Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Comparing the mapping between EQ-5D-5L, EQ-5D-3L and the EORTC-QLQ-C30 in non-small cell lung cancer patients.
Khan, Iftekhar; Morris, Steve; Pashayan, Nora; Matata, Bashir; Bashir, Zahid; Maguirre, Joe.
Afiliação
  • Khan I; Clinical Trials Unit & Department of Health Economics, University of Surrey, Guilford, UK. I.Khan@surrey.ac.uk.
  • Morris S; Department of Applied Health Research, University College London, London, UK. I.Khan@surrey.ac.uk.
  • Pashayan N; Department of Applied Health Research, University College London, London, UK.
  • Matata B; Department of Applied Health Research, University College London, London, UK.
  • Bashir Z; Liverpool Heart and Chest Hospital, Liverpool, UK.
  • Maguirre J; University of Birmingham, Cancer School, Birmingham, UK.
Health Qual Life Outcomes ; 14: 60, 2016 Apr 12.
Article em En | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-27072351
ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND:

Several mapping algorithms have been published with the EORTC-QLQ-C30 for estimating EQ-5D-3L utilities. However, none are available with EQ-5D-5L. Moreover, a comparison between mapping algorithms in the same set of patients has not been performed for these two instruments simultaneously. In this prospective data set of 100 non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) patients, we investigate three mapping algorithms using the EQ-5D-3L and EQ-5D-5L and compare their performance.

METHODS:

A prospective non-interventional cohort of 100 NSCLC patients were followed up for 12 months. EQ-5D-3L, EQ-5D-5L and EORTC-QLQ-C30 were assessed monthly. EQ-5D-5L was completed at least 1 week after EQ-5D-3L. A random effects linear regression model, a beta-binomial (BB) and a Limited Variable Dependent Mixture (LVDM) model were used to determine a mapping algorithm between EQ-5D-3L, EQ-5D-5L and QLQ-C30. Simulation and cross validation and other statistical measures were used to compare the performances of the algorithms.

RESULTS:

Mapping from the EQ-5D-5L was better lower AIC, RMSE, MAE and higher R(2) were reported with the EQ-5D-5L than with EQ-5D-3L regardless of the functional form of the algorithm. The BB model proved to be more useful for both instruments for the EQ-5D-5L, AIC was -485, R(2) of 75 %, MAE of 0.075 and RMSE was 0.092. This was -385, 69 %, 0.099 and 0.113 for EQ-5D-3L respectively. The mean observed vs. predicted utilities were 0.572 vs. 0.577 and 0.515 vs. 0.523 for EQ-5D-5L and EQ-5D-3L respectively, for OLS; for BB, these were 0.572 vs. 0.575 and 0.515 vs. 0.518 respectively and for LVDMM 0.532 vs 0.515 and 0.569 vs 0.572 respectively. Less over-prediction at poorer health states was observed with EQ-5D-5L.

CONCLUSIONS:

The BB mapping algorithm is confirmed to offer a better fit for both EQ-5D-3L and EQ-5D-5L. The results confirm previous and more recent results on the use of BB type modelling approaches for mapping. It is recommended that in studies where EQ-5D utilities have not been collected, an EQ-5D-5L mapping algorithm is used.
Assuntos

Texto completo: 1 Coleções: 01-internacional Base de dados: MEDLINE Assunto principal: Qualidade de Vida / Algoritmos / Carcinoma Pulmonar de Células não Pequenas Tipo de estudo: Etiology_studies / Incidence_studies / Observational_studies / Prognostic_studies / Qualitative_research / Risk_factors_studies Limite: Adult / Aged / Aged80 / Female / Humans / Male / Middle aged Idioma: En Ano de publicação: 2016 Tipo de documento: Article

Texto completo: 1 Coleções: 01-internacional Base de dados: MEDLINE Assunto principal: Qualidade de Vida / Algoritmos / Carcinoma Pulmonar de Células não Pequenas Tipo de estudo: Etiology_studies / Incidence_studies / Observational_studies / Prognostic_studies / Qualitative_research / Risk_factors_studies Limite: Adult / Aged / Aged80 / Female / Humans / Male / Middle aged Idioma: En Ano de publicação: 2016 Tipo de documento: Article