1 / 22

STATISTICS 542 Intro to Clinical Trials Quality of Life Assessment

STATISTICS 542 Intro to Clinical Trials Quality of Life Assessment. Why Are We Interested in the Quality of Life?. The United States Food and Drug Administration has stated that efficacy with respect to overall survival and/or improvements in QOL might provide the basis for drug approval

Leo
Download Presentation

STATISTICS 542 Intro to Clinical Trials Quality of Life Assessment

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. STATISTICS 542Intro to Clinical TrialsQuality of Life Assessment

  2. Why Are We Interested in the Quality of Life? The United States Food and Drug Administration has stated that efficacy with respect to overall survival and/or improvements in QOL might provide the basis for drug approval “Live longer – feel better” Shaughnessy JA, Wittes RE, Burke G et al. Commentary concerning demonstration of safety and efficacy of investigational anticancer agents in clinical trials. J Clin Oncol 1991; 9:2225-32.

  3. Outline for Quality of Life • General background • Data collection considerations • DeMets’ Perspective

  4. Your Quality of Life How are you feeling this afternoon? Mood Happy Miserable

  5. What is Quality of Life? WHO: “Health is not only the absence of infirmity and disease, but also a state of physical, mental and social well being Multiple domains include: physical, cognitive, emotional and social functioning, pain, sexual functioning, health perceptions, and symptoms such as nausea and fatigue Fundamental principle: quality of life is assessed by the patient

  6. Quality of Life (1) • Definition depends on context Cancer vs. MI vs. hypertension • Some instruments are disease specific • Others are "general health status" instruments • POMS = Profile of Mood • SIP = Sickness Impact Profile • Difficulties with concept • No agreement on definitions • Lack of standardized measures

  7. Quality of Life (2) • One definition (Levine & Croog) Two Components - Functioning 1. Social (Major component) - Get along with family & friends | sense of worth 2. Physical - Perform daily life activities 3. Emotional - Stability and self control 4. Intellectual - Decision making ability - Perceptions 1. Life Satisfaction - Sense of well being 2. Health Status - Compared to others

  8. Factors Which Influence Quality of Life 1. Intervention 2. Disease Process 3. "Labeling" Need a control group - Diagnosis brings on change 4. Concomitant Care 5. Non-related life events (e.g. death in family)

  9. Rationale in Clinical Trials • Quality of life may assess effect of intervention • primary response (treatment less toxic?) • side effects (treatment toxic?) • economic aspects (low risk/cost treatment but benefit high?)

  10. How To Assess Quality of Life • Determine your QoL Objective • Choose an instrument • Reliable, valid, responsive, feasible • Global measures, disease-specific measures, symptom checklists • Select your assessment time points and administration format • Develop an analysis plan

  11. Data Collection Considerations (1) • Mode • Self-administered • glasses, reading skills, fine-motor skills • Personal interview • training/background of interviewer • sensitivity to gender/ethnicity/age • hearing impairment

  12. Data Collection Considerations (2) • Content • instrument validity, sensitivity & specificity • sensitivity of questions • frame of reference for answers (cognitive skills, privacy, cultural background) • Source(s) • participant, family or support network, health care providers

  13. Off the Shelf Instruments • Off-the-shelf instruments • Designed to distinguish sickness from wellness • May not be sensitive to particular aspect of a given trial • May not be validated or "normed" in population being tested • May ask ridiculous questions for trial pop. • May take hours to complete • May impact negatively on compliance

  14. Off-the-Shelf Instruments(Example-NOTT) • Design • Advanced Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease • 24 vs. 12 hours of O2 • Quality of life 10 outcome (No norms in this pop!) • Quality of Life Results  • Patients were sick • Patients got worse • No treatment difference BUT • Mortality ratio was 2/1 (p<.01)

  15. DeMets’ Perspective • Professional "Tailor Made" Instruments • Can be Quick and simple • Standardized but targeted to disease • Must be Validated for trial population • Select subsets of off-the-shelf instruments

  16. DeMets’ Perspective • “Home-made" Instruments • Often designed by a graduate student • Often too long • Often not validated or field tested on your patient population

  17. Quality of Life Instruments • Can be simple and short • Classic examples for • Cancer • Congestive Heart Failure

  18. Quality of Life Analysis • Analytic methods likely to be based on a scoring system • Methods often rank based • Challenging to design/ compute sample size

  19. Bascom Hill

More Related