Content validation of the FACT-Br with patients and health-care professionals to assess quality of life in patients with brain metastases

Psychometric validation of the Brain Symptom and Impact Questionnaire (BASIQ) version 1.0 to assess quality of life in patients with brain metastases

OBJECTIVE

To test the reliability, clinical and psychometric validity of the Brain Symptom and Impact Questionnaire (BASIQ) in patients with brain metastases.

METHODS

Brain metastases patients were interviewed using the BASIQ, Functional Assessment of Cancer-Brain (FACT-Br) and FACT-General (FACT-G) at baseline, with a follow-up assessment at 1 month.

RESULTS

Forty patients had complete one data and the median age was 64 years. Patients with higher KPS, ECOG of 2, primary breast cancer, or >3 brain metastases, scored higher on the symptom scale of the BASIQ. All subscales showed no significant change in patient symptoms from baseline to follow-up.

CONCLUSION

This study supports that the reliability, clinical and psychometric validity of BASIQ to be used in brain metastases patients.

Validation of the Brain Symptom and Impact Questionnaire (BASIQ) to assess symptom and quality of life in brain metastases

OBJECTIVE

To validate the Brain Symptom and Impact Questionnaire (BASIQ) version 1.0 for brain metastases.

METHODS

Patients with brain metastases and their healthcare professionals (HCPs) assessed the relevance of the BASIQ on a 0-10 scale with 10 as extremely relevant.

RESULTS

A total of 52 patients and 20 HCPs participated in this study. In total, 95% of HCPs and 85% of patients found all items relevant. Balance and walking ability were rated relevant by 100% of patients and HCPs. Headache, nausea, energy, memory and ability to do housework were also rated relevant by 100% of HCPs. Over 95% of patients determined the items of ability to do housework, tiredness, energy, vision, memory and putting ideas into words as relevant. There were no items rated below 7 by patients or below 5 by HCPs.

CONCLUSION

This study indicates that BASIQ version 1.0 has valid content items encompassing disease-related symptom and impact on daily living.

Comparison of the EORTC QLQ-BN20 and the FACT-Br quality of life questionnaires for patients with primary brain cancers: a literature review

PURPOSE

This review compares and contrasts the development, validity, and characteristics of two quality of life (QOL) assessment tools used in patients with primary brain cancers: the European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Questionnaire Brain Cancer Module (EORTC QLQ-BN20) and the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-Brain (FACT-Br).

METHODS

A literature search was conducted using the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (June 2013), Ovid EMBASE (1947 to 2013, week 27), and Ovid MEDLINE (1946 to July 2013, week 1) to identify studies that discussed the development, characteristics, validity, and reliability of the EORTC QLQ-BN20 or the FACT-Br.

RESULTS

The EORTC QLQ-BN20 consists of 20 items that assess future uncertainty, visual disorder, motor dysfunction, and communication deficit. Items are presented as questions on a scale ranging from 1 = “not at all” to 4 = “very much.” Reliability and validity testing of the QLQ-BN20 revealed a Cronbach’s alpha coefficient that ranged from 0.71 to 0.90. The FACT-Br consists of 23 items that assess general well-being and brain cancer-specific concerns that include concentration, memory, seizures, eyesight, hearing, speech, personality, expression of thoughts, weakness, coordination, and headaches. These items are presented as statements on a scale ranging from 0 = “not applicable” to 4 = “extremely relevant.” The FACT-Br underwent validity as well as test-retest reliability testing with 101 and 46 patients, respectively. Validity testing found low to moderate correlation with the FACT-G questionnaire, while reliability testing for the brain subscale revealed an acceptable correlation coefficient (r = 0.66; p < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

The QLQ-BN20 and the FACT-Br are both valid and reliable tools that have been used extensively in the primary brain cancer population. Choice between the two tools should consider each instrument’s individual strengths and weaknesses.