Additional file 2: of Interpreting small treatment differences from quality of life data in cancer trials: an alternative measure of treatment benefit and effect size for the EORTC-QLQ-C30
Iftekhar Khan
Zahid Bashir
Martin Forster
10.6084/m9.figshare.c.3640214_D1.v1
https://springernature.figshare.com/articles/journal_contribution/Additional_file_2_of_Interpreting_small_treatment_differences_from_quality_of_life_data_in_cancer_trials_an_alternative_measure_of_treatment_benefit_and_effect_size_for_the_EORTC-QLQ-C30/4454672
Supplementary tables and figures. Figure S1: Distribution of QLQ-C30 responses. a)SOCCAR, b)Study 10, c)Study 11, d)Study 12, e)Study 14. (x-axis is QLQ-C30 score on a scale of 0 to 1 and - y axis is relative frequency). Figure S2: Plot of Odds Ratios vs. MDs for all 15 domains (all trials). a) Overall, b) Functional Domain, c) Symptom Domain. Vertical reference lines are Âą10 points for MDs and zero (no effect line). Horizontal reference lines are 1 (no effect) and 0.8 and 1.20 for ORs. Figure S3(a): Comparison of erlotinib vs placebo responses for EF in TOPICAL trial. (b): Comparison of erlotinib vs placebo responses for CO in TOPICAL trial. Example showing MDs not statistically different but ORs statistically significant: Higher proportion of placebo responses for lower scores and higher proportion of erlotinib responses in some categories of emotional function (EF) >0.6 (or 60); distribution is skewed. (DOC 955 kb)
2015-11-14 05:00:00
EORTC-QLQ-C30
Lung cancer
Quality of life
Beta binomial
Treatment effect size
MD: Mean Differences
ORs: Odds Ratios