Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39325297›Full record

ArticlePharmacoEconomics2024

Valuation of the EORTC Quality of Life Utility Core 10 Dimensions (QLU-C10D) in a Multi-ethnic Asian Setting: How Does Having Cancer Matter?

Mihir Gandhi, Ravindran Kanesvaran, Mohamad Farid Bin Harunal Rashid, Dawn Qingqing Chong, Wen-Yee Chay, Rachel Lee-Yin Tan, Richard Norman, Madeleine T King, Nan Luo

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in PharmacoEconomics, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

4 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Developing a patient-based utility value set for the EORTC QLU-C10D using the OPUF method in Chinese cancer patients.Quality of life research : an international journal of quality of life aspects of treatment, care and rehabilitation · 2025
    Article
  3. Psychometric testing of two respiratory bolt-on items to EQ-5D-5L in patients with obstructive airway diseases.Quality of life research : an international journal of quality of life aspects of treatment, care and rehabilitation · 2025
    Article
  4. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

9 authors.

Mihir GandhiBiostatistics, Singapore Clinical Research Institute, Consortium for Clinical Research and Innovation Singapore, Singapore, Singapore. mihir.gandhi@duke-nus.edu.sg.ORCID 0000-0002-8902-2710
Ravindran KanesvaranDivision of Medical Oncology, National Cancer Centre Singapore, Singapore, Singapore.ORCID 0000-0002-2351-881X
Mohamad Farid Bin Harunal RashidDivision of Medical Oncology, National Cancer Centre Singapore, Singapore, Singapore.
Dawn Qingqing ChongDivision of Medical Oncology, National Cancer Centre Singapore, Singapore, Singapore.
Wen-Yee ChayDivision of Medical Oncology, National Cancer Centre Singapore, Singapore, Singapore.
Rachel Lee-Yin TanSaw Swee Hock School of Public Health, National University of Singapore, Singapore, Singapore.ORCID 0000-0002-4610-1195
Richard NormanSchool of Population Health, Curtin University, Perth, Australia.ORCID 0000-0002-3112-3893
Madeleine T KingSchool of Psychology, The University of Sydney, Sydney, Australia.
Nan LuoSaw Swee Hock School of Public Health, National University of Singapore, Singapore, Singapore.ORCID 0000-0001-7980-6979

Funding

National Medical Research Council Singapore NMRC/HSRG/0084/2017
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectivesThe aim of the study was to develop and compare utility value sets for the EORTC QLU-C10D, a cancer-specific utility instrument based on the EORTC QLQ-C30, using the preferences of the general public and cancer patients in Singapore, and to assess their measurement properties.

methodsA total of 600 individuals from the general public were recruited using a multi-stage random sampling, along with 626 cancer patients with clinically confirmed diagnoses from outpatient clinics of the largest tertiary cancer hospital. Each participant valued 16 pairs of EORTC QLU-C10D health states using a discrete choice experiment (DCE). Conditional logit models were used to analyze the DCE responses of the general public and cancer patients separately. Utility values were assessed for known-group validity and responsiveness in the cancer patients by comparing mean values across subgroups of patients and calculating standardized response means using longitudinal EORTC QLQ-C30 data, respectively.

resultsPhysical functioning and pain had the most impact on utility for both cancer patients and general public groups. Worst health state utility values were -0.821 and -0.463 for the general public and cancer patients, respectively. Cancer patients' values were lower for mild-to-moderate health states but higher for moderately-to-highly impaired states compared with the general public's values. Both value sets discriminated between patients with differing characteristics and responded equally well to improved health status, but the cancer patients' value set was slightly more responsive to deteriorated health.

conclusionsEORTC QLU-C10D value sets based on the preferences of the Singaporean general public and cancer patients exhibited differences in values but similar psychometric properties.

Indexed as

NeoplasmsQuality of LifeAdultAgedAsian PeopleChoice BehaviorFemaleHealth StatusHumansLogistic ModelsMaleMiddle AgedPainPatient PreferenceSingaporeSurveys and Questionnaires

Identifiers

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.