QLU-C10D vs. EQ-5D-5L: Which Health-Related Quality of Life Scale is Best for Chinese Breast Cancer Patients?

A recent discussion surrounding the use of the QLU-C10D and EQ-5D-5L health-related quality of life scales for Chinese breast cancer patients has highlighted a minor error. The statement 'the RE＜1 suggests that EQ-5D-5L is more efficient than QLU-C10D' is incorrect. The correct comparison should be 'the RE＞1 suggests that EQ-5D-5L is more efficient than QLU-C10D.' The '>' symbol should be used instead of '<' to indicate that EQ-5D-5L is more efficient.

The QLU-C10D has been validated for reliability, validity, responsiveness, and sensitivity in the Chinese population with breast cancer. While the minimal important differences (MID) are yet to be determined, the EQ-5D-5L has shown better sensitivity and utility benefits compared to C10D. Despite these differences, both scales are valuable tools for assessing health-related quality of life.

The choice of which scale to use depends on the specific research or clinical purposes. While there is a clear correlation and similar convergent validity between C10D and 5L, the C10D demonstrates good test-retest reliability and excellent responsiveness in the improvement group. However, in Chinese breast cancer patients, the advantages of using QLU-C10D as a cancer-specific scale are not fully evident, as the RE＜1 suggests that EQ-5D-5L is more efficient than QLU-C10D. Moreover, the data in this study suggest that choosing 5L would lead to greater utility gains.

Therefore, while QLU-C10D validates good measurement properties as a cancer-specific scale, the choice of QALY calculation should be based on specific circumstances or by comparing multiple scales to determine the optimal solution.