Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Validity, reliability, responsiveness, and clinically meaningful change threshold estimates of the National Comprehensive Cancer Network-Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-Breast Cancer Symptom Index (NFBSI-16).
Clarke, Nathan A; Wong, Brendon; Lawrance, Rachael; Ingelgård, Anders; Griebsch, Ingolf; Cella, David; Trigg, Andrew.
Afiliação
  • Clarke NA; Adelphi Values, Adelphi Mill, Bollington, Cheshire, SK10 5JB, UK. nathan.clarke@adelphivalues.com.
  • Wong B; Boehringer Ingelheim International GmbH, Ingelheim am Rhein, Germany.
  • Lawrance R; Adelphi Values, Adelphi Mill, Bollington, Cheshire, SK10 5JB, UK.
  • Ingelgård A; Boehringer Ingelheim International GmbH, Ingelheim am Rhein, Germany.
  • Griebsch I; Boehringer Ingelheim International GmbH, Ingelheim am Rhein, Germany.
  • Cella D; Northwestern University, Chicago, IL, USA.
  • Trigg A; Adelphi Values, Adelphi Mill, Bollington, Cheshire, SK10 5JB, UK.
J Patient Rep Outcomes ; 8(1): 97, 2024 Aug 15.
Article em En | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-39145900
ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND:

Breast cancer is one of the most common cancers in women. Patient-reported outcome measures are used to evaluate patients' health-related quality of life in clinical breast cancer studies. This study evaluated the structure, validity, reliability, and responsiveness of the National Comprehensive Cancer Network-Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-Breast Cancer Symptom Index (NFBSI-16) subscales in a clinical trial featuring patients with advanced/metastatic breast cancer (aBC), and estimated NFBSI-16 meaningful change thresholds.

METHODS:

Data from 101 patients with aBC enrolled in a phase II trial (Xenera-1) were included for psychometric evaluation of the NFBSI-16. Subscale structure was evaluated by assessing inter-item correlations, item-total correlations, and internal consistency (cycles 2 and 5). Validity was assessed using scale-level convergent validity (cycles 2 and 5) and known-groups (Baseline). Reliability was analysed via test-retest at cycles 3-4, and responsiveness to improvement and worsening was evaluated at cycles 5, 7, and 9. Meaningful change thresholds were estimated using anchor-based methods (supported by distribution-based methods) at cycles 5, 7, and 9.

RESULTS:

NFBSI-16 internal consistency was acceptable, but item-total correlations suggested that its subscales and the GP5 item (side-effect of treatment) scores may be preferred over a total score. Convergent and known-groups evidence supported NFBSI-16 validity. Test-retest reliability was good to excellent for Total and DRS-P (disease-related symptoms physical) scales, and moderate for the GP5 item. Responsiveness to worsening was generally demonstrated, but responsiveness to improvement could not be demonstrated due to limited observed improvement. Anchor-based meaningful change thresholds were estimated for DRS-P and Total scores.

CONCLUSION:

This study provides evidence that the NFBSI-16 has desirable psychometric properties for use in clinical studies in aBC. It also provides estimates of group- and individual-level meaningful change thresholds to facilitate score interpretation in future aBC research.
Assuntos
Palavras-chave

Texto completo: 1 Coleções: 01-internacional Base de dados: MEDLINE Assunto principal: Psicometria / Qualidade de Vida / Neoplasias da Mama / Medidas de Resultados Relatados pelo Paciente Limite: Adult / Aged / Female / Humans / Middle aged Idioma: En Ano de publicação: 2024 Tipo de documento: Article

Texto completo: 1 Coleções: 01-internacional Base de dados: MEDLINE Assunto principal: Psicometria / Qualidade de Vida / Neoplasias da Mama / Medidas de Resultados Relatados pelo Paciente Limite: Adult / Aged / Female / Humans / Middle aged Idioma: En Ano de publicação: 2024 Tipo de documento: Article