Combined cancer patient-reported symptom and health utility tool for routine clinical implementation: a real-world comparison of the ESAS and EQ-5D in multiple cancer sites.
Value in cancer care
patient-reported outcomes
Journal
Current oncology (Toronto, Ont.)
ISSN: 1718-7729
Titre abrégé: Curr Oncol
Pays: Switzerland
ID NLM: 9502503
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
12 2019
12 2019
Historique:
entrez:
4
1
2020
pubmed:
4
1
2020
medline:
17
7
2020
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
We assessed whether the presence and severity of common cancer symptoms are associated with the health utility score (hus) generated from the EQ-5D (EuroQol Research Foundation, Rotterdam, Netherlands) in patients with cancer and evaluated whether it is possible pragmatically to integrate routine hus and symptom evaluation in our cancer population. Adult outpatients at Princess Margaret Cancer Centre with any cancer were surveyed cross-sectionally using the Edmonton Symptom Assessment System (esas) and the EQ-5D-3L, and results were compared using Spearman correlation coefficients and regression analyses. Of 764 patients analyzed, 27% had incurable disease. We observed mild-to-moderate correlations between each esas symptom score and the hus (Spearman coefficients: -0.204 to -0.416; The hus derived from the EQ-5D-3L is associated with all major cancer symptoms as captured by the esas. The esas scores alone could not predict EQ-5D scores with high accuracy. However, esas-derived questions assessing the same domains as the EQ-5D-3L questions could be mapped to their corresponding EQ-5D questions to generate the hus, with high correlation to the directly measured hus. That finding suggests a potential approach to integrating routine symptom and hus evaluations after confirmatory studies.
Sections du résumé
Background
We assessed whether the presence and severity of common cancer symptoms are associated with the health utility score (hus) generated from the EQ-5D (EuroQol Research Foundation, Rotterdam, Netherlands) in patients with cancer and evaluated whether it is possible pragmatically to integrate routine hus and symptom evaluation in our cancer population.
Methods
Adult outpatients at Princess Margaret Cancer Centre with any cancer were surveyed cross-sectionally using the Edmonton Symptom Assessment System (esas) and the EQ-5D-3L, and results were compared using Spearman correlation coefficients and regression analyses.
Results
Of 764 patients analyzed, 27% had incurable disease. We observed mild-to-moderate correlations between each esas symptom score and the hus (Spearman coefficients: -0.204 to -0.416;
Conclusions
The hus derived from the EQ-5D-3L is associated with all major cancer symptoms as captured by the esas. The esas scores alone could not predict EQ-5D scores with high accuracy. However, esas-derived questions assessing the same domains as the EQ-5D-3L questions could be mapped to their corresponding EQ-5D questions to generate the hus, with high correlation to the directly measured hus. That finding suggests a potential approach to integrating routine symptom and hus evaluations after confirmatory studies.
Identifiants
pubmed: 31896943
doi: 10.3747/co.26.5297
pii: conc-26-e733
pmc: PMC6927786
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Observational Study
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
e733-e741Informations de copyright
2019 Multimed Inc.
Déclaration de conflit d'intérêts
CONFLICT OF INTEREST DISCLOSURES We have read and understood Current Oncology’s policy on disclosing conflicts of interest, and we declare that we have none.
Références
Health Qual Life Outcomes. 2012 Dec 17;10:151
pubmed: 23244763
J Pain Symptom Manage. 2016 Apr;51(4):662-672.e8
pubmed: 26743641
J Popul Ther Clin Pharmacol. 2016 Sep 13;23(3):e196-e204
pubmed: 27783475
Clin Lung Cancer. 2017 Jul;18(4):388-395.e4
pubmed: 28111120
Value Health. 2014 Nov;17(7):A646
pubmed: 27202324
Psychooncology. 2016 May;25(5):491-5
pubmed: 26283141
Health Qual Life Outcomes. 2016 Apr 12;14:60
pubmed: 27072351
Med Decis Making. 1994 Jan-Mar;14(1):82-90
pubmed: 8152360
Pharmacoeconomics. 2005;23(11):1143-53
pubmed: 16277549
J Med Econ. 2015;18(11):954-66
pubmed: 26212479
Value Health. 2014 Nov;17(7):A567
pubmed: 27201884
Dis Esophagus. 2018 Dec 1;31(12):null
pubmed: 29905764
Qual Life Res. 2015 Mar;24(3):591-8
pubmed: 25326871
Oncologist. 2010;15(3):308-16
pubmed: 20189976
Health Technol Assess. 2014 Feb;18(9):1-224
pubmed: 24524660
Patient. 2017 Feb;10(1):105-115
pubmed: 27567613
Health Qual Life Outcomes. 2014 Sep 10;12:140
pubmed: 25214238
Value Health. 2014 Mar;17(2):238-44
pubmed: 24636382
Value Health. 2007 Sep-Oct;10(5):408-14
pubmed: 17888106
Qual Life Res. 2013 Jun;22(5):1045-54
pubmed: 22743734
Eur J Health Econ. 2008 Aug;9(3):237-49
pubmed: 17605057
Prostate Cancer Prostatic Dis. 2014 Mar;17(1):47-56
pubmed: 24126796
Eur J Health Econ. 2010 Aug;11(4):427-34
pubmed: 20473703
Value Health. 2011 Sep-Oct;14(6):900-6
pubmed: 21914512
J Pain Symptom Manage. 2017 Mar;53(3):630-643
pubmed: 28042071
Health Qual Life Outcomes. 2014 Dec 12;12:180
pubmed: 25495840
J Palliat Care. 1991 Summer;7(2):6-9
pubmed: 1714502
Value Health. 2016 Mar-Apr;19(2):218-25
pubmed: 27021756
J Clin Oncol. 2000 Sep 15;18(18):3302-17
pubmed: 10986064
PLoS One. 2012;7(2):e31115
pubmed: 22328929
Psychooncology. 2012 Apr;21(4):357-64
pubmed: 21308858
Expert Rev Pharmacoecon Outcomes Res. 2016 Oct;16(5):549-559
pubmed: 27574879
Health Qual Life Outcomes. 2003 Oct 16;1:54
pubmed: 14613568
Popul Health Metr. 2006 Oct 31;4:13
pubmed: 17076901
Qual Life Res. 2013 Sep;22(7):1745-51
pubmed: 23054499
Asia Pac J Clin Oncol. 2017 Oct;13(5):e195-e203
pubmed: 26990789