Does it matter how we evaluate HRQOL? Longitudinal comparison of the EORTC QLQ-C30/QLQ-OG25 and FACT-E
Purpose To determine whether EORTC QLQ-C30/QLQ-OG25 and FACT-E compared longitudinally provide similar reflections of health-related quality of life (HRQOL). Methods Eighty-six esophageal cancer patients treated with curative intent, scheduled to complete both questionnaires at baseline and post-tre...
Gespeichert in:
Veröffentlicht in: | Journal of cancer survivorship 2021-08, Vol.15 (4), p.641-650 |
---|---|
Hauptverfasser: | , , , , , |
Format: | Artikel |
Sprache: | eng |
Schlagworte: | |
Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
container_end_page | 650 |
---|---|
container_issue | 4 |
container_start_page | 641 |
container_title | Journal of cancer survivorship |
container_volume | 15 |
creator | Darling, Gail E. Sulman, Joanne Espin-Garcia, Osvaldo Trudel, Julie G. Atenafu, Eshetu G. Kidane, Biniam |
description | Purpose
To determine whether EORTC QLQ-C30/QLQ-OG25 and FACT-E compared longitudinally provide similar reflections of health-related quality of life (HRQOL).
Methods
Eighty-six esophageal cancer patients treated with curative intent, scheduled to complete both questionnaires at baseline and post-treatment time points until 36 months. A generalized estimating equation model utilizing a Gaussian family compared instruments longitudinally. The two-one-sided-test (TOST) method assessed equivalence between the instruments.
Results
Trajectories for social domain and overall quality of life differed significantly between instruments. Also, FACT-G’s functional well-being post-treatment returns to baseline 3–6 months earlier than the EORTC QLQ-C30’s role functioning subscale, suggesting measurement of different components. Trajectories for physical and esophageal symptom subscales are similar and are deemed equivalent. Emotional domains are comparable and bear little resemblance to the physical domain trajectories indicating reflection of emotional experience rather than a physical proxy. EORTC QLQ-C30 subscales have a trajectory similar to its physical functioning scale except for the emotional and esophageal symptoms scales. Overall HRQOL in both instruments showed a consistent return to baseline/pre-treatment levels by 6 months post-treatment.
Conclusions
Overall HRQOL recovers earlier after curative-intent treatment than previously reported despite persistence of physical symptoms, with a consistent return to pre-treatment levels by 6 months after treatment. This supports the concept that HRQOL is not primarily defined by physical function. Based on this longitudinal comparison, FACT-E provides a more multidimensional assessment of HRQOL.
Implications for Cancer Survivors
Curative intent treatment for esophageal cancer has adverse effects on HRQOL but despite intense treatment, overall HRQOL recovers within 6 months. |
doi_str_mv | 10.1007/s11764-020-00957-w |
format | Article |
fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_2454655493</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>2454655493</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c352t-cac21783ff3521176deed1c0d2e7b3bdec7490d8e71baa5f560cab166cf7b0963</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNp9kMFLwzAYxYsoqNN_wFPAi5dokjaNOYnUzQmFsjHPIU2_zkrXzKR1-N-bWVHw4Ol9H_zeg_ei6IKSa0qIuPGUijTBhBFMiOQC7w6iEypjhhlLxeHPzeVxdOr9KyGcScpOovrBgkdNjza678GhF7tDO0DwrttB94Dmy0WR36HcduumH6qm0y0ydrPVrvG2Q7ZG_QugabFcZWiRL3AWk5u9Fo-MI91VaHafrfD0LDqqdevh_Fsn0fNsusrmOC8en7L7HJuYsx4bbRgVt3Fdh3dfqQKoqCEVA1HGZQVGJJJUtyBoqTWveUqMLmmamlqURKbxJLoac7fOvg3ge7VpvIG21R3YwSuW8CTlPJFxQC__oK92cKFfoAIgU8kZCxQbKeOs9w5qtXXNRrsPRYnaT6_G6VWYXn1Nr3bBFI8mH-BuDe43-h_XJ7Lyg_w</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>2549969522</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Does it matter how we evaluate HRQOL? Longitudinal comparison of the EORTC QLQ-C30/QLQ-OG25 and FACT-E</title><source>SpringerLink Journals - AutoHoldings</source><creator>Darling, Gail E. ; Sulman, Joanne ; Espin-Garcia, Osvaldo ; Trudel, Julie G. ; Atenafu, Eshetu G. ; Kidane, Biniam</creator><creatorcontrib>Darling, Gail E. ; Sulman, Joanne ; Espin-Garcia, Osvaldo ; Trudel, Julie G. ; Atenafu, Eshetu G. ; Kidane, Biniam</creatorcontrib><description>Purpose
To determine whether EORTC QLQ-C30/QLQ-OG25 and FACT-E compared longitudinally provide similar reflections of health-related quality of life (HRQOL).
Methods
Eighty-six esophageal cancer patients treated with curative intent, scheduled to complete both questionnaires at baseline and post-treatment time points until 36 months. A generalized estimating equation model utilizing a Gaussian family compared instruments longitudinally. The two-one-sided-test (TOST) method assessed equivalence between the instruments.
Results
Trajectories for social domain and overall quality of life differed significantly between instruments. Also, FACT-G’s functional well-being post-treatment returns to baseline 3–6 months earlier than the EORTC QLQ-C30’s role functioning subscale, suggesting measurement of different components. Trajectories for physical and esophageal symptom subscales are similar and are deemed equivalent. Emotional domains are comparable and bear little resemblance to the physical domain trajectories indicating reflection of emotional experience rather than a physical proxy. EORTC QLQ-C30 subscales have a trajectory similar to its physical functioning scale except for the emotional and esophageal symptoms scales. Overall HRQOL in both instruments showed a consistent return to baseline/pre-treatment levels by 6 months post-treatment.
Conclusions
Overall HRQOL recovers earlier after curative-intent treatment than previously reported despite persistence of physical symptoms, with a consistent return to pre-treatment levels by 6 months after treatment. This supports the concept that HRQOL is not primarily defined by physical function. Based on this longitudinal comparison, FACT-E provides a more multidimensional assessment of HRQOL.
Implications for Cancer Survivors
Curative intent treatment for esophageal cancer has adverse effects on HRQOL but despite intense treatment, overall HRQOL recovers within 6 months.</description><identifier>ISSN: 1932-2259</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1932-2267</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1007/s11764-020-00957-w</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>New York: Springer US</publisher><subject>Cancer ; Domains ; Emotions ; Equivalence ; Esophageal cancer ; Esophagus ; Health Informatics ; Health Promotion and Disease Prevention ; Longitudinal studies ; Medicine ; Medicine & Public Health ; Oncology ; Pretreatment ; Primary Care Medicine ; Public Health ; Quality of life ; Quality of Life Research ; Well being</subject><ispartof>Journal of cancer survivorship, 2021-08, Vol.15 (4), p.641-650</ispartof><rights>Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, part of Springer Nature 2020</rights><rights>Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, part of Springer Nature 2020.</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c352t-cac21783ff3521176deed1c0d2e7b3bdec7490d8e71baa5f560cab166cf7b0963</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c352t-cac21783ff3521176deed1c0d2e7b3bdec7490d8e71baa5f560cab166cf7b0963</cites><orcidid>0000-0001-8430-3516</orcidid></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://link.springer.com/content/pdf/10.1007/s11764-020-00957-w$$EPDF$$P50$$Gspringer$$H</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://link.springer.com/10.1007/s11764-020-00957-w$$EHTML$$P50$$Gspringer$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>314,780,784,27924,27925,41488,42557,51319</link.rule.ids></links><search><creatorcontrib>Darling, Gail E.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Sulman, Joanne</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Espin-Garcia, Osvaldo</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Trudel, Julie G.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Atenafu, Eshetu G.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Kidane, Biniam</creatorcontrib><title>Does it matter how we evaluate HRQOL? Longitudinal comparison of the EORTC QLQ-C30/QLQ-OG25 and FACT-E</title><title>Journal of cancer survivorship</title><addtitle>J Cancer Surviv</addtitle><description>Purpose
To determine whether EORTC QLQ-C30/QLQ-OG25 and FACT-E compared longitudinally provide similar reflections of health-related quality of life (HRQOL).
Methods
Eighty-six esophageal cancer patients treated with curative intent, scheduled to complete both questionnaires at baseline and post-treatment time points until 36 months. A generalized estimating equation model utilizing a Gaussian family compared instruments longitudinally. The two-one-sided-test (TOST) method assessed equivalence between the instruments.
Results
Trajectories for social domain and overall quality of life differed significantly between instruments. Also, FACT-G’s functional well-being post-treatment returns to baseline 3–6 months earlier than the EORTC QLQ-C30’s role functioning subscale, suggesting measurement of different components. Trajectories for physical and esophageal symptom subscales are similar and are deemed equivalent. Emotional domains are comparable and bear little resemblance to the physical domain trajectories indicating reflection of emotional experience rather than a physical proxy. EORTC QLQ-C30 subscales have a trajectory similar to its physical functioning scale except for the emotional and esophageal symptoms scales. Overall HRQOL in both instruments showed a consistent return to baseline/pre-treatment levels by 6 months post-treatment.
Conclusions
Overall HRQOL recovers earlier after curative-intent treatment than previously reported despite persistence of physical symptoms, with a consistent return to pre-treatment levels by 6 months after treatment. This supports the concept that HRQOL is not primarily defined by physical function. Based on this longitudinal comparison, FACT-E provides a more multidimensional assessment of HRQOL.
Implications for Cancer Survivors
Curative intent treatment for esophageal cancer has adverse effects on HRQOL but despite intense treatment, overall HRQOL recovers within 6 months.</description><subject>Cancer</subject><subject>Domains</subject><subject>Emotions</subject><subject>Equivalence</subject><subject>Esophageal cancer</subject><subject>Esophagus</subject><subject>Health Informatics</subject><subject>Health Promotion and Disease Prevention</subject><subject>Longitudinal studies</subject><subject>Medicine</subject><subject>Medicine & Public Health</subject><subject>Oncology</subject><subject>Pretreatment</subject><subject>Primary Care Medicine</subject><subject>Public Health</subject><subject>Quality of life</subject><subject>Quality of Life Research</subject><subject>Well being</subject><issn>1932-2259</issn><issn>1932-2267</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2021</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>8G5</sourceid><sourceid>ABUWG</sourceid><sourceid>AFKRA</sourceid><sourceid>AZQEC</sourceid><sourceid>BENPR</sourceid><sourceid>CCPQU</sourceid><sourceid>DWQXO</sourceid><sourceid>GNUQQ</sourceid><sourceid>GUQSH</sourceid><sourceid>M2O</sourceid><recordid>eNp9kMFLwzAYxYsoqNN_wFPAi5dokjaNOYnUzQmFsjHPIU2_zkrXzKR1-N-bWVHw4Ol9H_zeg_ei6IKSa0qIuPGUijTBhBFMiOQC7w6iEypjhhlLxeHPzeVxdOr9KyGcScpOovrBgkdNjza678GhF7tDO0DwrttB94Dmy0WR36HcduumH6qm0y0ydrPVrvG2Q7ZG_QugabFcZWiRL3AWk5u9Fo-MI91VaHafrfD0LDqqdevh_Fsn0fNsusrmOC8en7L7HJuYsx4bbRgVt3Fdh3dfqQKoqCEVA1HGZQVGJJJUtyBoqTWveUqMLmmamlqURKbxJLoac7fOvg3ge7VpvIG21R3YwSuW8CTlPJFxQC__oK92cKFfoAIgU8kZCxQbKeOs9w5qtXXNRrsPRYnaT6_G6VWYXn1Nr3bBFI8mH-BuDe43-h_XJ7Lyg_w</recordid><startdate>20210801</startdate><enddate>20210801</enddate><creator>Darling, Gail E.</creator><creator>Sulman, Joanne</creator><creator>Espin-Garcia, Osvaldo</creator><creator>Trudel, Julie G.</creator><creator>Atenafu, Eshetu G.</creator><creator>Kidane, Biniam</creator><general>Springer US</general><general>Springer Nature B.V</general><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>3V.</scope><scope>7RV</scope><scope>7TO</scope><scope>7X7</scope><scope>7XB</scope><scope>88E</scope><scope>88G</scope><scope>8AO</scope><scope>8FI</scope><scope>8FJ</scope><scope>8FK</scope><scope>8G5</scope><scope>ABUWG</scope><scope>AFKRA</scope><scope>AZQEC</scope><scope>BENPR</scope><scope>CCPQU</scope><scope>DWQXO</scope><scope>FYUFA</scope><scope>GHDGH</scope><scope>GNUQQ</scope><scope>GUQSH</scope><scope>H94</scope><scope>K9.</scope><scope>KB0</scope><scope>M0S</scope><scope>M1P</scope><scope>M2M</scope><scope>M2O</scope><scope>MBDVC</scope><scope>NAPCQ</scope><scope>PQEST</scope><scope>PQQKQ</scope><scope>PQUKI</scope><scope>PRINS</scope><scope>PSYQQ</scope><scope>Q9U</scope><scope>7X8</scope><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0001-8430-3516</orcidid></search><sort><creationdate>20210801</creationdate><title>Does it matter how we evaluate HRQOL? Longitudinal comparison of the EORTC QLQ-C30/QLQ-OG25 and FACT-E</title><author>Darling, Gail E. ; Sulman, Joanne ; Espin-Garcia, Osvaldo ; Trudel, Julie G. ; Atenafu, Eshetu G. ; Kidane, Biniam</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c352t-cac21783ff3521176deed1c0d2e7b3bdec7490d8e71baa5f560cab166cf7b0963</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2021</creationdate><topic>Cancer</topic><topic>Domains</topic><topic>Emotions</topic><topic>Equivalence</topic><topic>Esophageal cancer</topic><topic>Esophagus</topic><topic>Health Informatics</topic><topic>Health Promotion and Disease Prevention</topic><topic>Longitudinal studies</topic><topic>Medicine</topic><topic>Medicine & Public Health</topic><topic>Oncology</topic><topic>Pretreatment</topic><topic>Primary Care Medicine</topic><topic>Public Health</topic><topic>Quality of life</topic><topic>Quality of Life Research</topic><topic>Well being</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Darling, Gail E.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Sulman, Joanne</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Espin-Garcia, Osvaldo</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Trudel, Julie G.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Atenafu, Eshetu G.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Kidane, Biniam</creatorcontrib><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Corporate)</collection><collection>Nursing & Allied Health Database</collection><collection>Oncogenes and Growth Factors Abstracts</collection><collection>Health & Medical Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>Medical Database (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>Psychology Database (Alumni)</collection><collection>ProQuest Pharma Collection</collection><collection>Hospital Premium Collection</collection><collection>Hospital Premium Collection (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni) (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>Research Library (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central UK/Ireland</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Essentials</collection><collection>ProQuest Central</collection><collection>ProQuest One Community College</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Korea</collection><collection>Health Research Premium Collection</collection><collection>Health Research Premium Collection (Alumni)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Student</collection><collection>Research Library Prep</collection><collection>AIDS and Cancer Research Abstracts</collection><collection>ProQuest Health & Medical Complete (Alumni)</collection><collection>Nursing & Allied Health Database (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>Health & Medical Collection (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>Medical Database</collection><collection>Psychology Database</collection><collection>Research Library</collection><collection>Research Library (Corporate)</collection><collection>Nursing & Allied Health Premium</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic Eastern Edition (DO NOT USE)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic UKI Edition</collection><collection>ProQuest Central China</collection><collection>ProQuest One Psychology</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Basic</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><jtitle>Journal of cancer survivorship</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Darling, Gail E.</au><au>Sulman, Joanne</au><au>Espin-Garcia, Osvaldo</au><au>Trudel, Julie G.</au><au>Atenafu, Eshetu G.</au><au>Kidane, Biniam</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Does it matter how we evaluate HRQOL? Longitudinal comparison of the EORTC QLQ-C30/QLQ-OG25 and FACT-E</atitle><jtitle>Journal of cancer survivorship</jtitle><stitle>J Cancer Surviv</stitle><date>2021-08-01</date><risdate>2021</risdate><volume>15</volume><issue>4</issue><spage>641</spage><epage>650</epage><pages>641-650</pages><issn>1932-2259</issn><eissn>1932-2267</eissn><abstract>Purpose
To determine whether EORTC QLQ-C30/QLQ-OG25 and FACT-E compared longitudinally provide similar reflections of health-related quality of life (HRQOL).
Methods
Eighty-six esophageal cancer patients treated with curative intent, scheduled to complete both questionnaires at baseline and post-treatment time points until 36 months. A generalized estimating equation model utilizing a Gaussian family compared instruments longitudinally. The two-one-sided-test (TOST) method assessed equivalence between the instruments.
Results
Trajectories for social domain and overall quality of life differed significantly between instruments. Also, FACT-G’s functional well-being post-treatment returns to baseline 3–6 months earlier than the EORTC QLQ-C30’s role functioning subscale, suggesting measurement of different components. Trajectories for physical and esophageal symptom subscales are similar and are deemed equivalent. Emotional domains are comparable and bear little resemblance to the physical domain trajectories indicating reflection of emotional experience rather than a physical proxy. EORTC QLQ-C30 subscales have a trajectory similar to its physical functioning scale except for the emotional and esophageal symptoms scales. Overall HRQOL in both instruments showed a consistent return to baseline/pre-treatment levels by 6 months post-treatment.
Conclusions
Overall HRQOL recovers earlier after curative-intent treatment than previously reported despite persistence of physical symptoms, with a consistent return to pre-treatment levels by 6 months after treatment. This supports the concept that HRQOL is not primarily defined by physical function. Based on this longitudinal comparison, FACT-E provides a more multidimensional assessment of HRQOL.
Implications for Cancer Survivors
Curative intent treatment for esophageal cancer has adverse effects on HRQOL but despite intense treatment, overall HRQOL recovers within 6 months.</abstract><cop>New York</cop><pub>Springer US</pub><doi>10.1007/s11764-020-00957-w</doi><tpages>10</tpages><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0001-8430-3516</orcidid></addata></record> |
fulltext | fulltext |
identifier | ISSN: 1932-2259 |
ispartof | Journal of cancer survivorship, 2021-08, Vol.15 (4), p.641-650 |
issn | 1932-2259 1932-2267 |
language | eng |
recordid | cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_2454655493 |
source | SpringerLink Journals - AutoHoldings |
subjects | Cancer Domains Emotions Equivalence Esophageal cancer Esophagus Health Informatics Health Promotion and Disease Prevention Longitudinal studies Medicine Medicine & Public Health Oncology Pretreatment Primary Care Medicine Public Health Quality of life Quality of Life Research Well being |
title | Does it matter how we evaluate HRQOL? Longitudinal comparison of the EORTC QLQ-C30/QLQ-OG25 and FACT-E |
url | https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2024-12-26T23%3A10%3A39IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Does%20it%20matter%20how%20we%20evaluate%20HRQOL?%20Longitudinal%20comparison%20of%20the%20EORTC%20QLQ-C30/QLQ-OG25%20and%20FACT-E&rft.jtitle=Journal%20of%20cancer%20survivorship&rft.au=Darling,%20Gail%20E.&rft.date=2021-08-01&rft.volume=15&rft.issue=4&rft.spage=641&rft.epage=650&rft.pages=641-650&rft.issn=1932-2259&rft.eissn=1932-2267&rft_id=info:doi/10.1007/s11764-020-00957-w&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E2454655493%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=2549969522&rft_id=info:pmid/&rfr_iscdi=true |