Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Purpose This study aimed to develop and validate a mapping algorithm to derive EQ-5D-5L utility values from EORTC QLQ-C30 responses in Korean patients with gastric cancer. Methods Secondary data from a multicenter cohort of 399 patients across 24 hospitals in Korea were analyzed, with utility calculated using the Korean EQ-5D-5L valuation set. Five regression approaches (OLS, TPM, ALDVMM, CLAD, and Beta regression) were applied under two specifications: Model 1, without control variables, and Model 2, with age and sex as control variables. Models were evaluated using RMSE and MAE, with 5-fold cross-validation and time point-specific external validation (6, 12, and 24 months). Results Among the 399 patients (mean age, 61.42 ± 9.36 years; male, 71.9%), the mean baseline EQ-5D-5L utility was 0.883 ± 0.115, with a ceiling effect observed in 39.35% of patients. TPM showed the best predictive performance among the five regression approaches in both Model 1 (R²=0.546, RMSE = 0.077, MAE = 0.060) and Model 2 (R²=0.549, RMSE = 0.077, MAE = 0.060), consistent with 5-fold cross-validation results. In time point-specific external validation, however, the model with the lowest MSE varied by time point. Conclusions This study offers a validated mapping algorithm for converting EORTC QLQ-C30 scores into EQ-5D-5L utility values in Korean gastric cancer patients, supporting its application in clinical research and healthcare policymaking.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Jin et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 8 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: