Jennifer Le-Rademacher1,2, Rahul Kanwar3, Drew Seisler1, Deirdre R Pachman2,3, Rui Qin1,4, Alexej Abyzov1, Kathryn J Ruddy2,3, Michaela S Banck2,3, Ellen M Lavoie Smith5, Susan G Dorsey6, Neil K Aaronson7, Jeff Sloan1,2, Charles L Loprinzi8,9, Andreas S Beutler10,11. 1. Alliance Statistics and Data Center, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN, USA. 2. Mayo Clinic Cancer Center, Mayo Clinic, 200 First Street SW, Rochester, MN, 55905, USA. 3. Department of Oncology, Mayo Clinic, 200 First Street SW, Rochester, MN, 55905, USA. 4. Regeneron Pharmaceuticals, Basking Ridge, NJ, USA. 5. Department of Health Behavior and Biological Sciences, School of Nursing, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI, USA. 6. Pain and Translational Symptom Science Department, School of Nursing, University of Maryland, Baltimore, MD, USA. 7. Division of Psychosocial Research and Epidemiology, Netherlands Cancer Institute, Department of Clinical Psychology, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, Netherlands. 8. Mayo Clinic Cancer Center, Mayo Clinic, 200 First Street SW, Rochester, MN, 55905, USA. cloprinzi@mayo.edu. 9. Department of Oncology, Mayo Clinic, 200 First Street SW, Rochester, MN, 55905, USA. cloprinzi@mayo.edu. 10. Mayo Clinic Cancer Center, Mayo Clinic, 200 First Street SW, Rochester, MN, 55905, USA. beutler.andreas@mayo.edu. 11. Department of Oncology, Mayo Clinic, 200 First Street SW, Rochester, MN, 55905, USA. beutler.andreas@mayo.edu.
Abstract
PURPOSE: Clinical practice guidelines on chemotherapy-induced peripheral neuropathy (CIPN) use the NCI Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (CTCAE), while recent clinical trials employ a potentially superior measure, the European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Questionnaire-CIPN twenty-item scale (QLQ-CIPN20), a patient-reported outcome (PRO). Practitioners and researchers lack guidance, regarding how QLQ-CIPN20 results relate to the traditional CTCAE during the serial assessment of patients undergoing chemotherapy. METHODS: Two large CIPN clinical trial datasets (538 patients) pairing QLQ-CIPN20 and CTCAE outcomes were analyzed using a multivariable linear mixed model with QLQ-CIPN20 score as the outcome variable, CTCAE grade as the main effect, and patient as random effect (accounting for internal correlation of serial measures). RESULTS: The association between QLQ-CIPN20 scores and CTCAE grades was strong (p < 0.0001), whereby patients with higher CTCAE grade had worse QLQ-CIPN20 scores. Some variation of QLQ-CIPN20 scores was observed based on drug, treatment, and cycle. While there was a marked difference in the mean QLQ-CIPN20 scores between CTCAE grades, the ranges of QLQ-CIPN20 scores within each CTCAE grade were large, leading to large overlap in CIPN20 scores across CTCAE grades. CONCLUSIONS: A strong positive association of QLQ-CIPN20 scores and CTCAE grade provides evidence of convergent validity as well as practical guidance, as to how to quantitatively interpret QLQ-CIPN20 scores at the study level in terms of the traditional CTCAE. The present results also highlight an important clinical caveat, specifically, that conversion of a specific QLQ-CIPN20 score to a specific CTCAE score may not be reliable at the level of an individual patient.
PURPOSE: Clinical practice guidelines on chemotherapy-induced peripheral neuropathy (CIPN) use the NCI Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (CTCAE), while recent clinical trials employ a potentially superior measure, the European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Questionnaire-CIPN twenty-item scale (QLQ-CIPN20), a patient-reported outcome (PRO). Practitioners and researchers lack guidance, regarding how QLQ-CIPN20 results relate to the traditional CTCAE during the serial assessment of patients undergoing chemotherapy. METHODS: Two large CIPN clinical trial datasets (538 patients) pairing QLQ-CIPN20 and CTCAE outcomes were analyzed using a multivariable linear mixed model with QLQ-CIPN20 score as the outcome variable, CTCAE grade as the main effect, and patient as random effect (accounting for internal correlation of serial measures). RESULTS: The association between QLQ-CIPN20 scores and CTCAE grades was strong (p < 0.0001), whereby patients with higher CTCAE grade had worse QLQ-CIPN20 scores. Some variation of QLQ-CIPN20 scores was observed based on drug, treatment, and cycle. While there was a marked difference in the mean QLQ-CIPN20 scores between CTCAE grades, the ranges of QLQ-CIPN20 scores within each CTCAE grade were large, leading to large overlap in CIPN20 scores across CTCAE grades. CONCLUSIONS: A strong positive association of QLQ-CIPN20 scores and CTCAE grade provides evidence of convergent validity as well as practical guidance, as to how to quantitatively interpret QLQ-CIPN20 scores at the study level in terms of the traditional CTCAE. The present results also highlight an important clinical caveat, specifically, that conversion of a specific QLQ-CIPN20 score to a specific CTCAE score may not be reliable at the level of an individual patient.
Authors: Ellen M Lavoie Smith; Debra L Barton; Rui Qin; Preston D Steen; Neil K Aaronson; Charles L Loprinzi Journal: Qual Life Res Date: 2013-03-30 Impact factor: 4.147
Authors: Alexis D Leal; Rui Qin; Pamela J Atherton; Paul Haluska; Robert J Behrens; Charles H Tiber; Patanit Watanaboonyakhet; Matthias Weiss; Paul T Adams; Travis J Dockter; Charles L Loprinzi Journal: Cancer Date: 2014-03-11 Impact factor: 6.860
Authors: Floortje Mols; Tonneke Beijers; Gerard Vreugdenhil; Lonneke van de Poll-Franse Journal: Support Care Cancer Date: 2014-05-01 Impact factor: 3.603
Authors: Charles L Loprinzi; Brandi N Reeves; Shaker R Dakhil; Jeff A Sloan; Sherry L Wolf; Kelli N Burger; Arif Kamal; Nguyet A Le-Lindqwister; Gamini S Soori; Anthony J Jaslowski; Paul J Novotny; Daniel H Lachance Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2011-03-07 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: Debra L Barton; Edward J Wos; Rui Qin; Bassam I Mattar; Nathan Benjamin Green; Keith S Lanier; James Dewitt Bearden; John W Kugler; Kay L Hoff; Pavan S Reddy; Kendrith M Rowland; Mike Riepl; Bradley Christensen; Charles L Loprinzi Journal: Support Care Cancer Date: 2010-05-25 Impact factor: 3.603
Authors: Daniel L Hertz; Kelley M Kidwell; Kiran Vangipuram; Feng Li; Manjunath P Pai; Monika Burness; Jennifer J Griggs; Anne F Schott; Catherine Van Poznak; Daniel F Hayes; Ellen M Lavoie Smith; N Lynn Henry Journal: Clin Cancer Res Date: 2018-04-27 Impact factor: 12.531
Authors: Ellen M Lavoie Smith; Noah Zanville; Grace Kanzawa-Lee; Clare Donohoe; Celia Bridges; Charles Loprinzi; Jennifer Le-Rademacher; James J Yang Journal: Support Care Cancer Date: 2018-11-20 Impact factor: 3.603
Authors: Yihan Sun; Jae Hyun Kim; Kiran Vangipuram; Daniel F Hayes; Ellen M L Smith; Larisa Yeomans; N Lynn Henry; Kathleen A Stringer; Daniel L Hertz Journal: Breast Cancer Res Treat Date: 2018-06-26 Impact factor: 4.872
Authors: Marie José Kersten; Karima Amaador; Monique C Minnema; Josephine M I Vos; Kazem Nasserinejad; Marcel Kap; Efstathios Kastritis; Maria Gavriatopoulou; Willem Kraan; Martine E D Chamuleau; Dries Deeren; Lidwine W Tick; Jeanette K Doorduijn; Fritz Offner; Lara H Böhmer; Roberto D Liu; Steven T Pals; Meletios A Dimopoulos Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2021-08-13 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: Marie Selvy; Nicolas Kerckhove; Bruno Pereira; Fantine Barreau; Daniel Nguyen; Jérôme Busserolles; Fabrice Giraudet; Aurélie Cabrespine; Carine Chaleteix; Martin Soubrier; Jacques-Olivier Bay; Richard Lemal; David Balayssac Journal: Front Pharmacol Date: 2021-04-22 Impact factor: 5.810
Authors: Hsing-Wei Hung; Chien-Ying Liu; Hsiu-Fang Chen; Chun-Chu Chang; Shu-Ching Chen Journal: Int J Environ Res Public Health Date: 2021-05-26 Impact factor: 3.390