Abstract:PurposeThe EORTC QLQ-C30 and the Brief Pain Inventory (BPI) are validated tools for measuring quality of life (QOL) and the impact of pain in patients with advanced cancer. Interpretation of these instrument scores can be challenging and it is difficult to know what numerical changes translate to clinically significant impact in patients’ lives. To address this issue, our study sought to establish the minimal clinically important differences (MCID) for these two instruments in a prospective cohort of patients with advanced cancer and painful bone metastases.MethodsBoth anchor-based and distribution-based methods were used to estimate the MCID scores from patients enrolled in a randomized phase III trial evaluating two different re-irradiation treatment schedules. For the anchor-based method, the global QOL item from the QLQ-C30 was chosen as the anchor. Spearman correlation coefficients were calculated for all items and only those items with moderate or better correlation (|r| ≥ 0.30) with the anchor were used for subsequent analysis. A 10-point difference in the global QOL score was used to classify improvement and deterioration, and the MCID scores were calculated for each of these categories. These results were compared with scores obtained by the distribution-method, which estimates the MCID purely from the statistical characteristics of the sample population.ResultsA total of 375 patients were included in this study with documented pain responses and completed QOL questionnaires at 2 months. 9/14 items in the QLQ-C30 and 6/10 items in the BPI were found to have moderate or better correlation with the anchor. For deterioration, statistically significant MCID scores were found in all items of the QLQ-C30 and BPI. For improvement, statistically significant MCID scores were found in 7/9 items of the QLQ-C30 and 2/6 items of the BPI. The MCID scores for deterioration were uniformly higher than the MCIDs for improvement. Using the distribution-based method, there was good agreement between the 0.5 standard deviation (SD) values and anchor-based scores for deterioration. For improvement, there was less agreement and the anchor-based scores were lower than the 0.5 SD values obtained from the distribution-based method.ConclusionWe present MCID scores for the QLQ-C30 and BPI instruments obtained from a large cohort of patients with advanced cancer undergoing re-irradiation for painful bone metastases. The results from this study were compared to other similar studies which showed larger MCID scores for improvement compared to deterioration. We hypothesize that disease trajectory and patient expectations are important factors in understanding the contrasting results. The results of this study can guide clinicians and researchers in the interpretation of these instruments.

Identifying changes in scores on the EORTC-QLQ-C30 representing a change in patients’ supportive care needs

Using the EORTC-QLQ-C30 in clinical practice for patient management: identifying scores requiring a clinician’s attention

Minimally Important Differences for Interpreting EORTC QLQ-C30 Scores in Patients With Advanced Breast Cancer

Needs assessments can identify scores on HRQOL questionnaires that represent problems for patients: an illustration with the Supportive Care Needs Survey and the QLQ-C30

Minimal important differences for interpreting health-related quality of life scores from the EORTC QLQ-C30 in lung cancer patients participating in randomized controlled trials

Minimally important differences for the EORTC QLQ-C30 in prostate cancer clinical trials

Asking the right questions: investigating needs assessments and health-related quality-of-life questionnaires for use in oncology clinical practice

Minimally important differences for interpreting the EORTC QLQ‐C30 in patients with advanced colorectal cancer treated with chemotherapy

Assessment of needs, health-related quality of life, and satisfaction with care in breast cancer patients to better target supportive care

Minimal clinically important differences in the EORTC QLQ-C30 and brief pain inventory in patients undergoing re-irradiation for painful bone metastases

The european organisation for research and treatment of cancer head and neck cancer module (EORTC QLQ-HN43): Estimates for minimal important difference and minimal important change

Estimating the minimally important difference for the EQ-5D-5L and EORTC QLQ-C30 in cancer

Changes in Patient-Reported Health Status in Advanced Cancer Patients from a Symptom Management Clinic: A Longitudinal Study Conducted in China

Supportive care needs, quality of life and social support among elderly colorectal cancer patients undergoing chemotherapy: a longitudinal study

Changes in health-related quality of life, depression, and fear of progression during oncological inpatient rehabilitation and beyond: a longitudinal study

Internal Responsiveness of EQ-5D-5L and EORTC QLQ-C30 in Dutch Breast Cancer Patients during the First Year Post-Surgery: A Longitudinal Cohort Study

Symptoms, supportive care needs, and function in cancer patients: how are they related?

The impact of curative cancer treatment on sexual health – clinical results from the EORTC QLQ-SH22 validation study

Prognostic value of changes in quality of life scores in prostate cancer