General Spanish population normative data analysis for the EORTC QLQ-C30 by sex, age, and health condition

Abstract

Purpose General population normative data for the European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) QLQ-C30 questionnaire facilitates interpretation of data assessed from cancer patients. This study aims to present normative data of the general Spanish population. Methods/patients Data were obtained from a prior larger study collecting EORTC QLQ-C30 norm data across 15 countries. Data were stratified by sex and age groups (18–39, 40–49, 50–59, 60–69 and > 70 years). Sex and age distribution were weighted according to population distribution statistics. Sex- and age-specific normative values were analysed separately, as were participants with versus those without health conditions. Multiple linear regression was used to estimate the association of each of the EORTC QLQ-C30 scales with the determinants age, sex, sex-by-age interaction term, and health condition. Results In total, 1,165 Spanish individuals participated in the study. Differences were found by sex and age. The largest sex-related differences were seen in fatigue, emotional functioning, and global QOL (Quality of Life), favouring men. The largest age differences were seen in emotional functioning, insomnia, and pain, with middle-aged groups having the worst scores. Those > 60 years old scored better than those < 60 years old on all scales except for physical functioning. Participants with no health conditions scored better in all QLQ-C30 domains. Conclusions The present study highlights differences in HRQOL between specific sex/age strata and especially between people with and without a health condition in the general Spanish population. These factors must be considered when comparing general population HRQOL data with that of cancer patients.

Health-Related Quality of Life of Patients with Metastatic Pancreatic Cancer: A Systematic Literature Review

“…For the general population, a total of 19 publications reporting HRQoL data from various geographical regions were identified from non-systematic searches. HRQoL was assessed using QLQ-C30 in 10 publications (15 European countries, Canada, the USA, Australia, and Colombia), [42][43][44][45][46][47][48][49][50][51] FACT-G in three publications (Sweden and the USA), [52][53][54] and the 5-dimension, 3-level EuroQoL questionnaire and EQ-5D-5L in six publications (Canada, the USA, Australia, Brazil, Hong Kong, and Vietnam). [55][56][57][58][59][60] Supplementary Table 7 summarizes publications reporting HRQoL data for the general population.…”

“…Based on the results of 15 studies that measured mean baseline QLQ-C30 global health status (GHS) for patients with mPaC, individuals with newly diagnosed disease had lower mean QLQ-C30 GHS scores (range, 41.7-63.2) [14][15][16]20,24,25,35,36 than those reported for the general population (range, 66.1-77.1). [42][43][44][45][46][47][48][49][50][51] Among studies assessing QLQ-C30 GHS for previously treated patients, 13,16,19,26,29,32,37,39 some found mean scores that were lower than those of the general population (43.8-58.3 vs 66.1-77.1) and some that were similar to those of the general population (70.4-75.0 vs 66.1-77.1, Figure 2). Mean baseline scores for all functional scales (physical, emotional, role, social, and cognitive function) of newly diagnosed patients, when reported, [14][15][16]20,24,25,35,36 were also generally lower than those of the general population [42][43][44][45][46][47][48][49][50]…”

“…[42][43][44][45][46][47][48][49][50][51] Among studies assessing QLQ-C30 GHS for previously treated patients, 13,16,19,26,29,32,37,39 some found mean scores that were lower than those of the general population (43.8-58.3 vs 66.1-77.1) and some that were similar to those of the general population (70.4-75.0 vs 66.1-77.1, Figure 2). Mean baseline scores for all functional scales (physical, emotional, role, social, and cognitive function) of newly diagnosed patients, when reported, [14][15][16]20,24,25,35,36 were also generally lower than those of the general population [42][43][44][45][46][47][48][49][50][51] (Figure 2). Scales showing the greatest decrease in function compared with the general population were emotional (41.7-74.4 vs 73.9-87.6), role ( 2).…”

Quality of life and financial toxicity after (chemo)radiation therapy in head and neck cancer: are there any sex- or gender-related differences?

“…22 Reference data from the European Organization for the Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Questionnaire (EORTC QLQ-C30) in different samples from the general population around the world agreed that women reported more symptoms, lower functional status and lower global QoL than men. 23-25…”

“…22 Reference data from the European Organization for the Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Questionnaire (EORTC QLQ-C30) in different samples from the general population around the world agreed that women reported more symptoms, lower functional status and lower global QoL than men. [23][24][25] Little is known about sex and gender differences in RT-related symptoms and QoL levels in HNSCC. Most data are based on descriptive studies that examined sex and gender differences at the time of HNSCC diagnosis, during and after receiving standard treatment.…”