Mapping the cancer-specific QLQ-C30 onto the generic EQ-5D-5L and SF-6D in colorectal cancer patients

References

• Park H-M, Woo H, Jung SJ, et al. Colorectal cancer incidence in 5 Asian countries by subsite: an analysis of cancer incidence in five continents (1998–2007). Cancer Epidemiol. 2016;45:65–70.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Arani SH, Kerachian M. Rising rates of colorectal cancer among younger Iranians: is diet to blame? Curr Oncol. 2017;24(2):e131.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• van Reenen M, Janssen B. EQ-5D-5L user guide: basic information on how to use the EQ-5D-5L instrument. Rotterdam: EuroQol Research Foundation; 2015.
   Google Scholar
• Horsman J, Furlong W, Feeny D, et al. The health utilities index (HUI): concepts, measurement properties and applications. Health Qual Life Outcomes. 2003;1:1–13.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Busija L, Pausenberger E, Haines TP, et al. Adult measures of general health and health-related quality of life: medical outcomes study short form 36-item (SF-36) and short form 12-item (SF-12) health surveys, Nottingham health profile (NHP), sickness impact profile (SIP), medical outcomes study short form 6D (SF-6D), health utilities index mark 3 (HUI3), quality of well-being scale (QWB), and assessment of quality of life (AQOL). Arthritis Care Res (Hoboken). 2011;63:S11.
   Google Scholar
• Brazier J, Roberts J, Deverill M. The estimation of a preference-based measure of health from the SF-36. J Health Econ. 2002;21:271–292.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Marriott E-R, van Hazel G, Gibbs P, et al. Mapping EORTC-QLQ-C30 to EQ-5D-3L in patients with colorectal cancer. J Med Econ. 2017;20(2):193–199.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Aaronson NK, Ahmedzai S, Bergman B, et al. The European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer QLQ-C30: a quality-of-life instrument for use in international clinical trials in oncology. JNCI: J Natl Cancer Inst. 1993;85(5):365–376.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Health Economics Research Centre (HERC) database of mapping studies. University of Oxford. [ cited 2017 Jan]. Available from: http://www.herc.ox.ac.uk/downLoAds/herc-database-of-mapping-studies. .
   Google Scholar
• Round J. Once bitten twice shy: thinking carefully before adopting the EQ-5D-5L. PharmacoEconomics. 2018;36(6):641-642.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Alava MH, Wailoo A, Grimm S, et al. EQ-5D-5L versus EQ-5D-3L: the impact on cost effectiveness in the United Kingdom. Value in Health. 2018;21(1):49–56.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wang P, Luo N, Tai E, et al. The EQ-5D-5L is more discriminative than the EQ-5D-3L in patients with diabetes in Singapore. Value in Health Regional Issues. 2016;9:57–62.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Cheung YB, Luo N, Ng R, et al. Mapping the functional assessment of cancer therapy-breast (FACT-B) to the 5-level EuroQoL group’s 5-dimension questionnaire (EQ-5D-5L) utility index in a multi-ethnic Asian population. Health Qual Life Outcomes. 2014;12(1):180.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Khan I, Morris S, Pashayan N, et al. Comparing the mapping between EQ-5D-5L, EQ-5D-3L and the EORTC-QLQ-C30 in non-small cell lung cancer patients. Health Qual Life Outcomes. 2016;14(1):60.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kontodimopoulos N, Aletras VH, Paliouras D, et al. Mapping the cancer-specific EORTC QLQ-C30 to the preference-based EQ-5D, SF-6D, and 15D instruments. Value in Health. 2009;12(8):1151–1157.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Teckle P, McTaggart-Cowan H, Van der Hoek K, et al. Mapping the FACT-G cancer-specific quality of life instrument to the EQ-5D and SF-6D. Health Qual Life Outcomes. 2013;11(1):203.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• EuroQol Research Foundation. EQ-5D-5L | about. [ cited 2017 Aug 13]. Available from: https://euroqol.org/eq-5d-instruments/eq-5d-5l-about/
   Google Scholar
• Motamed N, Ayatollahi A, Zare N, et al. Validity and reliability of the Persian translation of the SF-36 version 2 questionnaire.East Mediterr Health J. 2005;11(3):349-357
   Google Scholar
• Scott NW, Fayers P, Aaronson NK, et al. EORTC QLQ-C30 reference values manual.Brussels, Belgium: EORTC Quality of Life Group Publications; 2008.
   Google Scholar
• Montazeri A, Harirchi I, Vahdani M, et al. The European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Questionnaire (EORTC QLQ-C30): translation and validation study of the Iranian version. Supportive Care in Cancer. 1999;7(6):400–406.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dakin H, Abel L, Burns R, et al. Review and critical appraisal of studies mapping from quality of life or clinical measures to EQ-5D: an online database and application of the MAPS statement. Health Qual Life Outcomes. 2018;16(1):31.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Chen G, Khan MA, Iezzi A, et al. Mapping between 6 multiattribute utility instruments. Med Decis Making. 2016;36(2):160–175.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hawton A, Green C, Telford C, et al. Using the multiple sclerosis impact scale to estimate health state utility values: mapping from the MSIS-29, version 2, to the EQ-5D and the SF-6D. Value in Health. 2012;15(8):1084–1091.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Yousefi M, Sheikhrobat YB, Najafi S, et al. Mapping catquest scores onto EQ-5D utility values in patients with cataract disease. Iran Red Crescent Med J. 2017;19(5):1-7.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cheung YB, Thumboo J, Gao F, et al. Mapping the English and Chinese versions of the functional assessment of cancer therapy–general to the EQ-5D utility index. Value in Health. 2009;12(2):371–376.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• McKenzie L. Van der Pol M. Mapping the EORTC QLQ C-30 onto the EQ-5D instrument: the potential to estimate QALYs without generic preference data. Value in Health. 2009;12(1):167–171.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Proskorovsky I, Lewis P, Williams CD, et al. Mapping EORTC QLQ-C30 and QLQ-MY20 to EQ-5D in patients with multiple myeloma. Health Qual Life Outcomes. 2014;12(1):35.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bland JM, Altman DG. Measuring agreement in method comparison studies. Stat Methods Med Res. 1999;8(2):135–160.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Brazier JE, Yang Y, Tsuchiya A, et al. A review of studies mapping (or cross walking) non-preference based measures of health to generic preference-based measures. The European Journal of Health Economics. 2010;11(2):215–225.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Walters SJ, Brazier JE. Comparison of the minimally important difference for two health state utility measures: EQ-5D and SF-6D. Quality of Life Research. 2005;14(6):1523–1532.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wong CK, Lam CL, Rowen D, et al. Mapping the functional assessment of cancer therapy-general or-colorectal to SF-6D in Chinese patients with colorectal neoplasm. Value in Health. 2012;15(3):495–503.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wong CKH, Lam CL, Wan Y, et al. Predicting SF-6D from the European organization for treatment and research of cancer quality of life questionnaire scores in patients with colorectal cancer. Value in Health. 2013;16(2):373–384.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Longworth L, Rowen D. Mapping to obtain EQ-5D utility values for use in NICE health technology assessments. Value in Health. 2013;16(1):202–210.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• McTaggart-Cowan H, Teckle P, Peacock S. Mapping utilities from cancer-specific health-related quality of life instruments: a review of the literature. Expert Rev Pharmacoecon Outcomes Res. 2013;13(6):753–765.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Crott R, Briggs A. Mapping the QLQ-C30 quality of life cancer questionnaire to EQ-5D patient preferences. The European Journal of Health Economics. 2010;11(4):427–434.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kim SH, Jo M-W, Kim H-J, et al. Mapping EORTC QLQ-C30 onto EQ-5D for the assessment of cancer patients. Health Qual Life Outcomes. 2012;10(1):151.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sauerland S, Weiner S, Dolezalova K, et al. Mapping utility scores from a disease-specific quality-of-life measure in bariatric surgery patients. Value in Health. 2009;12(2):364–370.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Koo TK, Li MY. A guideline of selecting and reporting intraclass correlation coefficients for reliability research. J Chiropr Med. 2016;15(2):155–163.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Luo N, Johnson JA, Shaw JW, et al. A comparison of EQ-5D index scores derived from the US and UK population-based scoring functions. Med Decis Making. 2007;27(3):321–326.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar