• Asia Pac J Clin Oncol · Feb 2019

    Multicenter Study Comparative Study Observational Study

    Longitudinal validation and comparison of the Chinese version of the European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life-Chemotherapy-Induced Peripheral Neuropathy Questionnaire (EORTC QLQ-CIPN20) and the Functional Assessment of Cancer-Gynecologic Oncology Group-Neurotoxicity subscale (FACT/GOG-Ntx).

    • Hui Lin Cheng and Alex Molassiotis.
    • School of Nursing, The Hong Kong Polytechnic University, Hung Hom, Hong Kong.
    • Asia Pac J Clin Oncol. 2019 Feb 1; 15 (1): 56-62.

    AimTo validate and compare the Chinese version of the European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life-Chemotherapy-Induced Peripheral Neuropathy Questionnaire (EORTC QLQ-CIPN20) and the Functional Assessment of Cancer-Gynecologic Oncology Group-Neurotoxicity subscale (FACT/GOG-Ntx) for measuring chemotherapy-induced peripheral neuropathy (CIPN) in cancer patients.MethodsPatients were assessed with the EORTC QLQ-CIPN20, FACT/GOG-Ntx, National Cancer Institute-Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (NCI-CTCAE) and World Health Organization criterion of CIPN (WHO-CIPN) from baseline up to 10 assessment points. Internal consistency reliability, convergent validity, discriminant validity and responsiveness of the EORTC QLQ-CIPN20 and FACT/GOG-Ntx were evaluated, respectively. Correlation and regression analysis were used to examine the relationships between these two scales.ResultsInternal reliability coefficients for both scales were above 0.80 across all assessment points. Moderate correlations of the two scales were found with WHO-CIPN (rs  = 0.40-0.44; rs  = -0.42 to -0.46, all P < 0.05) and NCI-CTCAE (rs  = 0.46-0.57; rs  = -0.44 to -0.55, all P < 0.01) at most assessment points. Older patients reported significantly more CIPN symptoms than younger counterparts did (P < 0.05). The hypothesized factor structures of both scales were not confirmed (χ2/df = 3.70-7.01; χ2/df = 2.14-10.43, all P < 0.001). Both scales demonstrated responsiveness with small-to-moderate effect size (r = 0.09-0.46, r = 0.11-0.35). The two scales were highly correlated and were predicted by all domains of each other at specific assessment points (R2  = 0.62-0.87; R2  = 0.76-0.85; respectively, all P < 0.001).ConclusionThe Chinese version of the EORTC QLQ-CIPN20 and FACT/GOG-Ntx demonstrated acceptable reliability, validity and responsiveness and was found comparable in measuring CIPN among Chinese cancer patients at specific assessment points.© 2018 John Wiley & Sons Australia, Ltd.

      Pubmed     Full text   Copy Citation     Plaintext  

      Add institutional full text...

    Notes

     
    Knowledge, pearl, summary or comment to share?
    300 characters remaining
    help        
    You can also include formatting, links, images and footnotes in your notes
    • Simple formatting can be added to notes, such as *italics*, _underline_ or **bold**.
    • Superscript can be denoted by <sup>text</sup> and subscript <sub>text</sub>.
    • Numbered or bulleted lists can be created using either numbered lines 1. 2. 3., hyphens - or asterisks *.
    • Links can be included with: [my link to pubmed](http://pubmed.com)
    • Images can be included with: ![alt text](https://bestmedicaljournal.com/study_graph.jpg "Image Title Text")
    • For footnotes use [^1](This is a footnote.) inline.
    • Or use an inline reference [^1] to refer to a longer footnote elseweher in the document [^1]: This is a long footnote..

    hide…