Systematic review of health state utility values for economic evaluation of colorectal cancer

Springer Science and Business Media LLC - Tập 6 - Trang 1-10 - 2016
Kim Jeong1, John Cairns1
1Department of Health Services Research and Policy, London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, London, UK

Tóm tắt

Cost-utility analyses undertaken to inform decision making regarding colorectal cancer (CRC) require a set of health state utility values (HSUVs) so that the time CRC patients spend in different health states can be aggregated into quality-adjusted life-years (QALY). This study reviews CRC-related HSUVs that could be used in economic evaluation and assesses their advantages and disadvantages with respect to valuation methods used and CRC clinical pathways. Fifty-seven potentially relevant studies were identified which collectively report 321 CRC-related HSUVs. HSUVs (even for similar health states) vary markedly and this adds to the uncertainty regarding estimates of cost-effectiveness. There are relatively few methodologically robust HSUVs that can be directly used in economic evaluations concerned with CRC. There is considerable scope to develop new HSUVs which improve on those currently available either by expanded collection of generic measures or by making greater use of condition-specific data, for example, using mapping algorithms.

Tài liệu tham khảo

Haggar FA, Boushey RP. Colorectal cancer epidemiology: incidence, mortality, survival, and risk factors. Clin Colon Rectal Surg. 2009;22(4):191–7. Sung JJ, et al. Increasing incidence of colorectal cancer in Asia: implications for screening. Lancet Oncol. 2005;6(11):871–6. Peasgood T, Ward SE, Brazier J. Health-state utility values in breast cancer. Expert Rev Pharmacoecon Outcomes Res. 2010;10(5):553–66. Best JH, et al. Preference values associated with stage III colon cancer and adjuvant chemotherapy. Qual Life Res. 2010;19(3):391–400. Dominitz JA, Provenzale D. Patient preferences and quality of life associated with colorectal cancer screening. Am J Gastroenterol. 1997;92(12):2171–8. Hornbrook MC, et al. Complications among colorectal cancer survivors: SF-6D preference-weighted quality of life scores. Med Care. 2011;49(3):321–6. Miller AR, et al. Quality of life and cost effectiveness analysis of therapy for locally recurrent rectal cancer. Dis Colon Rectum. 2000;43:1651–1703. Ness RM, et al. Utility valuations for outcome states of colorectal cancer. Am J Gastroenterol. 1999;94(6):1650–7. Pickard AS, et al. Comparison of FACT- and EQ-5D-based utility scores in cancer. Value Health. 2012;15(2):305–11. Ramsey SD, et al. Quality of life in survivors of colorectal carcinoma. Cancer. 2000;88(6):1294–303. Ramsey SD, et al. Quality of life in long term survivors of colorectal cancer. Am J Gastroenterol. 2002;97(5):1228–34. Smith DM, et al. Misremembering colostomies? Former patients give lower utility ratings than do current patients. Health Psychol. 2006;25(6):688–95. Syngal S, et al. Benefits of colonoscopic surveillance and prophylactic colectomy in patients with hereditary nonpolyposis colorectal cancer mutations. Ann Intern Med. 1998;129(10):787–96. Ward P, et al. Physical function and quality of life in frail and/or elderly patients with metastatic colorectal cancer treated with capecitabine and bevacizumab: an exploratory analysis. Journal of Geriatric Oncology. 2014;5(4):368–75. Brown SR, et al. The impact of postoperative complications on long-term quality of life after curative colorectal cancer surgery. Ann Surg. 2014;259(5):916–23. Downing A, et al. Health-related quality of life after colorectal cancer in England: a patient-reported outcomes study of individuals 12 to 36 months after diagnosis. J Clin Oncol. 2015;33(6):616–24. Hall PS, et al. Costs of cancer care for use in economic evaluation: a UK analysis of patient-level routine health system data. Br J Cancer. 2015;112(5):948–56. Hompes R, et al. Evaluation of quality of life and function at 1 year after transanal endoscopic microsurgery. Colorectal Dis. 2015;17(2):O54–61. Jordan J, et al. Laparoscopic versus open colorectal resection for cancer and polyps: A cost-effectiveness study. Clinico Economics and Outcomes Research. 2014;6:415–22. Petrou S, Campbell N. Stabilisation in colorectal cancer. Int J Palliat Nurs. 1997;3(5):275. Sharma A, et al. Predictors of early postoperative quality of life after elective resection for colorectal cancer. Ann Surg Oncol. 2007;14(12):3435–42. Wilson TR, Alexander DJ, Kind P. Measurement of health-related quality of life in the early follow-up of colon and rectal cancer. Dis Colon Rectum. 2006;49(11):1692–702. Doornebosch PG, et al. Impact of transanal endoscopic microsurgery on functional outcome and quality of life. Int J Colorectal Dis. 2008;23(7):709–13. Doornebosch PG, et al. Quality of life after transanal endoscopic microsurgery and total mesorectal excision in early rectal cancer. Colorectal Dis. 2007;9(6):553–8. Gosselink MP, et al. Quality of life after total mesorectal excision for rectal cancer. Colorectal Dis. 2006;8(1):15–22. Kapidzic A, et al. Quality of life in participants of a CRC screening program. Br J Cancer. 2012;107(8):1295–301. van den Brink M, et al. Cost-utility analysis of preoperative radiotherapy in patients with rectal cancer undergoing total mesorectal excision: a study of the Dutch Colorectal Cancer Group. J Clin Oncol Off J Am Soc Clin Oncol. 2004;22(2):244–53. Wiering B, et al. Added value of positron emission tomography imaging in the surgical treatment of colorectal liver metastases. Nucl Med Commun. 2010;31(11):938–44. Wiering B, et al. Long-term global quality of life in patients treated for colorectal liver metastases. Br J Surg. 2011;98(4):565–71. discussion 571–2. Wong CK, et al. Clinical correlates of health preference and generic health-related quality of life in patients with colorectal neoplasms. PLoS ONE [Electronic Resource]. 2013b;8(3): e58341 Wong CK, et al. Mapping the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-general or -Colorectal to SF-6D in Chinese patients with colorectal neoplasm. Value Health. 2012;15(3):495–503. Wong CK, et al. Predicting SF-6D from the European Organization for Treatment and Research of Cancer Quality of Life Questionnaire scores in patients with colorectal cancer. Value Health. 2013a;16(2):373–84. Wong CK, et al. Responsiveness was similar between direct and mapped SF-6D in colorectal cancer patients who declined. J Clin Epidemiol. 2014;67(2):219–27. Yang Y, et al. Improving the mapping of condition-specific health-related quality of life onto SF-6D score. Qual Life Res Int J Qual Life Asp Treat Care Rehab. 2014;23(8):2343–53. Boyd NF, et al. Whose utilities for decision analysis? Med Decis Making. 1990;10(1):58–67. Dranitsaris G, et al. The application of pharmacoeconomic modelling to estimate a value-based price for new cancer drugs. J Eval Clin Pract. 2012b;18(2):343–51. Lee L, et al. Valuing postoperative recovery: validation of the SF-6D health-state utility. J Surg Res. 2013;184(1):108–14. Mittmann N, et al. Prospective cost-effectiveness analysis of cetuximab in metastatic colorectal cancer: Evaluation of national cancer institute of canada clinical trials group CO.17 Trial. J Natl Cancer Inst. 2009;101(17):1182–92. Augestad K, et al. Cost-effectiveness and quality of life in surgeon versus general practitioner-organised colon cancer surveillance: a randomised controlled trial. BMJ Open. 2013;3(4):e002391. Hamashima C. Long-term quality of life of postoperative rectal cancer patients. Journal of Gastroenterology & Hepatology. 2002;17(5):571–6. Kim SH, et al. Mapping EORTC QLQ-C30 onto EQ-5D for the assessment of cancer patients. Health Qual Life Outcomes. 2012;10:151. Kim SH, et al. Deriving a mapping algorithm for converting SF-36 scores to EQ-5D utility score in a Korean population. Health Qual Life Outcomes. 2014;12:145. Norum J, et al. Adjuvant chemotherapy (5-fluorouracil and levamisole) in Dukes' B and C colorectal carcinoma. A cost-effectiveness analysis. Ann Oncol. 1997;8(1):65–70. Shiroiwa T, Fukuda T, Tsutani K. Cost-effectiveness analysis of XELOX for metastatic colorectal cancer based on the NO16966 and NO16967 trials. Br J Cancer. 2009;101(1):12–8. Smith R, et al. A cost-utility approach to the use of 5-fluorouracil and levamisole as adjuvant chemotherapy for Dukes' C colonic carcinoma. Med J Aust. 1993;158:319–22. Young CJ, et al. Improving Quality of Life for People with Incurable Large-Bowel Obstruction: Randomized Control Trial of Colonic Stent Insertion. Dis Colon Rectum. 2015;58(9):838–49. Cheung YB, et al. Mapping the English and Chinese versions of the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-General to the EQ-5D utility index. Value Health. 2009;12(2):371–6. Dranitsaris G, et al. A pharmacoeconomic modeling approach to estimate a value-based price for new oncology drugs in Europe. J Oncol Pharm Pract. 2012a;18(1):57–67. Dranitsaris G, et al. Using pharmacoeconomic modelling to determine value-based pricing for new pharmaceuticals in Malaysia. Malaysian Journal of Medical Sciences. 2011b;18(4):31–42. Dranitsaris G, et al. Improving patient access to cancer drugs in India: Using economic modeling to estimate a more affordable drug cost based on measures of societal value. Int J Technol Assess Health Care. 2011a;27(1):23–30. Farkkila N, et al. Health-related quality of life in colorectal cancer. Colorectal Dis. 2013;15(5):e215–22. Haapamaki MM, et al. Physical performance and quality of life after extended abdominoperineal excision of rectum and reconstruction of the pelvic floor with gluteus maximus flap. Dis Colon Rectum. 2011;54(1):101–6. Polat U, et al. Evaluation of quality of life and anxiety and depression levels in patients receiving chemotherapy for colorectal cancer: Impact of patient education before treatment initiation. Journal of Gastrointestinal Oncology. 2014;5(4):270–5. Schwandner O. Sacral neuromodulation for fecal incontinence and "low anterior resection syndrome" following neoadjuvant therapy for rectal cancer. Int J Colorectal Dis. 2013;28(5):665–9. Andersson J, et al. Health-related quality of life after laparoscopic and open surgery for rectal cancer in a randomized trial. Br J Surg. 2013;100(7):941–9. Bennett L, et al. Health-related quality of life in patients with metastatic colorectal cancer treated with panitumumab in first- or second-line treatment. Br J Cancer. 2011;105(10):1495–502. Carter HE, et al. The cost effectiveness of bevacizumab when added to capecitabine, with or without mitomycin-C, in first line treatment of metastatic colorectal cancer: Results from the Australasian phase III MAX study. European Journal of Cancer (Oxford, England: 1990). 2014;50(3):535–43. Odom D, et al. Health-related quality of life and colorectal cancer-specific symptoms in patients with chemotherapy-refractory metastatic disease treated with panitumumab. Int J Colorectal Dis. 2011;26(2):173–81. Stein D, et al. Assessing health-state utility values in patients with metastatic colorectal cancer: a utility study in the United Kingdom and the Netherlands. Int J Colorectal Dis. 2014;29(10):1203–10. Wang J, et al. A Q-TWiST analysis comparing panitumumab plus best supportive care (BSC) with BSC alone in patients with wild-type KRAS metastatic colorectal cancer. Br J Cancer. 2011;104(12):1848–53. Rowen D, et al. Deriving a preference-based measure for cancer using the EORTC QLQ-C30. Value Health. 2011;14(5):721–31. Norman R, et al. Using a discrete choice experiment to value the QLU-C10D: feasibility and sensitivity to presentation format. Qual Life Res. 2016;25(3):637–49. Longworth L, et al. Use of generic and condition-specific measures of health-related quality of life in NICE decision-making: a systematic review, statistical modelling and survey. Health Technol Assess. 2014;18(9):1–224. McKenzie L, van der Pol M. Mapping the EORTC QLQ C-30 onto the EQ-5D instrument: the potential to estimate QALYs without generic preference data. Value Health. 2009;12(1):167–71. Teckle P, 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. Dolan P. Modeling valuations for EuroQol health states. Med Care. 1997;35(11):1095–108. Kind P, et al. Variations in population health status: results from a United Kingdom national questionnaire survey. BMJ. 1998;316(7133):736–41. NICE. Guide to the methods of technology appraisal 2013. 2013. Accessed 1 June 2013. Burke MJ, Sidhu R, George E. PCN158 - Utility Values Used in National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) Technology Appraisals of Medicines for 4 Metastatic Cancers. Value Health. 2013;16(7):A420. Glaser AW, et al. Patient-reported outcomes of cancer survivors in England 1-5 years after diagnosis: a cross-sectional survey. BMJ Open. 2013;3:e002317.