ASSOCIATION BETWEEN EORTC QLQ-C30 SUMMARY SCORE AND GLOBAL HEALTH STATUS IN CANCER PATIENTS RECEIVING CHEMOTHERAPY: A PROSPECTIVE LONGITUDINAL STUDY
Author(s)
NEELANSHI SINGAL, Pharm.D1, Pramil Tiwari, Prof, PhD2, Kislay Dimri, Prof, MBBS,MD3, Sanjay D'cruz, Prof, MBBS,MD,DM4.
1Student, NIPER, S.A.S. Nagar,Punjab, India, 2Pharmacy Practice, NIPER, SAS NAGAR,Punjab, India, 3Department of Radiation Oncology, Government Medical College and Hospital, Chandigarh, India, 4Department of General Medicine, Government Medical College and Hospital, Chandigarh, India.
1Student, NIPER, S.A.S. Nagar,Punjab, India, 2Pharmacy Practice, NIPER, SAS NAGAR,Punjab, India, 3Department of Radiation Oncology, Government Medical College and Hospital, Chandigarh, India, 4Department of General Medicine, Government Medical College and Hospital, Chandigarh, India.
OBJECTIVES: To assess whether the EORTC QLQ-C30v3 Summary Score reflects overall health-related quality of life by examining its association with Global Health Status (GHS) before and after chemotherapy.
METHODS: A prospective longitudinal observational study was conducted among adult cancer patients receiving chemotherapy at a tertiary care teaching hospital in India. Patients aged ≥18 years with a confirmed cancer diagnosis and planned chemotherapy were enrolled after providing written informed consent. Ethical approval was obtained from the institutional ethics committees before study initiation. HRQoL was assessed using the EORTC QLQ-C30 at baseline and six months. Of 350 enrolled patients, 336 completed follow-up. Summary Score and GHS were calculated according to EORTC guidelines. Changes over time were evaluated using paired t-tests. Pearson correlation shows associations between the Summary Score and GHS, while multivariable linear regression was performed to identify independent predictors of GHS. Statistical analyses were conducted using IBM SPSS Statistics version 26.0, with p<0.05 considered statistically significant.
RESULTS: Among 336 patients (median age 55 years; 59.8% female), 75.3% had stage III-IV disease, 40.5% had metastatic cancer, and breast cancer was the most common malignancy (29.2%). GHS improved significantly from 61.66±17.91 at baseline to 64.81±18.87 at six months (mean change=+3.15; p=0.001; Cohen’s d=0.18). In contrast, the EORTC QLQ-C30 Summary Score declined from 81.3±12.6 to 77.5±14.0 (mean change=-3.74; p<0.001; Cohen’s d=0.38). Moderate positive correlations were observed between Summary Score and GHS at baseline (r=0.440, p<0.001) and follow-up (r=0.588, p<0.001). Multivariable regression identified physical functioning (β=0.251, p<0.001) and cognitive functioning (β=0.222, p=0.002) as significant independent predictors of GHS, explaining 40.2% of the variance (R²=0.402)after chemotherapy.
CONCLUSIONS: The EORTC QLQ-C30v3 Summary Score and Global Health Status provide complementary information on health-related quality of life. Despite a moderate association, their differing longitudinal patterns suggest that both measures should be interpreted together when evaluating patient-reported outcomes in cancer patients receiving chemotherapy.
METHODS: A prospective longitudinal observational study was conducted among adult cancer patients receiving chemotherapy at a tertiary care teaching hospital in India. Patients aged ≥18 years with a confirmed cancer diagnosis and planned chemotherapy were enrolled after providing written informed consent. Ethical approval was obtained from the institutional ethics committees before study initiation. HRQoL was assessed using the EORTC QLQ-C30 at baseline and six months. Of 350 enrolled patients, 336 completed follow-up. Summary Score and GHS were calculated according to EORTC guidelines. Changes over time were evaluated using paired t-tests. Pearson correlation shows associations between the Summary Score and GHS, while multivariable linear regression was performed to identify independent predictors of GHS. Statistical analyses were conducted using IBM SPSS Statistics version 26.0, with p<0.05 considered statistically significant.
RESULTS: Among 336 patients (median age 55 years; 59.8% female), 75.3% had stage III-IV disease, 40.5% had metastatic cancer, and breast cancer was the most common malignancy (29.2%). GHS improved significantly from 61.66±17.91 at baseline to 64.81±18.87 at six months (mean change=+3.15; p=0.001; Cohen’s d=0.18). In contrast, the EORTC QLQ-C30 Summary Score declined from 81.3±12.6 to 77.5±14.0 (mean change=-3.74; p<0.001; Cohen’s d=0.38). Moderate positive correlations were observed between Summary Score and GHS at baseline (r=0.440, p<0.001) and follow-up (r=0.588, p<0.001). Multivariable regression identified physical functioning (β=0.251, p<0.001) and cognitive functioning (β=0.222, p=0.002) as significant independent predictors of GHS, explaining 40.2% of the variance (R²=0.402)after chemotherapy.
CONCLUSIONS: The EORTC QLQ-C30v3 Summary Score and Global Health Status provide complementary information on health-related quality of life. Despite a moderate association, their differing longitudinal patterns suggest that both measures should be interpreted together when evaluating patient-reported outcomes in cancer patients receiving chemotherapy.
Conference/Value in Health Info
2026-11, ISPOR Europe 2026, Vienna, Austria
Value in Health, Volume 29, Issue 12S
Code
PCR80
Topic
Clinical Outcomes, Patient-Centered Research, Real World Data & Information Systems
Topic Subcategory
Patient-reported Outcomes & Quality of Life Outcomes
Disease
Oncology