You are hereEvents
OUTCOME MEASURES IN CANCER: DO DISEASE SPECIFIC INSTRUMENTS OFFER GREATER SENSITIVITY THAN GENERIC INSTRUMENTS?
Disease-specific outcome measures for use in economic evaluations are growing in popularity. Although generic measures are recommended by many health technology assessment agencies, disease-specific measures are attractive as they are intended to be more sensitive to quality of life within a particular condition. Within cancer there are now two preference-based measures, the EORTC-8D and the QLU-C10D. Notably both map responses from the EORTC QLQ-C30, a questionnaire which measures the quality of life of cancer patients. They share some commonalities in the C30 items that they draw from and the analytical approach applied in selecting their item dimensions, but they differ in other areas (the clinical characteristics of the patient group within which they conducted their analysis and the valuation approach). To date, we know little about how they perform relative to generic instruments. This paper compares the EORTC-8D and the QLU-C10D to the EQ-5D-3L to understand the sensitivity of each measure to different sites of cancer and stages of cancer, and the effect of variations in patient functioning on each outcome measure over time.