Using a discrete choice experiment to value the QLU-C10D: feasibility and sensitivity to presentation format.

PURPOSE: To assess the feasibility of using a discrete choice experiment (DCE) to value health states within the QLU-C10D, a utility instrument derived from the QLQ-C30, and to assess clarity, difficulty, and respondent preference between two presentation formats. METHODS: We ran a DCE valuation task in an online panel (N = 430). Respondents answered 16 choice pairs; in half of these, differences between dimensions were highlighted, and in the remainder, common dimensions were described in text and differing attributes were tabulated. To simplify the cognitive task, only four of the QLU-C10D's ten dimensions differed per choice set. We assessed difficulty and clarity of the valuation task with Likert-type scales, and respondents were asked which format they preferred. We analysed the DCE data by format with a conditional logit model and used Chi-squared tests to compare other responses by format. Semi-structured telephone interviews (N = 8) explored respondents' cognitive approaches to the valuation task. RESULTS: Four hundred and forty-nine individuals were recruited, 430 completed at least one choice set, and 422/449 (94 %) completed all 16 choice sets. Interviews revealed that respondents found ten domains difficult but manageable, many adopting simplifying heuristics. Results for clarity and difficulty were identical between formats, but the "highlight" format was preferred by 68 % of respondents. Conditional logit parameter estimates were monotonic within domains, suggesting respondents were able to complete the DCE sensibly, yielding valid results. CONCLUSION: A DCE valuation task in which only four of the QLU-C10D's ten dimensions differed in any choice set is feasible for deriving utility weights for the QLU-C10D.

QLU-C10D: a health state classification system for a multi-attribute utility measure based on the EORTC QLQ-C30.

PURPOSE: To derive a health state classification system (HSCS) from the cancer-specific quality of life questionnaire, the EORTC QLQ-C30, as the basis for a multi-attribute utility instrument. METHODS: The conceptual model for the HSCS was based on the established domain structure of the QLQ-C30. Several criteria were considered to select a subset of dimensions and items for the HSCS. Expert opinion and patient input informed a priori selection of key dimensions. Psychometric criteria were assessed via secondary analysis of a pooled dataset comprising HRQOL and clinical data from 2616 patients from eight countries and a range of primary cancer sites, disease stages, and treatments. We used confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) to assess the conceptual model's robustness and generalisability. We assessed item floor effects (>75 % observations at lowest score), disordered item response thresholds, coverage of the latent variable and differential item function using Rasch analysis. We calculated effect sizes for known group comparisons based on disease stage and responsiveness to change. Seventy-nine cancer patients assessed the relative importance of items within dimensions. RESULTS: CFA supported the conceptual model and its generalisability across primary cancer sites. After considering all criteria, 12 items were selected representing 10 dimensions: physical functioning (mobility), role functioning, social functioning, emotional functioning, pain, fatigue, sleep, appetite, nausea, bowel problems. CONCLUSIONS: The HSCS created from QLQ-C30 items is known as the EORTC Quality of Life Utility Measure-Core 10 dimensions (QLU-C10D). The next phase of the QLU-C10D's development involves valuation studies, currently planned or being conducted across the globe.

Testing the measurement invariance of the EORTC QLQ-C30 across primary cancer sites using multi-group confirmatory factor analysis.

PURPOSE: The EORTC Quality of Life Questionnaire is a widely used cancer-specific quality of life instrument comprising a core set of 30 items (QLQ-C30) supplemented by cancer site-specific modules. The purpose of this paper was to examine the extent to which the conventional multi-item domain structure of the QLQ-C30 holds across patients with seven different primary cancer sites. METHODS: Multi-group confirmatory factor analysis was used to test whether a measurement model of the QLQ-C30 was invariant across cancer sites. Configural (same patterns of factor loadings), metric (equivalence of factor loadings) and scalar (equivalence of thresholds) invariance amongst the cancer site groups were assessed (N = 1,906) by comparing the fit of a model with these parameters freely estimated to a model where estimates were constrained to be equal for the corresponding items in each group. RESULTS: All groups exhibited good model fit except for the prostate group, which was excluded. Only 1 of 576 parameters was found to differ between primary sites: specifically, the first threshold of Item 1 in the breast cancer group exhibited non-invariance. In a post hoc analysis, several instances of non-invariance by treatment status (baseline, on-treatment, off-treatment) were observed. CONCLUSIONS: Given only one instance of non-invariance between cancer sites, there is a reason to be confident in the validity of conclusions drawn when comparing QLQ-C30 domain scores between different sites and when interpreting the scores of heterogeneous samples, although future research should assess the potential impact of confounding variables such as treatment and gender.

Validation of the Consensus-Definition for Cancer Cachexia and evaluation of a classification model--a study based on data from an international multicentre project (EPCRC-CSA).

BACKGROUND: Weight loss limits cancer therapy, quality of life and survival. Common diagnostic criteria and a framework for a classification system for cancer cachexia were recently agreed upon by international consensus. Specific assessment domains (stores, intake, catabolism and function) were proposed. The aim of this study is to validate this diagnostic criteria (two groups: model 1) and examine a four-group (model 2) classification system regarding these domains as well as survival. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Data from an international patient sample with advanced cancer (N = 1070) were analysed. In model 1, the diagnostic criteria for cancer cachexia [weight loss/body mass index (BMI)] were used. Model 2 classified patients into four groups 0-III, according to weight loss/BMI as a framework for cachexia stages. The cachexia domains, survival and sociodemographic/medical variables were compared across models. RESULTS: Eight hundred and sixty-one patients were included. Model 1 consisted of 399 cachectic and 462 non-cachectic patients. Cachectic patients had significantly higher levels of inflammation, lower nutritional intake and performance status and shorter survival. In model 2, differences were not consistent; appetite loss did not differ between group III and IV, and performance status not between group 0 and I. Survival was shorter in group II and III compared with other groups. By adding other cachexia domains to the model, survival differences were demonstrated. CONCLUSION: The diagnostic criteria based on weight loss and BMI distinguish between cachectic and non-cachectic patients concerning all domains (intake, catabolism and function) and is associated with survival. In order to guide cachexia treatment a four-group classification model needs additional domains to discriminate between cachexia stages.

Can individual patients assess differences in quality of life between groups of patients?

This qualitative study piloted a method for eliciting patient opinion on the size of group differences in quality of life (QOL) scores from the EORTC QLQ-C30. Using scenarios from published studies, patients were asked the differences in QOL they would expect between two groups of patients or a group of patients over time. Interviews were transcribed verbatim and thematic analysis used. Eleven breast cancer patients were interviewed. The final thematic framework consisted of three major themes: (1) their ability to use published data to judge the size of differences in QOL scores, (2) their ability to gain familiarity and understanding of the QLQ-C30 questionnaire in an interview situation and (3) their ability to understand and assess differences from a group of patients rather than on an individual basis. Patients felt able to understand the questionnaire and scoring. They provided an opinion on whether differences in QOL scores were trivial, small, medium or large. Patient perspectives were often based on their own experience of the disease and treatments and their opinions were varied. In order to estimate clinically meaningful differences from published literature, a larger number of patients with varied experiences would be required and a consensus process used to align opinions where possible.

International validation of the EORTC QLQ-ELD14 questionnaire for assessment of health-related quality of life elderly patients with cancer.

BACKGROUND: Older people represent the majority of cancer patients but their specific needs are often ignored in the development of health-related quality of life (HRQOL) instruments. The European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) QLQ-ELD15 was developed to supplement the EORTC's core questionnaire, the QLQ-C30, for measuring HRQOL in patients aged >70 years in oncology studies. METHODS: Patients (n=518) from 10 countries completed the QLQ-C30, QLQ-ELD15 and a debriefing interview. Eighty two clinically stable patients repeated the questionnaires 1 week later (test-retest analysis) and 107 others, with an expected change in clinical status, repeated the questionnaires 3 months later (response to change analysis, RCA). RESULTS: Information from the debriefing interview, factor analysis and item response theory analysis resulted in the removal of one item (QLQ-ELD15QLQ-ELD14) and revision of the proposed scale structure to five scales (mobility, worries about others, future worries, maintaining purpose and illness burden) and two single items (joint stiffness and family support). Convergent validity was good. In known-group comparisons, the QLQ-ELD14 differentiated between patients with different disease stage, treatment intention, number of comorbidities, performance status and geriatric screening scores. Test-retest and RCA analyses were equivocal. CONCLUSION: The QLQ-ELD14 is a validated HRQOL questionnaire for cancer patients aged 70 years. Changes in elderly patients' self-reported HRQOL may be related to both cancer evolution and non-clinical events.

Is there a genetic cause for cancer cachexia? - a clinical validation study in 1797 patients.

BACKGROUND: Cachexia has major impact on cancer patients' morbidity and mortality. Future development of cachexia treatment needs methods for early identification of patients at risk. The aim of the study was to validate nine single-nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) previously associated with cachexia, and to explore 182 other candidate SNPs with the potential to be involved in the pathophysiology. METHOD: A total of 1797 cancer patients, classified as either having severe cachexia, mild cachexia or no cachexia, were genotyped. RESULTS: After allowing for multiple testing, there was no statistically significant association between any of the SNPs analysed and the cachexia groups. However, consistent with prior reports, two SNPs from the acylpeptide hydrolase (APEH) gene showed suggestive statistical significance (P=0.02; OR, 0.78). CONCLUSION: This study failed to detect any significant association between any of the SNPs analysed and cachexia; although two SNPs from the APEH gene had a trend towards significance. The APEH gene encodes the enzyme APEH, postulated to be important in the endpoint of the ubiquitin system and thus the breakdown of proteins into free amino acids. In cachexia, there is an extensive breakdown of muscle proteins and an increase in the production of acute phase proteins in the liver.

Validation of the European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer QLQ-LMC21 questionnaire for assessment of patient-reported outcomes during treatment of colorectal liver metastases.

BACKGROUND: There is a lack of valid patient-reported outcome (PRO) measures for hepatectomy or palliative treatment of colorectal hepatic metastases. This study examined the validity and reliability of the European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life questionnaire liver module (QLQ-LMC21) in patients with liver metastases from colorectal cancer. METHODS: Some 356 patients completed the core questionnaire (QLQ-C30), QLQ-LMC21 and a debriefing questionnaire before and 3 months after hepatectomy or palliative treatment. Construct, criterion and clinical validity were evaluated before and after treatment. RESULTS: Questionnaire compliance was high; less than 1 per cent of data were missing from individual items. Modifications to the hypothesized scale structure produced four scales and nine single items with good reliability, clinical, criterion and construct validity. The QLQ-LMC21 distinguished between patients selected for surgery or palliative treatment in nine of these 13. Significant changes in PROs were observed before and after treatment. The new module discriminated between clinically distinct groups of patients and measured aspects of quality of life not covered in the core questionnaire. CONCLUSION: The EORTC QLQ-LMC21 is a valid and reliable questionnaire module to use with the QLQ-C30 in assessing PROs in hepatectomy or palliative treatment for colorectal liver metastases.

Establishing the European Norm for the health-related quality of life domains of the computer-adaptive test EORTC CAT Core.

OBJECTIVE: The computer-adaptive test (CAT) of the European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC), the EORTC CAT Core, assesses the same 15 domains as the EORTC QLQ-C30 health-related quality of life questionnaire but with increased precision, efficiency, measurement range and flexibility. CAT parameters for estimating scores have been established based on clinical data from cancer patients. This study aimed at establishing the European Norm for each CAT domain based on general population data. METHODS: We collected representative general population data across 11 European Union (EU) countries, Russia, Turkey, Canada and the United States (n ≥ 1000/country; stratified by sex and age). We selected item subsets from each CAT domain for data collection (totalling 86 items). Differential item functioning (DIF) analyses were conducted to investigate cross-cultural measurement invariance. For each domain, means and standard deviations from the EU countries (weighted by country population, sex and age) were used to establish a T-metric with a European general population mean = 50 (standard deviation = 10). RESULTS: A total of 15,386 respondents completed the online survey (n = 11,343 from EU countries). EORTC CAT Core norm scores for all 15 countries were calculated. DIF had negligible impact on scoring. Domain-specific T-scores differed significantly across countries with small to medium effect sizes. CONCLUSION: This study establishes the official European Norm for the EORTC CAT Core. The European CAT Norm can be used globally and allows for meaningful interpretation of scores. Furthermore, CAT scores can be compared with sex- and age-adjusted norm scores at a national level within each of the 15 countries.

General population normative data for the EORTC QLQ-C30 health-related quality of life questionnaire based on 15,386 persons across 13 European countries, Canada and the Unites States.

OBJECTIVE: The European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) QLQ-C30 health-related quality of life questionnaire is one of the most widely used cancer-specific health-related quality of life questionnaires worldwide. General population norm data can facilitate the interpretation of QLQ-C30 data obtained from cancer patients. This study aimed at systematically collecting norm data from the general population to develop European QLQ-C30 norm scores and to generate comparable norm data for individual countries in Europe and North America. METHODS: We collected QLQ-C30 data from the general population across 11 European Union (EU) countries, Russia, Turkey, Canada and United States (n ≥ 1000/country). Representative samples were stratified by sex and age groups (18-39, 40-49, 50-59, 60-69 and ≥ 70 years). After applying weights based on the United Nations population distribution statistics, we calculated QLQ-C30 domain scores to generate a 'European QLQ-C30 Norm' based on the EU countries. Further, we calculated QLQ-C30 norm scores for all 15 individual countries. RESULTS: A total of 15,386 respondents completed the online survey. For the EU sample, most QLQ-C30 domains showed differences by sex/age, with men scoring somewhat better health than women, while age effects varied across domains. Substantially larger differences were seen in inter-country comparisons, with Austrian and Dutch respondents reporting consistently better health compared with British and Polish respondents. CONCLUSIONS: This study is the first to systematically collect EORTC QLQ-C30 general population norm data across Europe and North America applying a consistent data collection method across 15 countries. These new norm data facilitate valid intra-country as well as inter-country comparisons and QLQ-C30 score interpretation.

Chronic non-malignant pain patients report as poor health-related quality of life as palliative cancer patients.

BACKGROUND: Patients with chronic non-malignant pain (CNMP) conditions are known to report reduced health-related quality of life (HRQoL). The objective of this exploratory study was to compare HRQoL between patients admitted to a multidisciplinary pain centre, palliative cancer (PC) patients and national norms. METHODS: HRQoL data from 288 patients with CNMP admitted to the multidisciplinary pain centre at Trondheim University Hospital were compared with 434 patients with advanced cancer included in a trial of comprehensive palliative care in the hospital palliative medicine unit and national norms. HRQoL was assessed using the EORTC QLQ-C30. Age- and gender-adjusted norm data were calculated and compared between the two groups. RESULTS: Scores from both groups deviated from adjusted norm data on all scales, with poorer functioning and more symptoms. Compared with PC patients, CNMP patients reported a larger deviation (worse scores) on global quality of life, cognitive functioning, pain, sleep disturbances and financial difficulties. Deviations from norm data were similar for physical, social and emotional functioning, diarrhoea, dyspnoea and fatigue. PC patients reported worse scores on role functioning, nausea/vomiting, loss of appetite and constipation. CONCLUSION: CNMP patients admitted to multidisciplinary pain centres report significantly reduced HRQoL, in addition to severe pain. They consider their HRQoL to be as poor as HRQoL reported from dying cancer patients and substantially poorer than national norms. Factors other than the biological severity of the disease seem to be of major importance for self-reported HRQoL.

Fetal, infant, and childhood growth and adult blood pressure: a longitudinal study from birth to 22 years of age.

BACKGROUND: People who are small at birth tend to have higher blood pressure in later life. However, it is not clear whether it is fetal growth restriction or the accelerated postnatal growth that often follows it that leads to higher blood pressure. METHODS AND RESULTS: We studied blood pressure in 346 British men and women aged 22 years whose size had been measured at birth and for the first 10 years of life. Their childhood growth was characterized using a conditional method that, free from the effect of regression to the mean, estimated catch-up growth. People who had been small at birth but who gained weight rapidly during early childhood (1 to 5 years) had the highest adult blood pressures. Systolic pressure increased by 1.3 mm Hg (95% CI, 0.3 to 2.3) for every standard deviation score decrease in birth weight and, independently, increased by 1.6 mm Hg (95% CI, 0.6 to 2.7) for every standard deviation score increase in early childhood weight gain. Adjustment for adult body mass index attenuated the effect of early childhood weight gain but not of birth weight. Relationships were smaller for diastolic pressure. Weight gain in the first year of life did not influence adult blood pressure. CONCLUSIONS: Part of the risk of adult hypertension is set in fetal life. Accelerated weight gain in early childhood adds to this risk, which is partly mediated through the prediction of adult fatness. The primary prevention of hypertension may depend on strategies that promote fetal growth and reduce childhood obesity.

Health-related quality of life in the general Norwegian population assessed by the European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer Core Quality-of-Life Questionnaire: the QLQ=C30 (+ 3).

PURPOSE: To obtain reference data on health-related quality of life (HRQOL) for the functional and symptom scales and single items of the European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer Core Quality-of-Life Questionnaire (EORTC QLQ-C30 [+ 3]) in a representative sample of the Norwegian general population. PATIENTS AND METHODS: A randomly selected sample of 3,000 people from the Norwegian population, aged 18 to 93 years, who represent geographic diversity, took part in this postal survey. The EORTC QLQ-C30 (+ 3) and a questionnaire about demographic data and health were sent by mail. A new questionnaire package was sent as a reminder after 3 weeks. RESULTS: The survey yielded a high response rate with 1,965 of 2,892 eligible persons responding (68%). There was a low amount of missing data (1.8%). Internal consistency was highly satisfactory and yielded Cronbach's alpha coefficients greater than 0.70 for all but two functional scales and one symptom scale. The sensitivity of the questionnaire was shown by the excellent discrimination between age and sex groups. Clinical validity was shown by the distinct differences according to age and sociodemographic characteristics. Women reported lower functional status and global quality of life (mean scale scores from 71.7 to 91.0) than men (mean scale scores from 75.4 to 94.4), and also more symptoms and problems. This was remarkably consistent across age groups, as was a decline in functional status with an increase in age. CONCLUSION: This is the first study that presented reference data from the EORTC QLQ-C30 (+ 3) in a sample from a general population and seems to provide valid measures of HRQOL within different age groups. The results may serve as a guideline for clinicians when interpreting HRQOL in their own groups of patients, and contributes to a better understanding of the significance of mean scores and their clinical relevance.

Health-related quality of life 1 year after allogeneic or autologous stem-cell transplantation: a prospective study.

PURPOSE: To evaluate health-related quality of life (HRQOL) in adults treated with high-dose chemotherapy followed by allogeneic (SCT) and autologous (ASCT) stem-cell transplantation 1 year after transplantation, using data from concurrent lymphoma patients receiving combination chemotherapy (CT) as a reference. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Forty-one leukemia patients (SCT group), 51 lymphoma patients (ASCT group), and 85 CT patients completed the European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer QLQ-C30 questionnaire at baseline and after 1 year. RESULTS: The SCT group (median age, 36 years) had better functioning scores and less symptomatology at baseline compared with the ASCT (median age, 41 years) and CT (median age, 37 years) groups. Statistically significant differences of 10 or more points on the 0 to 100 scales were found for 10 of 15 scales and items (P< or =.01) between the SCT and ASCT groups. Global quality of life (79 v 58, P<.0001), role function (83 v 65, P = .001), sleep disturbances (6 v 28, P<.0001), and fatigue (25 v 44, P = .0001) deviated most. The differences were 10 or more points for seven of 15 scales and items comparing the SCT and CT groups, with sleep disturbances (6 v 35, P<.0001) and pain (11 v 29, P<.01) deviating most. Differences across groups were smaller after 1 year; cognitive function was the only scale with a statistically significant difference (ASCT 80 v CT 89; P = .002). Patterns of change in HRQOL scores were different between groups during follow-up. A great improvement was found in the ASCT group (P<.01 for emotional and role function, fatigue, appetite, and constipation), whereas no significant changes were observed for the SCT group. CONCLUSION: Prospective studies with extended follow-up periods are necessary to separate a slow recovery process from more permanently reduced HRQOL after transplantation and to examine the late side effects from previous treatment.

Quality of life in palliative cancer care: results from a cluster randomized trial.

PURPOSE: To assess the impact of comprehensive palliative care on patients' quality of life. The intervention was based on cooperation between a palliative medicine unit and the community service and was compared with conventional care. PATIENTS AND METHODS: A cluster randomized trial was carried out, with community health care districts defined as the clusters. Patients from these districts who had malignant disease and survival expectancy between 2 to 9 months were entered onto the trial. The main quality-of-life end points were physical and emotional functioning, pain, and psychologic distress assessed monthly by using the European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Questionnaire-C30 (EORTC QLQ-C30) questionnaire and Impact of Event scale (IES). In total, 235 intervention patients and 199 controls were included. RESULTS: During the initial 4 months of follow-up, the compliance was good (72%) and comparable among treatment groups. No significant differences on any of the quality-of-life scores were found. At later assessments and for scores that were made within 3 months before death, there was also no consistent tendency in favor of any treatment group on the main outcomes or other EORTC QLQ-C30 scales/items. CONCLUSION: A general program of palliative care may be important to ensure flexibility and to meet the needs of terminally ill patients. However, to achieve improvements on a group level of the various dimensions of quality of life, specific interventions directed toward specific symptoms or problems may have to be defined, evaluated, and included in the program.

Quality of life in head and neck cancer patients: validation of the European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Questionnaire-H&N35.

PURPOSE: The aim of this study was to define the scales and test the validity, reliability, and sensitivity of the European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Questionnaire (EORTC QLQ)-H&N35, a questionnaire designed to assess the quality of life of head and neck (H&N) cancer patients in conjunction with the general cancer-specific EORTC QLQ-C30. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Questionnaires were given to 500 H&N cancer patients from Norway, Sweden, and the Netherlands as part of two prospective studies. The patients completed the questionnaires before, during (Norway and Sweden only), and after treatment, yielding a total of 2070 completed questionnaires. RESULTS: The compliance rate was high, and the questionnaires were well accepted by the patients. Seven scales were constructed (pain, swallowing, senses, speech, social eating, social contact, sexuality). Scales and single items were sensitive to differences between patient subgroups with relation to site, stage, or performance status. Most scales and single items were sensitive to changes, with differences of various magnitudes according to the site in question. The internal consistency, as assessed by Cronbach's alpha coefficient, varied according to assessment point and within subsamples of patients. A low overall alpha value was found for the speech and the senses scales, but values were higher in assessments of patients with laryngeal cancer and in patients with nose, sinus, and salivary gland tumors. Scales and single items in the QLQ-H&N35 seem to be more sensitive to differences between groups and changes over time than do the scales and single items in the core questionnaire. CONCLUSION: The QLQ-H&N35, in conjunction with the QLQ-C30, provides a valuable tool for the assessment of health-related quality of life in clinical studies of H&N cancer patients before, during, and after treatment with radiotherapy, surgery, or chemotherapy.

Depression in advanced cancer--assessment challenges and associations with disease load.

BACKGROUND: Patients with advanced cancer commonly experience multiple somatic symptoms and declining functioning. Some highly prevalent symptoms also overlap with diagnostic symptom-criteria of depression. Thus, assessing depression in these patients can be challenging. We therefore investigated 1) the effect of different scoring-methods of depressive symptoms on detecting depression, and 2) the relationship between disease load and depression amongst patients with advanced cancer. METHODS: The sample included 969 patients in the European Palliative Care Research Collaborative-Computer Symptom Assessment Study (EPCRC-CSA). Inclusion criteria were: incurable metastatic/locally advanced cancer and ≥ 18 years. Biomarkers and length of survival were registered from patient-records. Depression was assessed using the Patient Health Questionnaire (PHQ-9) and applying three scoring-methods: inclusive (algorithm scoring including the somatic symptom-criteria), exclusive (algorithm scoring excluding the somatic symptom-criteria) and sum-score (sum of all symptoms with a cut-off ≥ 8). RESULTS: Depression prevalence rates varied according to scoring-method: inclusive 13.7%, exclusive 14.9% and sum-score 45.3%. Agreement between the algorithm scoring-methods was excellent (Kappa = 0.81), but low between the inclusive and sum scoring-methods (Kappa = 0.32). Depression was significantly associated with more pain (OR-range: 1.09-1.19, p < 0.001-0.04) and lower performance status (KPS-score, OR-range = 0.68-0.72, p < 0.001) irrespective of scoring-method. LIMITATIONS: Depression was assessed using self-report, not clinical interviews. CONCLUSIONS: The scoring-method, not excluding somatic symptoms, had the greatest effect on assessment outcomes. Increasing pain and poorer than expected physical condition should alert clinicians to possible co-morbid depression. The large discrepancy in prevalence rates between scoring-methods reinforces the need for consensus and validation of depression definitions and assessment in populations with high disease load.