Background: Cost-utility analysis generally requires valid preference-based measures (PBMs) to assess the utility of patient health. While generic PBMs are widely used, disease-specific PBMs may capture additional aspects of health relevant for certain patient populations. This study investigates the construct and concurrent criterion validity of the cancer-specific European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) Quality of Life Utility-Core 10 dimensions (QLU-C10D) in non-small-cell lung cancer patients.

Methods: We retrospectively analysed data from four multicentre LUX-Lung trials, all of which had administered the EORTC Quality of Life Questionnaire (QLQ-C30) and the EQ-5D-3L. We applied six country-specific value sets (Australia, Canada, Italy, the Netherlands, Poland, and the United Kingdom) to both instruments. Criterion validity was assessed via correlations between the instruments' utility scores. Correlations of divergent and convergent domains and Bland-Altman plots investigated construct validity. Floor and ceiling effects were assessed.

Results: The comparison of the EORTC QLU-C10D and EQ-5D-3L produced homogenous results for five of the six country tariffs. High correlations of utilities (r > 0.7) were found for all country tariffs except for the Netherlands. Moderate to high correlations of converging domain pairs (r from 0.472 to 0.718) were found with few exceptions, such as the Social Functioning-Usual Activities domain pair (max. r = 0.376). For all but the Dutch tariff, the EORTC QLU-C10D produced consistently lower utility values compared to the EQ-5D-3L (x̄ difference from - 0.082 to 0.033). Floor and ceiling effects were consistently lower for the EORTC QLU-C10D (max. 4.67% for utilities).

Conclusions: The six country tariffs showed good psychometric properties for the EORTC QLU-C10D in lung cancer patients. Criterion and construct validity was established. The QLU-C10D showed superior measurement precision towards the upper and lower end of the scale compared to the EQ-5D-3L, which is important when cost-utility analysis seeks to measure health change across the severity spectrum.

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11252099PMC
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s41669-024-00484-9DOI Listing

Publication Analysis

Top Keywords

eortc qlu-c10d
20
country tariffs
16
lung cancer
12
properties eortc
8
qlu-c10d lung
8
multicentre lux-lung
8
lux-lung trials
8
cost-utility analysis
8
criterion validity
8
eortc quality
8

Similar Publications

Cancer-specific utility: clinical validation of the EORTC QLU-C10D in patients with glioblastoma.

Eur J Health Econ

November 2024

Department for Psychiatry, Psychotherapy and Psychosomatic Medicine,University Hospital of Psychiatry II, Medical University of Innsbruck, Innsbruck, Austria.

Introduction: Many health economic evaluations rely on the validity of the utility measurement for health-related quality of life (HRQoL). While generic utility measures perform well in HRQoL assessments of many diseases and patient populations, appropriateness for cancer-specific disease burdens needs attention and condition-specific measures could be a viable option. This study assessed the clinical validity of the cancer-specific EORTC QLU-C10D, a utility scoring algorithm for the EORTC QLQ-C30, in patients with glioblastoma.

View Article and Find Full Text PDF

The EORTC QLU-C10D distinguished better between cancer patients and the general population than PROPr and EQ-5D-5L in a cross-sectional study.

J Clin Epidemiol

November 2024

Center for Internal Medicine and Dermatology, Department of Psychosomatic Medicine, Charité - Universitätsmedizin Berlin, Berlin, Germany; BIH Charité Digital Clinician Scientist Program, BIH Biomedical Innovation Academy, Berlin Institute of Health at Charité - Universitätsmedizin Berlin, Charitéplatz 1 10117, Berlin, Germany.

Objectives: Health state utility (HSU) instruments for calculating quality-adjusted life years, such as the European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) Quality of Life Utility - Core 10 Dimensions (QLU-C10D), derived from the EORTC QLQ-30 questionnaire, the Patient-Reported Outcome Measurement Information System (PROMIS) preference score (PROPr), and the EuroQoL-5-Dimensions-5-Levels (EQ-5D-5L), yield different HSU values due to different modeling and different underlying descriptive scales. For example the QLU-C10D includes cancer-relevant dimensions such as nausea. This study aimed to investigate how these differences in descriptive scales contribute to differences in HSU scores by comparing scores of cancer patients receiving chemotherapy to those of the general population.

View Article and Find Full Text PDF

Purpose: This study aimed to develop utility weights for the European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) QLU-C10D, a cancer-specific utility instrument, tailored to the Norwegian and Swedish populations. The utility weights are intended for use in the specific welfare contexts of Norway and Sweden to support more precise healthcare decision-making in cancer treatment and care.

Methods: This cross-sectional study included 1019 Norwegian and 1048 Swedish participants representative in age and gender of the two general populations.

View Article and Find Full Text PDF

Health economic appraisals often rely on the assessment of health utilities using preference-based measures (PBM). The cancer-specific PBM, European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Utility - Core 10 Dimensions (EORTC QLU-C10D), was developed recently, and now needs to be validated in various clinical populations. In a multicenter, multinational prospective cohort study, we longitudinally collected EORTC QLQ-C30 and EQ-5D-5L data from patients with thyroid cancer.

View Article and Find Full Text PDF

Introduction: Stereotactic ablative radiotherapy (SABR) is a standard of care treatment for medically inoperable early-stage non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). The CHISEL trial was a phase 3 randomised controlled trial that compared SABR to conventional radiation therapy (CRT). Using patient-level data, we compared the cost-effectiveness of SABR and CRT for early-stage NSCLC.

View Article and Find Full Text PDF

Want AI Summaries of new PubMed Abstracts delivered to your In-box?

Enter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!