Validity and Reliability of the US National Cancer Institute's Patient-Reported Outcomes Version of the Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (PRO-CTCAE).

Published

Journal Article

To integrate the patient perspective into adverse event reporting, the National Cancer Institute developed a patient-reported outcomes version of the Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (PRO-CTCAE).To assess the construct validity, test-retest reliability, and responsiveness of PRO-CTCAE items.A total of 975 adults with cancer undergoing outpatient chemotherapy and/or radiation therapy enrolled in this questionnaire-based study between January 2011 and February 2012. Eligible participants could read English and had no clinically significant cognitive impairment. They completed PRO-CTCAE items on tablet computers in clinic waiting rooms at 9 US cancer centers and community oncology practices at 2 visits 1 to 6 weeks apart. A subset completed PRO-CTCAE items during an additional visit 1 business day after the first visit.Primary comparators were clinician-reported Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group Performance Status (ECOG PS) and the European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer Core Quality of Life Questionnaire (QLQ-C30).A total of 940 of 975 (96.4%) and 852 of 940 (90.6%) participants completed PRO-CTCAE items at visits 1 and 2, respectively. At least 1 symptom was reported by 938 of 940 (99.8%) participants. Participants' median age was 59 years; 57.3% were female, 32.4% had a high school education or less, and 17.1% had an ECOG PS of 2 to 4. All PRO-CTCAE items had at least 1 correlation in the expected direction with a QLQ-C30 scale (111 of 124, P<.05 for all). Stronger correlations were seen between PRO-CTCAE items and conceptually related QLQ-C30 domains. Scores for 94 of 124 PRO-CTCAE items were higher in the ECOG PS 2 to 4 vs 0 to 1 group (58 of 124, P<.05 for all). Overall, 119 of 124 items met at least 1 construct validity criterion. Test-retest reliability was 0.7 or greater for 36 of 49 prespecified items (median [range] intraclass correlation coefficient, 0.76 [0.53-.96]). Correlations between PRO-CTCAE item changes and corresponding QLQ-C30 scale changes were statistically significant for 27 prespecified items (median [range] r=0.43 [0.10-.56]; all P≤.006).Evidence demonstrates favorable validity, reliability, and responsiveness of PRO-CTCAE in a large, heterogeneous US sample of patients undergoing cancer treatment. Studies evaluating other measurement properties of PRO-CTCAE are under way to inform further development of PRO-CTCAE and its inclusion in cancer trials.

Full Text

Duke Authors

Cited Authors

  • Dueck, AC; Mendoza, TR; Mitchell, SA; Reeve, BB; Castro, KM; Rogak, LJ; Atkinson, TM; Bennett, AV; Denicoff, AM; O'Mara, AM; Li, Y; Clauser, SB; Bryant, DM; Bearden, JD; Gillis, TA; Harness, JK; Siegel, RD; Paul, DB; Cleeland, CS; Schrag, D; Sloan, JA; Abernethy, AP; Bruner, DW; Minasian, LM; Basch, E; National Cancer Institute PRO-CTCAE Study Group,

Published Date

  • November 2015

Published In

Volume / Issue

  • 1 / 8

Start / End Page

  • 1051 - 1059

PubMed ID

  • 26270597

Pubmed Central ID

  • 26270597

Electronic International Standard Serial Number (EISSN)

  • 2374-2445

International Standard Serial Number (ISSN)

  • 2374-2437

Digital Object Identifier (DOI)

  • 10.1001/jamaoncol.2015.2639

Language

  • eng