An assessment of the external validity of mapping QLQ-C30 to EQ-5D preferences

BackgroundAlthough cancer-specific Health-related Quality-of-Life measures are commonly included in randomized clinical trials or other prospective non-randomized clinical studies, it is rare that preference-based instruments are used, which allow the calculation of a Utility weight suitable for estimating Quality-adjusted Life-Years gained.ObjectiveTo test the external validity of a previously published mapping algorithm to transform the EORTC QLQ-C30 questionnaire responses into EQ-5D-derived utilities by predicting EQ-5D utilities from QLQ-C30 scores.Study design and methodsComparative retrospective data analysis of four multicentre, prospective clinical trials in Breast, Multiple Myeloma, Non-Hodgkin Lymphoma and Non-Small-Cell Lung cancer patients with, respectively, 219, 172, 132 and 172 patients. Regression analysis of individual pairs of EQ-5D and QLQ-C30 scores.ResultsAlthough the internal predictive power of a previously published mapping equation was high, its external validity when tested on a set of unrelated external data sets in other cancers proved to underestimate both the mean and variance of the mapped EQ-5D utilities. Furthermore, it appears that the relationship between QLQ-C30 scores and EQ-5D values is not stable across the different data sets.ConclusionsValidation of the proposed algorithm in other external clinical data sets should be encouraged as well as the application of other more complex mapping methods to enhance accuracy of mapping. In the meanwhile, direct mapping from QLQ-C30 profiles to EQ-5D utilities using published algorithms should be performed with reservations.

[1]  David R. Anderson,et al.  Multimodel Inference , 2004 .

[2]  Donna Rowen,et al.  Mapping onto Eq-5 D for patients in poor health , 2010, Health and quality of life outcomes.

[3]  P. Dolan,et al.  Modeling valuations for EuroQol health states. , 1997, Medical care.

[4]  Andrew Briggs,et al.  Mapping the QLQ-C30 quality of life cancer questionnaire to EQ-5D patient preferences , 2010, The European Journal of Health Economics.

[5]  M. Versteegh,et al.  Mapping QLQ-C30, HAQ, and MSIS-29 on EQ-5D , 2012, Medical decision making : an international journal of the Society for Medical Decision Making.

[6]  Albert W Wu,et al.  Addressing ceiling effects in health status measures: a comparison of techniques applied to measures for people with HIV disease. , 2007, Health services research.

[7]  M. Palta,et al.  Gender differences in health-related quality-of-life are partly explained by sociodemographic and socioeconomic variation between adult men and women in the US: evidence from four US nationally representative data sets , 2010, Quality of Life Research.

[8]  N. Devlin,et al.  Comprar EQ-5D Value Sets: Inventory, Comparative Review and User Guide | Szende, Agota | 9781402055102 | Springer , 2007 .

[9]  Aki Tsuchiya,et al.  A review of studies mapping (or cross walking) non-preference based measures of health to generic preference-based measures , 2010, The European Journal of Health Economics.

[10]  M. van der Pol,et al.  Mapping the EORTC QLQ C-30 onto the EQ-5D instrument: the potential to estimate QALYs without generic preference data. , 2009, Value in health : the journal of the International Society for Pharmacoeconomics and Outcomes Research.

[11]  Aki Tsuchiya,et al.  A single European currency for EQ-5D health states , 2003, The European Journal of Health Economics, formerly: HEPAC.

[12]  P. Sonneveld,et al.  Partially T-cell-depleted allogeneic stem-cell transplantation for first-line treatment of multiple myeloma: a prospective evaluation of patients treated in the phase III study HOVON 24 MM. , 2003, Journal of clinical oncology : official journal of the American Society of Clinical Oncology.

[13]  Patrick W. Sullivan,et al.  Preference-Based EQ-5D Index Scores for Chronic Conditions in the United States , 2006, Medical decision making : an international journal of the Society for Medical Decision Making.

[14]  James L. Powell,et al.  Semiparametric Censored Regression Models , 2001 .

[15]  Mark Oppe,et al.  EQ-5D value sets : inventory, comparative review, and user guide , 2007 .

[16]  Murtuza Bharmal,et al.  Comparing the EQ-5D and the SF-6D descriptive systems to assess their ceiling effects in the US general population. , 2006, Value in health : the journal of the International Society for Pharmacoeconomics and Outcomes Research.

[17]  M. Piccart,et al.  Health-related quality of life in survivors of locally advanced breast cancer: an international randomised controlled phase III trial. , 2005, The Lancet. Oncology.

[18]  C. Gudex,et al.  Generation of a Danish TTO value set for EQ-5D health states , 2009, Scandinavian journal of public health.

[19]  Nick Kontodimopoulos,et al.  Mapping the cancer-specific EORTC QLQ-C30 to the preference-based EQ-5D, SF-6D, and 15D instruments. , 2009, Value in health : the journal of the International Society for Pharmacoeconomics and Outcomes Research.

[20]  Allan Wailoo,et al.  Tails from the Peak District: adjusted censored mixture models of EQ-5D health state utility values , 2010 .

[21]  M. Neovius,et al.  National EQ-5D tariffs and quality-adjusted life-year estimation: comparison of UK, US and Danish utilities in south Swedish rheumatoid arthritis patients , 2011, Annals of the rheumatic diseases.

[22]  F. Shepherd,et al.  Derivation of Utility Values from European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life-Core 30 Questionnaire Values in Lung Cancer , 2010, Journal of thoracic oncology : official publication of the International Association for the Study of Lung Cancer.

[23]  Oliver Rivero-Arias,et al.  Estimating the Association between SF-12 Responses and EQ-5D Utility Values by Response Mapping , 2006, Medical decision making : an international journal of the Society for Medical Decision Making.

[24]  K. Van Steen,et al.  Health-related quality of life parameters as prognostic factors in a nonmetastatic breast cancer population: an international multicenter study. , 2004, Journal of clinical oncology : official journal of the American Society of Clinical Oncology.

[25]  P. Sonneveld,et al.  CHOP compared with CHOP plus granulocyte colony-stimulating factor in elderly patients with aggressive non-Hodgkin's lymphoma. , 2003, Journal of clinical oncology : official journal of the American Society of Clinical Oncology.