Quality of life assessment in patients with nonmelanoma skin cancer - psychometric validation of the EORTC QLQ-C30 questionnaire

The Dermatology Life Quality Index (DLQI) used as the benchmark in validation of 101 quality-of-life instruments: A systematic review

BACKGROUND

The validation of psychometric measures requires use of other established and standardized validated measures. The Dermatology Life Quality Index (DLQI) is the most widely used tool to measure the burden of skin diseases and assess effectiveness of interventions based on patients' perspective.

OBJECTIVES

The objective of this study was to systematically analyse peer-reviewed publications describing use of the DLQI in validation of other patient-reported outcome (PRO) and quality-of-life (QoL) measures.

METHODS

Seven databases were searched for papers published between January 1994 and December 2022 for articles containing data using DLQI in the validation of other PRO/QoL measures. The methodology followed PRISMA guidelines. The protocol was prospectively registered on PROSPERO.

RESULTS

Of 1717 screened publications, 122 articles including 30,727 patients from 34 different countries with 41 diseases met the inclusion criteria. The DLQI was used in validation of 101 measures: 80 dermatology-specific QoL measures, mostly disease-specific, and 21 generic measures. Of these studies, 47 were cross-cultural adaptations, 116 single arm, 100 were cross-sectional, 18 longitudinal and six randomized placebo controlled. DLQI was used for 14 known group, and correlation for 10 construct, 101 convergent, 10 concurrent, 10 divergent/discriminant and three criterion validity tests using Mann-Whitney (2), Spearman's (80), Pearson's correlation (26) and Student's t-test (1). The DLQI was used in responsiveness analysis in 13 studies.

CONCLUSIONS

This review identified widespread use of the DLQI in validation of other dermatology PRO/QoL measures and confirmed the central role that the DLQI plays as a benchmark in instrument development and validation across dermatology and beyond. The use of the DLQI by so many developers of other instruments has provided a common standard for comparability.

Advanced Cutaneous Squamous Cell Carcinoma Management in Immunotherapy Era: Achievements and New Challenges

Introduction of immunotherapy (IT) has radically changed the therapeutic scenario in patients affected by locally advanced and/or metastatic cutaneous squamous cell carcinoma (cSCC) patients. If it is well consolidated the role of immunotherapy in the setting of a disease not amenable to curative surgery and/or radiation, how to integrate immune checkpoint inhibitors in the curative setting is still under evaluation. Surgery combined or not with adjuvant radiotherapy remains the mainstay of curative treatment in localized cSCC; however, promising data with neoadjuvant or perioperative immunotherapy could pave the way towards treatment de-escalation according to the response achieved. On the other side, data on adjuvant treatment with pembrolizumab and cemiplimab after surgery and radiation are still awaited. Several questions related to the activity and the safety of immunotherapy in the real-world setting still remain without answer, and several points need to be better explored. In the current review we will explore the updated literature on the use of immunotherapy in cSCC, and we will show the current challenges in its use.

A systematic review of patient-reported outcome measures for advanced skin cancer patients

Many patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) have been used to study quality of life (QOL) in the skin cancer population. Advanced melanoma and non-melanoma skin cancer (NMSC) may be associated with increased morbidity, mortality, and treatment side effects; however, it is unclear which PROM is valid and appropriate to use in these populations for both clinical and research purposes. We aimed to identify the PROMs that have been used to measure QOL in advanced skin cancer patients and determine which of these PROMs have been validated to assess QOL outcomes in this population. A PubMed and EMBASE search was conducted from its inception to March 2021 according to PRISMA guidelines with a comprehensive list of search terms under three main topics: (1) PROM; (2) advanced skin cancer; and (3) staging and interventions. We included articles utilizing a PROM measuring QOL and having a patient population with advanced skin cancer defined as melanoma stage > T1a or non-melanoma AJCC stage T3 or greater. Advanced skin cancer patients were also defined as those with metastasis or requiring adjuvant therapy (systemic chemotherapy, radiation, and immunotherapy). Studies were excluded according to the following criteria: mix of low-risk and advanced skin cancer patients in the study population without stratification into low-risk and advanced groups, stage T1a melanoma or mix of stages without stratification, low-risk NMSC, no PROM (i.e., study specific questionnaires), non-English publication, review article or protocol paper, conference abstract, or populations including non-skin cancers. A total of 1,998 articles were identified. 82 met our inclusion criteria resulting in 22 PROMs: five generic health-related (QWB-SA, AQoL-8D, EQ-5D, SF-36, and PRISM), six general cancer (EORTC QLQ-C30, EORTC QLQ-C36, LASA, IOC, Rotterdam Symptom Checklist, and FACT-G), nine disease-focused or specialized (EORTC QLQ-H&N35, EORTC QLQ-MEL38, EORTC QLQ-BR23, Facial Disability Index, FACT-H&N, FACT-BRM, FACT-B, FACT-M, and scqolit), and two general dermatology (Skindex-16 and DLQI) PROMs. All PROMs have been generally validated except for EORTC QLQ-MEL38. Only two PROMs have been validated in the advanced melanoma population: FACT-M and EORTC QLQ-C36. No PROMS have been validated in the advanced NMSC population. The PROMs that were validated in the advanced melanoma population do not include QOL issues unique to advanced skin tumors such as odor, bleeding, itching, wound care burden, and public embarrassment. Breast cancer and head and neck cancer instruments were adapted but not validated for use in the advanced skin cancer population due to the lack of an adequate instrument for this population. This study highlights the need for PROM instrument validation or creation specifically geared toward the advanced skin cancer population. Future studies should aim to develop and validate a PROM to assess QOL in this population.

Psychometric properties of the Spanish version of the European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Questionnaire (EORTC QLQ-C30)

PURPOSE

The aim of this study was to analyze the internal structure of the EORTC QLQ-C30, to examine the validity and normative data for cancer patients.

METHOD

Exploratory and Confirmatory factor analyses were conducted to explore the scale's dimensionality and test for strong measurement invariance across sex and tumor site. All the analyses were based on a multicenter cohort of 931 patients who completed the Brief Symptom Inventory (BSI-18) and the EORTC QLQ-C30.

RESULTS

Our findings indicate that the EORTC QLQ-C30 has acceptable psychometric properties and an internal structure that is well accounted for a bifactor model: a general factor that evaluates quality of life and a group factor that would analyze physical health that would be defined by physical function, role function, and fatigue. The result of the multi-group CFA revealed a strong invariance according to sex, tumor, and over time. Reliability of the EORTC exceeding 0.86 and the simple sum of the items of the scale was a good indicator of oncology patients' quality of life. Both factors correlate closely with depression, anxiety, and psychological distress and are sensitive to change, especially the quality of life, with a significant decrease in the post-test.

CONCLUSION

The Spanish version of the EORTC QLQ-C30 proved to be a valid, reliable instrument to appraise quality of life in cancer patients. The normative data collected from this study may be useful for the early detection of initial symptoms of deterioration of quality of life in oncology patients.

Quality of life measurement in skin cancer patients: literature review and position paper of the European Academy of Dermatology and Venereology Task Forces on Quality of Life and Patient Oriented Outcomes, Melanoma and Non-Melanoma Skin Cancer

The European Academy of Dermatology and Venereology (EADV) Task Forces (TFs) on Quality of Life (QoL) and Patient Oriented Outcomes, Melanoma and Non-Melanoma Skin Cancer (NMSC) present a review of the literature and position statement on health-related (HR) QoL assessment in skin cancer patients. A literature search was carried out to identify publications since 1980 that included information about the impact of SC on QoL. Generic, dermatology-specific, cancer-specific, SC-specific, facial SC-specific, NMSC-specific, basal cell carcinoma-specific and melanoma-specific QoL questionnaires have been used to assess HRQoL in SC patients. HRQoL was assessed in the context of creation and validation of the HRQoL instruments, clinical trials, comparison of QoL in SC and other cancers, other diseases or controls, HRQoL assessment after treatment, comorbidities, behaviour modification, predictors of QoL and survival, supportive care needs, coping strategies and fear of cancer recurrence. The most widely used instruments for HRQoL assessment in SC patients are the European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer Core Questionnaire (EORTC QLQ-C30), the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-Melanoma (FACT-M), Skin Cancer Index (SCI), Short Form 36 Item Health Survey (SF-36) and the Dermatology Life Quality Index (DLQI). The TFs recommend the use of the cancer-specific EORTC QLQ-C30, especially in late stages of disease, and the melanoma-specific FACT-M and SC-specific SCI questionnaires. These instruments have been well validated and used in several studies. Other HRQoL instruments, also with good basic validation, are not currently recommended because the experience of their use is too limited. Dermatology-specific HRQoL instruments can be used to assess the impact of skin-related problems in SC. The TFs encourage further studies to validate HRQoL instruments for use in different stages of SC, in order to allow more detailed practical recommendations on HRQoL assessment in SC.