Health utility assessments in individuals undergoing diagnostic and surveillance colonoscopy: improved discrimination with a cancer-specific scale

Purpose To compare the sensitivity and discriminant validity of generic and cancer-specific measures for assessing health-related quality of life (HRQoL) for individuals undergoing diagnostic or surveillance colonoscopy for colorectal cancer. Methods HRQoL was assessed using EQ-5D-5L (generic), and...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Cancer causes & control 2024-02, Vol.35 (2), p.347-357
Hauptverfasser: Bulamu, Norma B., Chen, Gang, McGrane, Ellen, Cock, Charles, Young, Graeme P., Symonds, Erin L.
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
Beschreibung
Zusammenfassung:Purpose To compare the sensitivity and discriminant validity of generic and cancer-specific measures for assessing health-related quality of life (HRQoL) for individuals undergoing diagnostic or surveillance colonoscopy for colorectal cancer. Methods HRQoL was assessed using EQ-5D-5L (generic), and EORTC QLQ-C30 (cancer-specific) scales, 14 days after (baseline) and one-year following colonoscopy (follow-up). Utility scores were calculated by mapping EORTC-QLQ-C30 onto QLU-C10D. Differences between participants with different indications for colonoscopy (positive faecal occult blood test (FOBT), surveillance, or symptoms) and colonoscopy findings (no polyps, polyps, or cancer) were tested using Wilcoxon-Mann–Whitney and Kruskal–Wallis H tests. Sensitivity was assessed by calculating the ceiling effects (proportion reporting the best possible level). Results 246 adults completed the survey, including those undergoing colonoscopy for symptoms ( n  = 87), positive FOBT ( n  = 92) or surveillance ( n  = 67). Those with symptoms had the lowest HRQoL at both baseline and follow-up, with differences observed within the HRQoL domains/areas of role function, appetite loss and bowel function on the QLU-C10D. No differences were found in HRQoL when stratified by findings at colonoscopy with both measures or when comparing baseline and follow-up responses. Participants reporting full health with EQ-5D-5L (21% at baseline and 16% at follow-up) still had problems on the QLU-C10D, with fatigue and sleep at baseline and with role function and fatigue at follow-up. Conclusion Patients undergoing colonoscopy for symptoms had lower HRQoL compared to surveillance or positive FOBT. The cancer-specific QLU-C10D was more sensitive and had greater discriminant ability between patients undergoing colonoscopy for different indications.
ISSN:0957-5243
1573-7225
DOI:10.1007/s10552-023-01789-6