Establishing the minimal clinically important difference of the Brief Fatigue Inventory for brain or CNS cancer patients undergoing radiotherapy

被引:0
作者
Gunn, Heather J. [1 ]
Zaniletti, Isabella [2 ]
Breen, William G. [3 ]
Leavitt, Todd [4 ]
Bogan, Aaron [5 ]
Mahajan, Anita [3 ]
Brown, Paul D. [3 ]
Yan, Elizabeth [3 ]
Vora, Sujay A. [6 ]
Merrell, Kenneth W. [3 ]
Ashman, Jonathan B. [6 ]
Peterson, Jennifer L. [7 ]
Leenstra, James L. [8 ]
Wilson, Zachary C. [9 ]
Laughlin, Brady S. [6 ]
Laack, Nadia N. [3 ]
DeWees, Todd A. [10 ]
机构
[1] Mayo Clin, Dept Quantitat Hlth Sci, 200 1st St SW, Rochester, MN 55905 USA
[2] IZ Stat LLC, Tampa, FL USA
[3] Mayo Clin, Dept Radiat Oncol, Rochester, MN USA
[4] Cytel, Cambridge, MA USA
[5] Mayo Clin, Dept Quantitat Hlth Sci, Scottsdale, AZ USA
[6] Mayo Clin, Dept Radiat Oncol, Phoenix, AZ USA
[7] Mayo Clin, Dept Radiat Oncol, Jacksonville, FL USA
[8] Mayo Clin, Dept Radiat Oncol, Northfield, MN USA
[9] Mayo Clin, Dept Radiat Oncol, Eau Claire, WI USA
[10] City Hope Natl Med Ctr, Dept Computat & Quantitat Med, Duarte, CA USA
关键词
brain tumor; Brief Fatigue Inventory; fatigue; minimal clinically important difference; minimal important change; QUALITY-OF-LIFE; VALIDATION; VERSION;
D O I
10.1093/nop/npae034
中图分类号
R74 [神经病学与精神病学];
学科分类号
摘要
Background Minimal clinically important differences (MCIDs) quantify the clinical relevance of quality of life results at the individual patient and group level. The aim of this study was to estimate the MCID for the Brief Fatigue Inventory (BFI) and the Worst and Usual Fatigue items in patients with brain or CNS cancer undergoing curative radiotherapy.Methods Data from a multi-site prospective registry was used. The MCID was calculated using distribution-based and anchor-based approaches. For the anchor-based approach, the fatigue item from the PROMIS-10 served as the anchor to determine if a patient improved, deteriorated, or had no change from baseline to end of treatment (EOT). We compared the unadjusted means on the BFI for the 3 groups to calculate the MCID. For the distribution-based approaches, we calculated the MCID as 0.5 SD of the scores and as 1.96 times the standard error of measurement.Results Three-hundred and fifty nine patients with brain or CNS tumors undergoing curative radiotherapy filled out the 9-item BFI at baseline and EOT. The MCID for the BFI was 1.33 (ranging from 0.99 to 1.70 across the approaches), 1.51 (ranging from 1.16 to 2.02) and 1.76 (ranging from 1.38 to 2.14) for the usual and worst fatigue items, respectively.Conclusions This study provides the MCID ranges for the BFI and Worst and Usual fatigue items, which will allow clinically meaningful conclusions to be drawn from BFI scores. These results can be used to select optimal treatments for patients with brain or CNS cancer or to interpret BFI scores from clinical trials.
引用
收藏
页码:633 / 639
页数:7
相关论文
共 36 条
  • [1] [Anonymous], CEFA COMPREHENSIVE E
  • [2] [Anonymous], 2013, SAS 9 3
  • [3] Asher Arash, 2016, CNS Oncol, V5, P91, DOI 10.2217/cns-2015-0008
  • [4] Hippocampal Avoidance During Whole-Brain Radiotherapy Plus Memantine for Patients With Brain Metastases: Phase III Trial NRG Oncology CC001
    Brown, Paul D.
    Gondi, Vinai
    Pugh, Stephanie
    Tome, Wolfgang A.
    Wefel, Jeffrey S.
    Armstrong, Terri S.
    Bovi, Joseph A.
    Robinson, Cliff
    Konski, Andre
    Khuntia, Deepak
    Grosshans, David
    Benzinger, Tammie L. S.
    Bruner, Deborah
    Gilbert, Mark R.
    Roberge, David
    Kundapur, Vijayananda
    Devisetty, Kiran
    Shah, Sunjay
    Usuki, Kenneth
    Anderson, Bethany Marie
    Stea, Baldassarre
    Yoon, Harold
    Li, Jing
    Laack, Nadia N.
    Kruser, Tim J.
    Chmura, Steven J.
    Shi, Wenyin
    Deshmukh, Snehal
    Mehta, Minesh P.
    Kachnic, Lisa A.
    [J]. JOURNAL OF CLINICAL ONCOLOGY, 2020, 38 (10) : 1019 - +
  • [5] SCREE TEST FOR NUMBER OF FACTORS
    CATTELL, RB
    [J]. MULTIVARIATE BEHAVIORAL RESEARCH, 1966, 1 (02) : 245 - 276
  • [6] Coens C, 2020, LANCET ONCOL, V21, pE83, DOI 10.1016/S1470-2045(19)30790-9
  • [7] Minimal changes in health status questionnaires: distinction between minimally detectable change and minimally important change
    de Vet, Henrica C.
    Terwee, Caroline B.
    Ostelo, Raymond W.
    Beckerman, Heleen
    Knol, Dirk L.
    Bouter, Lex M.
    [J]. HEALTH AND QUALITY OF LIFE OUTCOMES, 2006, 4 (1)
  • [8] Establishing anchor-based minimally important differences for the EORTC QLQ-C30 in glioma patients
    Dirven, Linda
    Musoro, Jammbe Z.
    Coens, Comeel
    Reijneveld, Jaap C.
    Taphoom, Martin J. B.
    Boele, Florien W.
    Groenvold, Mogens
    van den Bent, Martin J.
    Stupp, Roger
    Velikova, Galina
    Cocks, Kim
    Sprangers, Mirjam A. G.
    King, Madeleine T.
    Flechtner, Hans-Henning
    Bottomley, Andrew
    [J]. NEURO-ONCOLOGY, 2021, 23 (08) : 1327 - 1336
  • [9] Predictors of subjective versus objective cognitive functioning in patients with stable grades II and III glioma
    Gehring, Karin
    Taphoorn, Martin J. B.
    Sitskoorn, Margriet M.
    Aaronson, Neil K.
    [J]. NEURO-ONCOLOGY PRACTICE, 2015, 2 (01) : 20 - 31
  • [10] Cancer-related fatigue in breast cancer patients: factor mixture models with continuous non-normal distributions
    Ho, Rainbow T. H.
    Fong, Ted C. T.
    Cheung, Irene K. M.
    [J]. QUALITY OF LIFE RESEARCH, 2014, 23 (10) : 2909 - 2916