Table 4.
Sensitivity, Specificity and Accuracy of CTCAE, MOSES and C-MOSES in predicting substantial QOL symptoms and functional scales.
| QOL Symptoms | CTCAE maximum grade method |
MOSES Method |
|||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Sensitivity | Specificity | Accuracy | p-value (φ*) | Sensitivity | Specificity | Accuracy | p-value (φ*) | AUC | |
| Diarrhoea | 50% | 73% | 69% | 0.096 (0.186) | 43% | 94% | 85% | 0·001 (0·42) | 0.67 |
| Anorexia | 25% | 63% | 51% | 0·24 (0·11) | 9% | 85% | 61% | 0·4 (0·02) | 0.45 |
| Abdominal Pain | 88% | 24% | 57% | 0·046 (0·156) | 58% | 85% | 71% | 0·001 (0·45) | 0.76 |
| Urinary incontinence | 65% | 59% | 61% | 0·04 (0·226) | 30% | 91% | 72% | 0·01 (0·27) | 0.65 |
| Urinary frequency | 63% | 56% | 59% | 0·045 (0·18) | 21% | 91% | 62% | 0·06 (0·16) | 0.63 |
| Fatigue | 90% | 24% | 76% | 0.03 (0·165) | 63% | 70% | 64% | 0·001 (0·27) | 0.71 |
| QOL functional Domains | CTCAE maximum grade | Cumulative-MOSES | |||||||
| Physical function | 87% | 13% | 70% | 0·982 (0.002) | 56% | 65% | 58% | 0·003 (0·213) | 0.67 |
| Role function | 86% | 13% | 31% | 0·892 (0.10) | 46% | 80% | 72% | 0·001 (0·256) | 0.68 |
| Social function | 85% | 10% | 67% | 0·088 (0·153) | 27% | 100% | 28% | 0·22 (0·085) | 0.77 |
| Global health status/QOL | 22% | 90% | 38% | 0·446 (0.54) | 32% | 92% | 47% | 0·001 (0·235) | 0.59 |
⁎
φ – phi value is used to measure effect size where 0·2, 0·5 and 0·8 represents small medium and large effect size (Cohen,1988), area under curve comparison not feasible for both methods as CTCAE uses categorical and MOSES uses continuous data.