Interpreting European Organisation for Research and Treatment for Cancer Quality of life Questionnaire core 30 scores as minimally importantly different for patients with malignant melanoma.

Abstract Introduction Health-related quality of life (HRQOL) is increasingly recognised as an important end-point in cancer clinical trials. The concept of minimally important difference (MID) enables interpreting differences and changes in HRQOL scores in terms of clinical meaningfulness. We aimed to estimate MIDs for interpreting group-level change of European Organisation for Research and Treatment for Cancer Quality of life Questionnaire core 30 (EORTC QLQ-C30) scores in patients with malignant melanoma. Methods Data were pooled from three published melanoma phase III trials. Anchors relying on clinician's ratings, e.g. performance status, were selected using correlation strength and clinical plausibility of associating the anchor/EORTC QLQ-C30 scale pair. HRQOL change was evaluated between time periods that were common to all trials: start of treatment to end of treatment and end of treatment to end of follow-up. Three change status groups were formed: deteriorated by one anchor category, improved by one anchor category and no change. Patients with greater anchor change were excluded. The mean change method and linear regression were used to estimate MIDs for change in HRQOL scores within the group and between the groups of patients, respectively. Results MIDs varied according to QLQ-C30 scale, direction (improvement versus deterioration), anchor and period. MIDs for within-group change ranged from 4 to 18 points (improvement) and −16 to −4 points (deterioration), and MIDs for between-group change ranged from 3 to 16 points and from −16 to −3 points. MIDs for most of QLQ-C30 scales ranged from 5 to 10 points in absolute values. Conclusions These results are useful for interpreting changes in EORTC QLQ-C30 scores over time and for performing more accurate sample size calculations in adjuvant melanoma settings. Highlights • We have provided minimally important difference (MID) estimates for interpreting EORTC QLQ-C30 scores in adjuvant melanoma. • MIDs varied according to EORTC QLQ-C30 scale, direction (improvement versus deterioration), anchor and period. • The use of multiple anchors per scale provided some reassurance about the plausibility of the estimated MIDs. • Our findings provide further evidence that there is no single global standard for clinically meaningful change. • There is need to update and diversify the current MID standards. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Copyright of European Journal of Cancer is the property of Pergamon Press - An Imprint of Elsevier Science and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)