Giving 'Meaning' To Measurement In Prostate Cancer

Main Category: Prostate / Prostate Cancer
Also Included In: Cancer / Oncology
Article Date: 31 Jul 2008 - 0:00 PDT

email to a friend   printer friendly   opinions  

Can scores of patient-reported outcome (PRO) measures be made more meaningful to patients and physicians?

For years patients, physicians, and policy makers have questioned the usefulness of scores generated by PRO measures. Unlike 'objective' biological markers, scores of 'subjective' assessments such as quality of life are often poorly understood. Specifying score differences that correspond to 'real' change in patient health status can facilitate interpretation of PRO scores, ultimately enhancing the utility of PROs.

A recent study published in Value in Health, "Estimating clinically meaningful changes for the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-Prostate," provides point-value estimates of clinically meaningful change for five endpoints of a commonly used measure of quality of life in prostate cancer. The study was co-authored by David Cella, Michael Nichol, David Eton, Joel Nelson, and Parvez Mulani.

While such estimates can be valuable aids in the design of clinical trials and the interpretation of trial results, the study's lead author, Dr. David Cella, believes that there are also important practical benefits of knowing how much score change "counts." He states that, "Estimates of clinically meaningful change provide practical benchmarks for physicians interested in integrating PRO measures into practice as they specify precisely what score changes on a PRO measure correspond to actual change in patient health status."

Dr. Cella directs the Center on Outcomes, Research, and Education (CORE) at Evanston Northwestern Healthcare in Evanston, Illinois. Founded in 1997, CORE's vision is to champion the integration of the patient's voice into outcomes research to improve health and quality of life.

Value in Health (ISSN 1098-3015) publishes papers, concepts, and ideas that advance the field of pharmacoeconomics and outcomes research and help health care leaders to make decisions that are solidly evidence-based. The journal is published bi-monthly and has a regular readership of over 3,000 clinicians, decision-makers, and researchers worldwide.

ISPOR is a nonprofit, international organization that strives to translate pharmacoeconomics and outcomes research into practice to ensure that society allocates scarce health care resources wisely, fairly, and efficiently.

Value in Health Volume 12 Issue 1 - January/February 2009
ABSTRACT

http://www.enh.org/core
http://www.ispor.org

• Additional
• References
• Citations