Comparing EQ-5D-3L and EQ-5D-5L Performance in Common Cancers: Suggestions for Instrument Choosing

Overview

Journal Qual Life Res

Specialties Pharmacology
Rehabilitation Medicine

Date 2020 Sep 15

PMID 32930993

Citations 19

Authors

Juan Zhu

Xin-Xin Yan

Cheng-Cheng Liu

Hong Wang

Le Wang

Su-Mei Cao

Xian-Zhen Liao

Yun-Feng Xi

Yong Ji

Lin Lei

Hai-Fan Xiao

Hai-Jing Guan

Wen-Qiang Wei

Min Dai

Wanqing Chen

Ju-Fang Shi

Affiliations

Soon will be listed here.

Abstract

Purpose: To compare the performance of three-level EuroQol five-dimensions (EQ-5D-3L) and five-level EuroQol five-dimensions (EQ-5D-5L) among common cancer patients in urban China.

Methods: A hospital-based cross-sectional survey was conducted in three provinces from 2016 to 2018 in urban China. Patients with breast cancer, colorectal cancer, or lung cancer were recruited to complete the EQ-5D-3L and EQ-5D-5L questionnaires. Response distribution, discriminatory power (indicator: Shannon index [H'] and Shannon evenness index [J']), ceiling effect (the proportion of full health state), convergent validity, and health-related quality of life (HRQoL) were compared between the two instruments.

Results: A total of 1802 cancer patients (breast cancer: 601, colorectal cancer: 601, lung cancer: 600) were included, with the mean age of 55.6 years. The average inconsistency rate was 4.4%. Compared with EQ-5D-3L (average: H' = 1.100, J' = 0.696), an improved discriminatory power was observed in EQ-5D-5L (H' = 1.473, J' = 0.932), especially contributing to anxiety/depression dimensions. The ceiling effect was diminished in EQ-5D-5L (26.5%) in comparison with EQ-5D-3L (34.5%) (p < 0.001), mainly reflected in the pain/discomfort and anxiety/depression dimensions. The overall utility score was 0.790 (95% CI 0.778-0.801) for EQ-5D-3L and 0.803 (0.790-0.816) for EQ-5D-5L (p < 0.001). A similar pattern was also observed in the detailed cancer-specific analysis.

Conclusions: With greater discriminatory power, convergent validity and lower ceiling, EQ-5D-5L may be preferable to EQ-5D-3L for the assessment of HRQoL among cancer patients. However, higher utility scores derived form EQ-5D-5L may also lead to lower QALY gains than those of 3L potentially in cost-utility studies and underestimation in the burden of disease.

Citing Articles

Associations between financial toxicity, health-related quality of life, and well-being in Indonesian patients with breast cancer.

Pangestu S, Purba F, Setyowibowo H, Mukuria C, Rencz F Qual Life Res. 2025; .

PMID: 39998755 DOI: 10.1007/s11136-025-03925-y.

Assessment of Health-Related Quality of Life in Thai Endometrial Cancer Patients: A Comparative Analysis Using EQ5D Utility Scores Across States.

Poonyakanok V, Eagjeen J, Kwangngoen T, Leelahavarong P, Chitpim N Cancer Rep (Hoboken). 2025; 8(2):e70139.

PMID: 39929698 PMC: 11810482. DOI: 10.1002/cnr2.70139.

Comparison of the EQ-5D-3L and EQ-5D-5L instruments in patients undergoing unicompartmental knee arthroplasty.

Tai Z, Wan D, Zan Q, Huang Y, Xu C Front Med (Lausanne). 2025; 11():1451979.

PMID: 39835100 PMC: 11744716. DOI: 10.3389/fmed.2024.1451979.

The generic version of China Health Related Outcomes Measures (CHROME-G): psychometric testing and comparative performance with the EQ-5D-5L and SF-6Dv2 among the Chinese general population.

Xie S, Wu J, Chen P, He X, Zhao K, Xie F BMC Public Health. 2024; 24(1):3485.

PMID: 39695490 PMC: 11656610. DOI: 10.1186/s12889-024-20999-4.

A randomised trial comparing 6-monthly adjuvant zoledronate with a single one-time dose in patients with early breast cancer.

Awan A, Stober C, Pond G, Machado I, Clemons L, Conter H Breast Cancer Res Treat. 2024; 208(3):523-533.

PMID: 39083190 PMC: 11522049. DOI: 10.1007/s10549-024-07443-2.

References

Fitzmaurice C, Abate D, Abbasi N, Abbastabar H, Abd-Allah F, Abdel-Rahman O . Global, Regional, and National Cancer Incidence, Mortality, Years of Life Lost, Years Lived With Disability, and Disability-Adjusted Life-Years for 29 Cancer Groups, 1990 to 2017: A Systematic Analysis for the Global Burden of Disease Study. JAMA Oncol. 2019; 5(12):1749-1768. PMC: 6777271. DOI: 10.1001/jamaoncol.2019.2996. View

Zheng R, Sun K, Zhang S, Zeng H, Zou X, Chen R . [Report of cancer epidemiology in China, 2015]. Zhonghua Zhong Liu Za Zhi. 2019; 41(1):19-28. DOI: 10.3760/cma.j.issn.0253-3766.2019.01.005. View

Lloyd A, Pickard A . The EQ-5D and the EuroQol Group. Value Health. 2019; 22(1):21-22. DOI: 10.1016/j.jval.2018.12.002. View

Rabin R, Gudex C, Selai C, Herdman M . From translation to version management: a history and review of methods for the cultural adaptation of the EuroQol five-dimensional questionnaire. Value Health. 2014; 17(1):70-6. DOI: 10.1016/j.jval.2013.10.006. View

Kopec J, Willison K . A comparative review of four preference-weighted measures of health-related quality of life. J Clin Epidemiol. 2003; 56(4):317-25. DOI: 10.1016/s0895-4356(02)00609-1. View

Sakthong P, Sonsa-Ardjit N, Sukarnjanaset P, Munpan W . Psychometric properties of the EQ-5D-5L in Thai patients with chronic diseases. Qual Life Res. 2015; 24(12):3015-22. DOI: 10.1007/s11136-015-1038-z. View

Janssen M, Pickard A, Golicki D, Gudex C, Niewada M, Scalone L . Measurement properties of the EQ-5D-5L compared to the EQ-5D-3L across eight patient groups: a multi-country study. Qual Life Res. 2012; 22(7):1717-27. PMC: 3764313. DOI: 10.1007/s11136-012-0322-4. View

Golicki D, Niewada M, Karlinska A, Buczek J, Kobayashi A, Janssen M . Comparing responsiveness of the EQ-5D-5L, EQ-5D-3L and EQ VAS in stroke patients. Qual Life Res. 2014; 24(6):1555-63. PMC: 4457098. DOI: 10.1007/s11136-014-0873-7. View

Pattanaphesaj J, Thavorncharoensap M . Measurement properties of the EQ-5D-5L compared to EQ-5D-3L in the Thai diabetes patients. Health Qual Life Outcomes. 2015; 13:14. PMC: 4328309. DOI: 10.1186/s12955-014-0203-3. View

10.

Tran B, Ohinmaa A, Nguyen L . Quality of life profile and psychometric properties of the EQ-5D-5L in HIV/AIDS patients. Health Qual Life Outcomes. 2012; 10:132. PMC: 3541089. DOI: 10.1186/1477-7525-10-132. View

11.

Jia Y, Cui F, Li L, Zhang D, Zhang G, Wang F . Comparison between the EQ-5D-5L and the EQ-5D-3L in patients with hepatitis B. Qual Life Res. 2014; 23(8):2355-63. DOI: 10.1007/s11136-014-0670-3. View

12.

Pan C, Sun H, Wang X, Ma Q, Xu Y, Luo N . The EQ-5D-5L index score is more discriminative than the EQ-5D-3L index score in diabetes patients. Qual Life Res. 2014; 24(7):1767-74. DOI: 10.1007/s11136-014-0902-6. View

13.

Kim S, Kim H, Lee S, Jo M . Comparing the psychometric properties of the EQ-5D-3L and EQ-5D-5L in cancer patients in Korea. Qual Life Res. 2011; 21(6):1065-73. DOI: 10.1007/s11136-011-0018-1. View

14.

Pickard A, De Leon M, Kohlmann T, Cella D, Rosenbloom S . Psychometric comparison of the standard EQ-5D to a 5 level version in cancer patients. Med Care. 2007; 45(3):259-63. DOI: 10.1097/01.mlr.0000254515.63841.81. View

15.

Su M, Hua X, Wang J, Yao N, Zhao D, Liu W . Health-related quality of life among cancer survivors in rural China. Qual Life Res. 2018; 28(3):695-702. DOI: 10.1007/s11136-018-2038-6. View

16.

Liu L, Li S, Wang M, Chen G . Comparison of EQ-5D-5L health state utilities using four country-specific tariffs on a breast cancer patient sample in mainland China. Patient Prefer Adherence. 2017; 11:1049-1056. PMC: 5495091. DOI: 10.2147/PPA.S138028. View

17.

Lee C, Luo N, Ng R, Wong N, Yap Y, Lo S . Comparison of the measurement properties between a short and generic instrument, the 5-level EuroQoL Group's 5-dimension (EQ-5D-5L) questionnaire, and a longer and disease-specific instrument, the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-Breast.... Qual Life Res. 2012; 22(7):1745-51. DOI: 10.1007/s11136-012-0291-7. View

18.

Janssen M, Bonsel G, Luo N . Is EQ-5D-5L Better Than EQ-5D-3L? A Head-to-Head Comparison of Descriptive Systems and Value Sets from Seven Countries. Pharmacoeconomics. 2018; 36(6):675-697. PMC: 5954015. DOI: 10.1007/s40273-018-0623-8. View

19.

Janssen M, Birnie E, Haagsma J, Bonsel G . Comparing the standard EQ-5D three-level system with a five-level version. Value Health. 2008; 11(2):275-84. DOI: 10.1111/j.1524-4733.2007.00230.x. View

20.

Liu G, Wu H, Li M, Gao C, Luo N . Chinese time trade-off values for EQ-5D health states. Value Health. 2014; 17(5):597-604. DOI: 10.1016/j.jval.2014.05.007. View