Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Health-related Quality of Life in Patients with Brain Tumors: Limitations and Additional Outcome Measures

  • Neuro-Oncology (LE Abrey, Section Editor)
  • Published:
Current Neurology and Neuroscience Reports Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Health-related quality of life (HRQOL) is a multidimensional concept used to measure patients’ functioning and well-being. In recent decades, HRQOL has become an important (secondary) outcome measure in clinical trials for brain tumor patients. It could be questioned, however, whether HRQOL is the only useful outcome measure for assessing the level of functioning and well-being of these patients. As described in this review, several general methodological issues can hamper the interpretation of HRQOL data collected in the oncology setting. Additionally, because brain tumor patients have a progressive brain disease resulting in cognitive impairments, patient-reported outcomes may not always be the most informative and accurate measures of HRQOL in brain tumor patients. Supplementary or alternative measures, such as proxy-rated HRQOL measures and measures of instrumental activities of daily living, may provide a more complete picture of brain tumor patients’ functioning in daily life.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

Papers of particular interest, published recently, have been highlighted as: • Of importance

  1. Kamangar F, Dores GM, Anderson WF. Patterns of cancer incidence, mortality, and prevalence across five continents: defining priorities to reduce cancer disparities in different geographic regions of the world. J Clin Oncol. 2006;24:2137–50.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Behin A, Hoang-Xuan K, Carpentier AF, Delattre JY. Primary brain tumours in adults. Lancet. 2003;361:323–31.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Ranjan T, Abrey LE. Current management of metastatic brain disease. Neurotherapeutics. 2009;6:598–603.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  4. Stupp R, Mason WP, van den Bent MJ, Weller M, Fisher B, Taphoorn MJ, et al. Radiotherapy plus concomitant and adjuvant temozolomide for glioblastoma. N Engl J Med. 2005;352:987–96.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  5. Efficace F, Taphoorn M. Methodological issues in designing and reporting health-related quality of life in cancer clinical trials: the challenge of brain cancer studies. J Neurooncol. 2012;108:221–6.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Efficace F, Bottomley A. Health related quality of life assessment methodology and reported outcomes in randomised controlled trials of primary brain cancer patients. Eur J Cancer. 2002;38:1824–31.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  7. Aaronson NK. Quality of life: what is it? How should it be measured? Oncology (Williston Park). 1988;2:69–76.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  8. Aaronson NK, Taphoorn MJ, Heimans JJ, Postma TJ, Gundy CM, Beute GN, et al. Compromised health-related quality of life in patients with low-grade glioma. J Clin Oncol. 2011;29:4430–5.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Caissie A, Nguyen J, Chen E, Zhang L, Sahgal A, Clemons M, et al. Quality of life in patients with brain metastases using the EORTC QLQ-BN20+2 and QLQ-C15-PAL. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2012;83:1238–45.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Gronberg BH, Ciuleanu T, Flotten O, Knuuttila A, Abel E, Langer SW, et al. A placebo-controlled, randomized phase II study of maintenance enzastaurin following whole brain radiation therapy in the treatment of brain metastases from lung cancer. Lung Cancer. 2012;78:63–9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Ma S, Xu Y, Deng Q, Yu X. Treatment of brain metastasis from non-small cell lung cancer with whole brain radiotherapy and Gefitinib in a Chinese population. Lung Cancer. 2009;65:198–203.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Steinmann D, Paelecke-Habermann Y, Geinitz H, Aschoff R, Bayerl A, Bolling T, et al. Prospective evaluation of quality of life effects in patients undergoing palliative radiotherapy for brain metastases. BMC Cancer. 2012;12:283.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Stupp R, Wong ET, Kanner AA, Steinberg D, Engelhard H, Heidecke V, et al. NovoTTF-100A versus physician's choice chemotherapy in recurrent glioblastoma: a randomised phase III trial of a novel treatment modality. Eur J Cancer. 2012;48:2192–202.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Taphoorn MJ, Stupp R, Coens C, Osoba D, Kortmann R, van den Bent MJ, et al. Health-related quality of life in patients with glioblastoma: a randomised controlled trial. Lancet Oncol. 2005;6:937–44.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Taphoorn MJ, van den Bent MJ, Mauer ME, Coens C, Delattre JY, Brandes AA, et al. Health-related quality of life in patients treated for anaplastic oligodendroglioma with adjuvant chemotherapy: results of a European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer randomized clinical trial. J Clin Oncol. 2007;25:5723–30.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Yaneva MP, Semerdjieva MA. Assessment of the effect of palliative radiotherapy for cancer patients with intracranial metastases using EORTC-QOL-C30 questionnaire. Folia Med (Plovdiv). 2006;48:23–9.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Yavas C, Zorlu F, Ozyigit G, Gurkaynak M, Yavas G, Yuce D, et al. Health-related quality of life in high-grade glioma patients: a prospective single-center study. Support Care Cancer. 2012;20:2315–25.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Kirkbride P, Tannock IF. Trials in palliative treatment–have the goal posts been moved? Lancet Oncol. 2008;9:186–7.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Arpinelli F, Bamfi F. The FDA guidance for industry on PROs: the point of view of a pharmaceutical company. Health Qual Life Outcomes. 2006;4:85.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Aaronson NK, Ahmedzai S, Bergman B, Bullinger M, Cull A, Duez NJ, et al. The European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer QLQ-C30: a quality-of-life instrument for use in international clinical trials in oncology. J Natl Cancer Inst. 1993;85:365–76.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  21. Osoba D, Aaronson NK, Muller M, Sneeuw K, Hsu MA, Yung WK, et al. The development and psychometric validation of a brain cancer quality-of-life questionnaire for use in combination with general cancer-specific questionnaires. Qual Life Res. 1996;5:139–50.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  22. Taphoorn MJ, Claassens L, Aaronson NK, Coens C, Mauer M, Osoba D, et al. An international validation study of the EORTC brain cancer module (EORTC QLQ-BN20) for assessing health-related quality of life and symptoms in brain cancer patients. Eur J Cancer. 2012;46:1033–40.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Weitzner MA, Meyers CA, Gelke CK, Byrne KS, Cella DF, Levin VA. The Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy (FACT) scale. Development of a brain subscale and revalidation of the general version (FACT-G) in patients with primary brain tumors. Cancer. 1995;75:1151–61.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  24. Armstrong TS, Mendoza T, Gning I, Coco C, Cohen MZ, Eriksen L, et al. Validation of the M.D. Anderson Symptom Inventory Brain Tumor Module (MDASI-BT). J Neurooncol. 2006;80:27–35.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  25. Armstrong TS, Gning I, Mendoza TR, Weinberg JS, Gilbert MR, Tortorice ML, et al. Clinical utility of the MDASI-BT in patients with brain metastases. J Pain Symptom Manage. 2009;37:331–40.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Detmar SB, Muller MJ, Schornagel JH, Wever LD, Aaronson NK. Health-related quality-of-life assessments and patient-physician communication: a randomized controlled trial. JAMA. 2002;288:3027–34.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Hilarius DL, Kloeg PH, Gundy CM, Aaronson NK. Use of health-related quality-of-life assessments in daily clinical oncology nursing practice: a community hospital-based intervention study. Cancer. 2008;113:628–37.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. Taphoorn MJ, Sizoo EM, Bottomley A. Review on quality of life issues in patients with primary brain tumors. Oncologist. 2010;15:618–26.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  29. Cheng JX, Zhang X, Liu BL. Health-related quality of life in patients with high-grade glioma. Neuro Oncol. 2009;11:41–50.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  30. Vordermark D. Avoiding bias in the prospective evaluation of patients with brain metastases. J Clin Oncol. 2007;25:4023–5.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  31. Gallego Perez-Larraya J, Ducray F, Chinot O, Catry-Thomas I, Taillandier L, Guillamo JS, et al. Temozolomide in elderly patients with newly diagnosed glioblastoma and poor performance status: an ANOCEF phase II trial. J Clin Oncol. 2011;29:3050–5.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  32. Levin VA, Phuphanich S, Yung WK, Forsyth PA, Maestro RD, Perry JR, et al. Randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial of marimastat in glioblastoma multiforme patients following surgery and irradiation. J Neurooncol. 2006;78:295–302.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  33. Mauer ME, Bottomley A, Taphoorn MJ. Evaluating health-related quality of life and symptom burden in brain tumour patients: instruments for use in experimental trials and clinical practice. Curr Opin Neurol. 2008;21:745–53.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  34. Reijneveld JC, Klein M, Taphoorn MJ, Postma TJ, Heimans JJ. Improved, personalized treatment of glioma necessitates long-term follow-up of cognitive functioning. Pharmacogenomics. 2012;13:1667–9.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  35. Osoba D. What has been learned from measuring health-related quality of life in clinical oncology. Eur J Cancer. 1999;35:1565–70.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  36. Hakamies-Blomqvist L, Luoma ML, Sjostrom J, Pluzanska A, Sjodin M, Mouridsen H, et al. Timing of quality of life (QoL) assessments as a source of error in oncological trials. J Adv Nurs. 2001;35:709–16.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  37. Klee MC, King MT, Machin D, Hansen HH. A clinical model for quality of life assessment in cancer patients receiving chemotherapy. Ann Oncol. 2000;11:23–30.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  38. Pater J, Osoba D, Zee B, Lofters W, Gore M, Dempsey E, et al. Effects of altering the time of administration and the time frame of quality of life assessments in clinical trials: an example using the EORTC QLQ-C30 in a large anti-emetic trial. Qual Life Res. 1998;7:273–8.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  39. Ediebah DE, Coens C, Maringwa JT, Quinten C, Zikos E, Ringash J, et al. Effect of completion-time windows in the analysis of health-related quality of life outcomes in cancer patients. Ann Oncol. 2013;24:231–7.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  40. Osoba D. Rationale for the timing of health-related quality-of-life (HQL) assessments in oncological palliative therapy. Cancer Treat Rev. 1996;22(A):69–73.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  41. Fairclough DL, Cella DF. Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy (FACT-G): non-response to individual questions. Qual Life Res. 1996;5:321–9.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  42. Walker M, Brown J, Brown K, Gregor A, Whittle IR, Grant R. Practical problems with the collection and interpretation of serial quality of life assessments in patients with malignant glioma. J Neurooncol. 2003;63:179–86.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  43. Rubin DB. Inference and missing data. Biometrika. 1976;63:581–92.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  44. Little R, Rubin D. Statistical Analysis with Missing Data. New York: Wiley; 1987.

    Google Scholar 

  45. Post WJ, Buijs C, Stolk RP, de Vries EG, le Cessie S. The analysis of longitudinal quality of life measures with informative drop-out: a pattern mixture approach. Qual Life Res. 2010;19:137–48.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  46. Walther B, Hossin S, Townend J, Abernethy N, Parker D, Jeffries D. Comparison of electronic data capture (EDC) with the standard data capture method for clinical trial data. PLoS One. 2011;6:e25348.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  47. Maringwa J, Quinten C, King M, Ringash J, Osoba D, Coens C, et al. Minimal clinically meaningful differences for the EORTC QLQ-C30 and EORTC QLQ-BN20 scales in brain cancer patients. Ann Oncol. 2011;22:2107–12.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  48. Kvam AK, Wisloff F, Fayers PM. Minimal important differences and response shift in health-related quality of life; a longitudinal study in patients with multiple myeloma. Health Qual Life Outcomes. 2010;8:79.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  49. Schwartz CE, Bode R, Repucci N, Becker J, Sprangers MA, Fayers PM. The clinical significance of adaptation to changing health: a meta-analysis of response shift. Qual Life Res. 2006;15:1533–50.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  50. Schwartz CE, Sprangers MA. Methodological approaches for assessing response shift in longitudinal health-related quality-of-life research. Soc Sci Med. 1999;48:1531–48.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  51. Sprangers MA, Schwartz CE. Integrating response shift into health-related quality of life research: a theoretical model. Soc Sci Med. 1999;48:1507–15.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  52. Rapkin BD, Schwartz CE. Toward a theoretical model of quality-of-life appraisal: Implications of findings from studies of response shift. Health Qual Life Outcomes. 2004;2:14.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  53. Barclay-Goddard R, Epstein JD, Mayo NE. Response shift: a brief overview and proposed research priorities. Qual Life Res. 2009;18:335–46.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  54. Hamidou Z, Dabakuyo TS, Bonnetain F. Impact of response shift on longitudinal quality-of-life assessment in cancer clinical trials. Expert Rev Pharmacoecon Outcomes Res. 2011;11:549–59.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  55. Ubel PA, Peeters Y, Smith D. Abandoning the language of "response shift": a plea for conceptual clarity in distinguishing scale recalibration from true changes in quality of life. Qual Life Res. 2010;19:465–71.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  56. Nolte S, Elsworth GR, Sinclair AJ, Osborne RH. The inclusion of 'then-test' questions in post-test questionnaires alters post-test responses: a randomized study of bias in health program evaluation. Qual Life Res. 2012;21:487–94.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  57. Schwartz CE, Sprangers MA. Guidelines for improving the stringency of response shift research using the thentest. Qual Life Res. 2010;19:455–64.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  58. McPhail S, Haines T. Response shift, recall bias and their effect on measuring change in health-related quality of life amongst older hospital patients. Health Qual Life Outcomes. 2010;8:65.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  59. Groenvold M, Petersen M. The role and use of differential item functioning (DIF) analysis of quality of life data in clinical trials. In: Fayers P, Hays R, editors. Assessing Quality of Life in Clinical Trials. 2nd ed. Oxford: Oxford University Press; 2008. p. 195–208.

    Google Scholar 

  60. Scott NW, Fayers PM, Bottomley A, Aaronson NK, de Graeff A, Groenvold M, et al. Comparing translations of the EORTC QLQ-C30 using differential item functioning analyses. Qual Life Res. 2006;15:1103–15.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  61. Scott NW, Fayers PM, Aaronson NK, Bottomley A, de Graeff A, Groenvold M, et al. The relationship between overall quality of life and its subdimensions was influenced by culture: analysis of an international database. J Clin Epidemiol. 2008;61:788–95.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  62. King MT. The interpretation of scores from the EORTC quality of life questionnaire QLQ-C30. Qual Life Res. 1996;5:555–67.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  63. Osoba D, Rodrigues G, Myles J, Zee B, Pater J. Interpreting the significance of changes in health-related quality-of-life scores. J Clin Oncol. 1998;16:139–44.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  64. Scott NW, Fayers PM, Aaronson NK, Bottomley A, de Graeff A, Groenvold M, et al. The practical impact of differential item functioning analyses in a health-related quality of life instrument. Qual Life Res. 2009;18:1125–30.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  65. Oberndorfer S, Lindeck-Pozza E, Lahrmann H, Struhal W, Hitzenberger P, Grisold W. The end-of-life hospital setting in patients with glioblastoma. J Palliat Med. 2008;11:26–30.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  66. Pace A, Di LC, Guariglia L, Jandolo B, Carapella CM, Pompili A. End of life issues in brain tumor patients. J Neurooncol. 2009;91:39–43.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  67. Sizoo EM, Braam L, Postma TJ, Pasman HR, Heimans JJ, Klein M, et al. Symptoms and problems in the end-of-life phase of high-grade glioma patients. Neuro Oncol. 2010;12:1162–6.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  68. Taphoorn MJ, Klein M. Cognitive deficits in adult patients with brain tumours. Lancet Neurol. 2004;3:159–68.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  69. Fayers P, Machin D. Quality of life. Assessment, analysis and interpretation. Chichester: Wiley; 2000.

    Google Scholar 

  70. Sneeuw KC, Sprangers MA, Aaronson NK. The role of health care providers and significant others in evaluating the quality of life of patients with chronic disease. J Clin Epidemiol. 2002;55:1130–43.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  71. Brown PD, Decker PA, Rummans TA, Clark MM, Frost MH, Ballman KV, et al. A prospective study of quality of life in adults with newly diagnosed high-grade gliomas: comparison of patient and caregiver ratings of quality of life. Am J Clin Oncol. 2008;31:163–8.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  72. Sneeuw KC, Aaronson NK, Osoba D, Muller MJ, Hsu MA, Yung WK, et al. The use of significant others as proxy raters of the quality of life of patients with brain cancer. Med Care. 1997;35:490–506.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  73. Sneeuw KC, Aaronson NK, Sprangers MA, Detmar SB, Wever LD, Schornagel JH. Comparison of patient and proxy EORTC QLQ-C30 ratings in assessing the quality of life of cancer patients. J Clin Epidemiol. 1998;51:617–31.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  74. Stephens RJ, Hopwood P, Girling DJ, Machin D. Randomized trials with quality of life endpoints: are doctors' ratings of patients' physical symptoms interchangeable with patients' self-ratings? Qual Life Res. 1997;6:225–36.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  75. Moinpour CM, Lyons B, Schmidt SP, Chansky K, Patchell RA. Substituting proxy ratings for patient ratings in cancer clinical trials: an analysis based on a Southwest Oncology Group trial in patients with brain metastases. Qual Life Res. 2000;9:219–31.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  76. • Quinten C, Maringwa J, Gotay CC, Martinelli F, Coens C, Reeve BB, et al. Patient self-reports of symptoms and clinician ratings as predictors of overall cancer survival. J Natl Cancer Inst. 2011;103:1851–8. This study examined the extent to which HRQOL scores of cancer patients and clinicians corresponded and if both contributed to the estimation of overall survival. Patient- and clinician-reported HRQOL scores did differ, but contributed independently and positively to survival prognostication. The subjective measure of a patient thus complements clinician scoring in predicting overall survival.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  77. Wilson KA, Dowling AJ, Abdolell M, Tannock IF. Perception of quality of life by patients, partners and treating physicians. Qual Life Res. 2000;9:1041–52.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  78. Milne DJ, Mulder LL, Beelen HC, Schofield P, Kempen GI, Aranda S. Patients' self-report and family caregivers' perception of quality of life in patients with advanced cancer: how do they compare? Eur J Cancer Care (Engl). 2006;15:125–32.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  79. Giesinger JM, Golser M, Erharter A, Kemmler G, Schauer-Maurer G, Stockhammer G, et al. Do neurooncological patients and their significant others agree on quality of life ratings? Health Qual Life Outcomes. 2009;7:87.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  80. McPhail S, Beller E, Haines T. Two perspectives of proxy reporting of health-related quality of life using the Euroqol-5D, an investigation of agreement. Med Care. 2008;46:1140–8.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  81. Sprangers MA, Aaronson NK. The role of health care providers and significant others in evaluating the quality of life of patients with chronic disease: a review. J Clin Epidemiol. 1992;45:743–60.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  82. Pickard AS, Knight SJ. Proxy evaluation of health-related quality of life: a conceptual framework for understanding multiple proxy perspectives. Med Care. 2005;43:493–9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  83. Gundy CM, Aaronson NK. The influence of proxy perspective on patient-proxy agreement in the evaluation of health-related quality of life: an empirical study. Med Care. 2008;46:209–16.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  84. Ruge MI, Ilmberger J, Tonn JC, Kreth FW. Health-related quality of life and cognitive functioning in adult patients with supratentorial WHO grade II glioma: status prior to therapy. J Neurooncol. 2011;103:129–36.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  85. Lawton MP, Brody EM. Assessment of older people: self-maintaining and instrumental activities of daily living. Gerontologist. 1969;9:179–86.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  86. Sikkes SA, de Lange-de Klerk ES, Pijnenburg YA, Gillissen F, Romkes R, Knol DL, et al. A new informant-based questionnaire for instrumental activities of daily living in dementia. Alzheimers Dement. 2012;8:536–43.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  87. Osoba D, Bezjak A, Brundage M, Zee B, Tu D, Pater J. Analysis and interpretation of health-related quality-of-life data from clinical trials: basic approach of The National Cancer Institute of Canada Clinical Trials Group. Eur J Cancer. 2005;41:280–7.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  88. Bottomley A, Efficace F, Thomas R, Vanvoorden V, Ahmedzai SH. Health-related quality of life in non-small-cell lung cancer: methodologic issues in randomized controlled trials. J Clin Oncol. 2003;21:2982–92.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  89. Efficace F, Bottomley A, Vanvoorden V, Blazeby JM. Methodological issues in assessing health-related quality of life of colorectal cancer patients in randomised controlled trials. Eur J Cancer. 2004;40:187–97.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  90. Efficace F, Osoba D, Gotay C, Sprangers M, Coens C, Bottomley A. Has the quality of health-related quality of life reporting in cancer clinical trials improved over time? Towards bridging the gap with clinical decision making. Ann Oncol. 2007;18:775–81.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  91. Mauer ME, Taphoorn MJ, Bottomley A, Coens C, Efficace F, Sanson M, et al. Prognostic value of health-related quality-of-life data in predicting survival in patients with anaplastic oligodendrogliomas, from a phase III EORTC brain cancer group study. J Clin Oncol. 2007;25:5731–7.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  92. Efficace F, Bottomley A, Osoba D, Gotay C, Flechtner H, D'haese S, et al. Beyond the development of health-related quality-of-life (HRQOL) measures: a checklist for evaluating HRQOL outcomes in cancer clinical trials—does HRQOL evaluation in prostate cancer research inform clinical decision making? J Clin Oncol. 2003;21:3502–11.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  93. Sprangers MA, Moinpour CM, Moynihan TJ, Patrick DL, Revicki DA. Assessing meaningful change in quality of life over time: a users' guide for clinicians. Mayo Clin Proc. 2002;77:561–71.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  94. Staquet M, Berzon R, Osoba D, Machin D. Guidelines for reporting results of quality of life assessments in clinical trials. Qual Life Res. 1996;5:496–502.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

Download references

Compliance with Ethics Guidelines

Conflict of Interest

Linda Dirven declares that she has no conflict of interest.

Jacob C. Reijneveld declares that he has no conflict of interest.

Neil K. Aaronson declares that she/he has no conflict of interest.

Andrew Bottomley declares that he has no conflict of interest.

Bernard M.J. Uitdehaag has been a consultant to Novartis, Merck Serono, Biogen Idec, Synthon, and Danone Research.

Martin J.B. Taphoorn has been a consultant to Roche.

Human and Animal Rights and Informed Consent

This article does not contain any studies with human or animal subjects performed by any of the authors.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Neurology, VU University Medical Center, PO Box 7057, 1007 MB, Amsterdam, the Netherlands

    Linda Dirven, Jacob C. Reijneveld, Bernard M. J. Uitdehaag & Martin J. B. Taphoorn

  2. Division of Psychosocial Research and Epidemiology, The Netherlands Cancer Institute, Amsterdam, the Netherlands

    Neil K. Aaronson

  3. Quality of life department, European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer, Headquarters, Brussels, Belgium

    Andrew Bottomley

  4. Department of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, VU University Medical Center, Amsterdam, the Netherlands

    Bernard M. J. Uitdehaag

  5. Department of Neurology, Medical Center Haaglanden, The Hague, the Netherlands

    Martin J. B. Taphoorn

Authors
  1. Linda Dirven
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Jacob C. Reijneveld
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Neil K. Aaronson
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Andrew Bottomley
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Bernard M. J. Uitdehaag
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Martin J. B. Taphoorn
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Linda Dirven.

Additional information

This article is part of Topical Collection on Neuro-Oncology

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Dirven, L., Reijneveld, J.C., Aaronson, N.K. et al. Health-related Quality of Life in Patients with Brain Tumors: Limitations and Additional Outcome Measures. Curr Neurol Neurosci Rep 13, 359 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11910-013-0359-y

Download citation

  • Published:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11910-013-0359-y

Keywords

Search

Navigation