0 to100) lasted longer than in the prednisone-alone group (.004 < P <.05). The addition of mitoxantrone to prednisone after failure of prednisone alone was associated with improvements in pain, pain impact, pain relief, insomnia, and global quality of life (.001 < P <.003). CONCLUSION: Treatment with mitoxantrone plus prednisone was associated with greater and longer-lasting improvement in several HQL domains and symptoms than treatment with prednisone alone.

Randomized study of CODE versus alternating CAV/EP for extensive-stage small-cell lung cancer: an Intergroup Study of the National Cancer Institute of Canada Clinical Trials Group and the Southwest Oncology Group.

PURPOSE: To determine whether an intensive weekly chemotherapy regimen plus thoracic irradiation is superior to standard chemotherapy in the treatment of extensive-stage small-cell lung cancer (ESCLC). PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients with ESCLC were considered eligible for the study if they were younger than 68 years, had a performance status of 0 to 2, and were free of brain metastases. Patients were randomized to receive cisplatin, vincristine, doxorubicin, and etoposide (CODE) or alternating cyclophosphamide, doxorubicin, vincristine/etoposide and cisplatin (CAV/EP). Consolidative thoracic irradiation and prophylactic cranial irradiation were given to patients responding to CODE and according to investigator discretion on the CAV/EP arm. RESULTS: The fidelity of drug delivery on both drug regimens was equal, and more than 70% of all patients received the intended protocol chemotherapy. Although rates of neutropenic fever were similar, nine (8.2%) of 110 patients on the CODE arm died during chemotherapy, whereas one (0.9%) of 109 patients died on the CAV/EP arm. Response rates after chemotherapy were higher (P =.006) with CODE (87%) than with CAV/EP (70%). However, progression-free survival (median of 0.66 years on both arms) and overall survival (median, 0.98 years for CODE and 0. 91 years for CAV/EP) were not statistically different. CONCLUSION: The CODE regimen increased two-fold the received dose-intensity of four of the most active drugs in small-cell lung cancer compared with the standard CAV/EP regimen while maintaining an approximately equal total dose. Despite supportive care (but not routine prophylactic use of granulocyte colony-stimulating factor), there was excessive toxic mortality with the CODE regimen. The response rate with CODE was higher than that of CAV/EP, but progression-free and overall survival were not significantly improved. In view of increased toxicity and similar efficacy, the CODE chemotherapy regimen is not recommended for treatment of ESCLC.

Health-related quality of life in women with metastatic breast cancer treated with trastuzumab (Herceptin).

The measurement of health-related quality of life (HRQL) was an important component of clinical trials of trastuzumab (Herceptin; Genentech, San Francisco, CA) in women with progressive HER2-overexpressing metastatic breast cancer who may or may not have had prior chemotherapy. Health-related quality of life was measured at baseline and specified intervals during therapy using the European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer core Quality of Life Questionnaire (QLQ-C30, version 1.0). Five domains were chosen a priori for analysis: global quality of life, physical, role and social functioning, and fatigue. In the phase II study, in which trastuzumab was given alone, there was no change in on-treatment QLQ-C30 scores compared with baseline. These results suggest that trastuzumab does not adversely affect HRQL during therapy. In the phase III study, the effects of trastuzumab plus chemotherapy were compared with those of chemotherapy alone. A comparison of QLQ-C30 scores during treatment did not show statistically significant differences between the two groups at the preset level of P = .01. However, comparison of on-treatment scores with baseline in patients receiving chemotherapy alone indicated mild worsening of physical and role functioning and of fatigue throughout the duration of treatment, whereas a similar comparison of those receiving chemotherapy with trastuzumab revealed mild worsening of role functioning at weeks 8 and 20 and of fatigue only at week 8. These results suggest that trastuzumab may be associated with an amelioration of the deleterious effects of chemotherapy alone. In summary, in the doses and schedules used in these studies, trastuzumab is not associated with worsening of HRQL.