Choosing between the EORTC QLQ-C30 and FACT-G for measuring health-related quality of life in cancer clinical research: issues, evidence and recommendations

被引:208
作者
Luckett, T. [1 ,2 ]
King, M. T. [2 ]
Butow, P. N. [2 ,3 ]
Oguchi, M. [2 ,3 ]
Rankin, N. [2 ,4 ]
Price, M. A. [2 ,3 ]
Hackl, N. A. [5 ]
Heading, G. [5 ,6 ]
机构
[1] Braeside Hosp, Dept Palliat Care, Improving Palliat Care Clin Trials ImPaCCT New S, Wetherill Pk, NSW 2164, Australia
[2] Braeside Hosp, Psychooncol Cooperat Res Grp PoCoG, Wetherill Pk, NSW 2164, Australia
[3] Univ Sydney, Ctr Med Psychol & Evidence Based Decis Making CeM, Camperdown, NSW, Australia
[4] Univ Wollongong, Ctr Hlth Serv Dev, Wollongong, NSW, Australia
[5] Canc Inst New S Wales, Eveleigh, Wales
[6] Clin Educ & Training Inst, Gladesville, Australia
关键词
psychometrics; quality of life; questionnaires; FUNCTIONAL-ASSESSMENT; EUROPEAN-ORGANIZATION; GENERAL-POPULATION; PROSTATE-CANCER; NECK-CANCER; THERAPY; VALIDATION; QUESTIONNAIRE; SCORES; VALIDITY;
D O I
10.1093/annonc/mdq721
中图分类号
R73 [肿瘤学];
学科分类号
100214 ;
摘要
Background: This review aims to assist cancer clinical researchers in choosing between the two most widely used measures of cancer-specific health-related quality of life: the European Organisation for the Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Questionnaire Core 30 and Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-General (FACT-G). Materials and methods: Information on QLQ-C30 and FACT-G content, scale structure, accessibility and availability was collated from websites and manuals. A systematic review was undertaken to identify all articles reporting on psychometric properties and information to assist interpretability. Evidence for reliability, validity and responsiveness was rated using a standardised checklist. Instrument properties were compared and contrasted to inform recommendations. Results: Psychometric evidence does not recommend one questionnaire over the other in general. However, there are important differences between the scale structure, social domains and tone that inform choice for any particular study. Conclusions: Where research objectives are concerned with the impact of a specific tumour type, treatment or symptom, choice should be guided by the availability, content, scale structure and psychometric properties of relevant European Organisation for the Research and Treatment of Cancer versus Functional Assessment of Chronic Illness Therapy modules. Because the FACT-G combines symptoms and concerns within each scale, individual items should always be reviewed within the context of specific research objectives. Where these issues are indecisive, researchers are encouraged to use an algorithm at the end of the current article.
引用
收藏
页码:2179 / 2190
页数:12
相关论文
共 49 条
[11]   Validation of the functional assessment of cancer therapy esophageal cancer subscale [J].
Darling, Gail ;
Eton, David T. ;
Sulman, Joanne ;
Casson, Alan G. ;
Cella, David .
CANCER, 2006, 107 (04) :854-863
[12]  
*EORTC QUAL LIF GR, EORTC QLQ C30 MAN RE
[13]   Interpreting quality of life data: population-based reference data for the EORTC QLQ-C30 [J].
Fayers, PM .
EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF CANCER, 2001, 37 (11) :1331-1334
[14]  
Gotay Carolyn Cook, 2004, J Natl Cancer Inst Monogr, P126
[15]   Interpretation of quality of life scores in multiple myeloma by comparison with a reference population and assessment of the clinical importance of score differences [J].
Gulbrandsen, N ;
Hjermstad, MJ ;
Wisloff, F .
EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF HAEMATOLOGY, 2004, 72 (03) :172-180
[16]  
Hedges L., 1985, Statistical methods for meta-analysis, DOI DOI 10.1016/J.PHYTOCHEM.2011.03.026
[17]   Using reference data on quality of life - the importance of adjusting for age and gender, exemplified by the EORTC QLQ-C30 (+3) [J].
Hjermstad, MJ ;
Fayers, PM ;
Bjordal, K ;
Kaasa, S .
EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF CANCER, 1998, 34 (09) :1381-1389
[18]   Equating EORTC QLQ-C30 and FACT-G scores and its use in oncological research [J].
Holzner, B. ;
Bode, R. K. ;
Hahn, E. A. ;
Cella, D. ;
Kopp, M. ;
Sperner-Unterweger, B. ;
Kemmler, G. .
EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF CANCER, 2006, 42 (18) :3169-3177
[19]   Normative data for functional assessment of cancer therapy - General scale and its use for the interpretation of quality of life scores in cancer survivors [J].
Holzner, B ;
Kemmler, G ;
Cella, D ;
De Paoli, C ;
Meraner, V ;
Kopp, M ;
Greil, R ;
Fleischhacker, WW ;
Sperner-Unterweger, B .
ACTA ONCOLOGICA, 2004, 43 (02) :153-160
[20]   Quality of life measurement in oncology -: a matter of the assessment instrument? [J].
Holzner, B ;
Kemmler, G ;
Sperner-Unterweger, B ;
Kopp, M ;
Dünser, M ;
Margreiter, R ;
Marschitz, I ;
Nachbaur, D ;
Fleischhacker, WW ;
Greil, R .
EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF CANCER, 2001, 37 (18) :2349-2356