Converting Parkinson-Specific Scores into Health State Utilities to Assess Cost-Utility Analysis
Tóm tắt
The aim of this study was to compare the Parkinson’s Disease Questionnaire-8 (PDQ-8) with three multi-attribute utility (MAU) instruments (EQ-5D-3L, EQ-5D-5L, and 15D) and to develop mapping algorithms that could be used to transform PDQ-8 scores into MAU scores. A cross-sectional study was conducted. A final sample of 228 evaluable patients was included in the analyses. Sociodemographic and clinical data were also collected. Two EQ-5D questionnaires were scored using Spanish tariffs. Two models and three statistical techniques were used to estimate each model in the direct mapping framework for all three MAU instruments, including the most widely used ordinary least squares (OLS), the robust MM-estimator, and the generalized linear model (GLM). For both EQ-5D-3L and EQ-5D-5L, indirect response mapping based on an ordered logit model was also conducted. Three goodness-of-fit tests were employed to compare the models: the mean absolute error (MAE), the root-mean-square error (RMSE), and the intra-class correlation coefficient (ICC) between the predicted and observed utilities. Health state utility scores ranged from 0.61 (EQ-5D-3L) to 0.74 (15D). The mean PDQ-8 score was 27.51. The correlation between overall PDQ-8 score and each MAU instrument ranged from − 0.729 (EQ-5D-5L) to − 0.752 (EQ-5D-3L). A mapping algorithm based on PDQ-8 items had better performance than using the overall score. For the two EQ-5D questionnaires, in general, the indirect mapping approach had comparable or even better performance than direct mapping based on MAE. Mapping algorithms developed in this study enable the estimation of utility values from the PDQ-8. The indirect mapping equations reported for two EQ-5D questionnaires will further facilitate the calculation of EQ-5D utility scores using other country-specific tariffs.
Tài liệu tham khảo
Gibb WRG, Lees AJ. The significance of the lewy body in the diagnosis of idiopathic Parkinson’s Disease. Neuropathol Appl Neurobiol. 1989;15(1):27–44.
Lees AJ, Hardy J, Revesz T. Parkinson’s disease. Lancet. 2009;373(9680):2055–66.
Dowding CH, Shenton CL, Salek SS. A review of the health-related quality of life and economic impact of Parkinson’s disease. Drugs Aging. 2006;23(9):693–721.
Martinez-Martin P, Rodriguez-Blazquez C, Paz S, Forjaz MJ, Frades-Payo B, Cubo E, et al. Parkinson symptoms and health related quality of life as predictors of costs: a longitudinal observational study with linear mixed model analysis. PLoS One. 2015;10(12):e0145310.
Tosh JC, Longworth LJ, George E. Utility values in National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence (NICE) Technology Appraisals. Value Health. 2011;14(1):102–9.
Earnshaw J, Lewis G. NICE guide to the methods of technology appraisal: pharmaceutical industry perspective. PharmacoEconomics. 2008;26(9):725–7.
Drummond MF, Sculpher MJ, Claxton K, Stoddart GL, Torrance GW. Methods for the economic evaluation of health care programmes. Oxford: Oxford University Press; 2015.
Richardson J, McKie J, Bariola E. Multi attribute utility instruments and their use. In: Culyer AJ, editor. Online encyclopedia of health economics. San Diego: Elsevier Science; 2014. p. 341–57.
Heniford BT, Walters AL, Lincourt AE, Novitsky YW, Hope WW, Kercher KW. Comparison of generic versus specific quality-of-life scales for mesh hernia repairs. J Am Coll Surg. 2008;206(4):638–44.
Maly M, Vondra V. Generic versus disease-specific instruments in quality-of-life assessment of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. Methods Inf Med. 2006;45(2):211–5.
Rowen D, Brazier J, Ara R, Zouraq IA. The role of condition-specific preference-based measures in health technology assessment. PharmacoEconomics. 2017;35(Suppl. 1):33–41.
Teckle P, McTaggart-Cowan H, Van der Hoek K, Chia S, Melosky B, Gelmon K, et al. Mapping the FACT-G cancer-specific quality of life instrument to the EQ-5D and SF-6D. Health Qual Life Outcomes. 2013;11:203.
Muangpaisan W, Mathews A, Hori H, Seidel D. A systematic review of the worldwide prevalence and incidence of Parkinson’s disease. J Med Assoc Thai. 2011;94(6):749.
Badia X, Roset M, Montserrat S, Herdman M, Segura A. The Spanish version of EuroQol: a description and its applications. European Quality of Life scale. Med Clin. 1999;112(Suppl 1):79–85.
Herdman M, Gudex C, Lloyd A, Janssen M, Kind P, Parkin D, et al. Development and preliminary testing of the new five-level version of EQ-5D (EQ-5D-5L). Qual Life Res. 2011;20(10):1727–36.
Badia X, Roset M, Herdman M, Kind P. A comparison of United Kingdom and Spanish general population time trade-off values for EQ-5D health states. Med Decis Making. 2001;21(1):7–16.
Ramos-Goñi JM, Pinto-Prades JL, Oppe M, Cabasés JM, Serrano-Aguilar P, Rivero-Arias O. Valuation and modeling of EQ-5D-5L health states using a hybrid approach. Med Care. 2017;55(7):e51–8.
Sintonen H. The 15D instrument of health-related quality of life: properties and applications. Ann Med. 2001;33(5):328–36.
Garcia-Gordillo M, del Pozo-Cruz B, Adsuar JC, Sanchez-Martinez FI, Abellan-Perpinan JM. Validation and comparison of 15-D and EQ-5D-5L instruments in a Spanish Parkinson’s disease population sample. Qual Life Res. 2014;23(4):1315–26.
Jenkinson C, Fitzpatrick R, Peto V, Greenhall R, Hyman N. The PDQ-8: development and validation of a short-form Parkinson’s disease questionnaire. Psychol Health. 1997;12(6):805–14.
Chen G, Stevens K, Rowen D, Ratcliffe J. From KIDSCREEN-10 to CHU9D: creating a unique mapping algorithm for application in economic evaluation. Health Qual Life Outcomes. 2014;12:134.
Chen G, Khan MA, Iezzi A, Ratcliffe J, Richardson J. Mapping between 6 multiattribute utility instruments. Med Decis Making. 2016;36(2):160–75.
Fox J. Applied Regression Analysis and Generalized Linear Models (Second Edition). Thousand Oaks: SAGE Publications; 2008.
Freese J, Long JS. Regression models for categorical dependent variables using Stata. Austin: Stata; 2006.
Cheung Y, Tan L, Lau P, Au W, Luo N. Mapping the eight-item Parkinson’s Disease Questionnaire (PDQ-8) to the EQ-5D utility index. Qual Life Res. 2008;17(9):1173–81.
McGraw KO, Wong SP. Forming inferences about some intraclass correlation coefficients. Psychol Methods. 1996;1(1):30–46.
Dams J, Klotsche J, Bornschein B, Reese JP, Balzer-Geldsetzer M, Winter Y, et al. Mapping the EQ-5D index by UPDRS and PDQ-8 in patients with Parkinson’s disease. Health Qual Life Outcomes. 2013;11:35.
National Institute for Health and Care Excellence. Guide to the methods of technology apprasial, April 2013. London: UK National Health Service, National Institute for Health and Care Excellence; 2013.
Young MK, Ng SK, Mellick G, Scuffham PA. Mapping of the PDQ-39 to EQ-5D scores in patients with Parkinson’s disease. Qual Life Res. 2013;22(5):1065–72.
Kent S, Gray A, Schlackow I, Jenkinson C, McIntosh E. Mapping from the Parkinson’s Disease Questionnaire PDQ-39 to the Generic EuroQol EQ-5D-3L: the value of mixture models. Med Decis Making. 2015;35(7):902–11.
Tan LC, Luo N, Nazri M, Li SC, Thumboo J. Validity and reliability of the PDQ-39 and the PDQ-8 in English-speaking Parkinson’s disease patients in Singapore. Parkinsonism Relat Disord. 2004;10(8):493–9.
Metta V, Logishetty K, Martinez-Martin P, Gage HM, Schartau P, Kaluarachchi T, et al. The possible clinical predictors of fatigue in Parkinson’s disease: a study of 135 patients as part of international nonmotor scale validation project. Parkinson’s Disease. 2011;2011.
Brazier JE, Yang Y, Tsuchiya A, Rowen DL. A review of studies mapping (or cross walking) non-preference based measures of health to generic preference-based measures. Eur J Health Econ. 2010;11(2):215–25.
Ara R, Rowen D, Mukuria C. The use of mapping to estimate health state utility values. PharmacoEconomics. 2017;35(Suppl 1):57–66.
McCabe C, Edlin R, Meads D, Brown C, Kharroubi S. Constructing indirect utility models: some observations on the principles and practice of mapping to obtain health state utilities. PharmacoEconomics. 2013;31(8):635–41.
Longworth L, Rowen D. Mapping to obtain EQ-5D utility values for use in NICE health technology assessments. Value Health. 2013;16(1):202–10.
Borchani H, Bielza C, Martinez-Martin P, Larrañaga P. Predicting the EQ-5D from the Parkinson’s disease questionnaire PDQ-8 using multi-dimensional Bayesian network classifiers. Biomed Eng Appl Basis Commun. 2014;26(01):1450015.
Borchani H, Bielza C, Martı P, Larrañaga P. Markov blanket-based approach for learning multi-dimensional Bayesian network classifiers: an application to predict the European Quality of Life-5 Dimensions (EQ-5D) from the 39-item Parkinson’s Disease Questionnaire (PDQ-39). J Biomed Inf. 2012;45(6):1175–84.