Literature DB >> 10364039

Utility valuations for outcome states of colorectal cancer.

R M Ness1, A M Holmes, R Klein, R Dittus.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: Utilities for the outcome states of colorectal cancer (CRC) must be measured to evaluate the cost-utility of screening and surveillance strategies for this disease. We sought to measure utilities for stage-dependent outcome states of CRC.
METHODS: We identified persons who had previously undergone removal of colorectal adenoma. We conducted individual interviews in which these participants were presented with stage-dependent outcome states and were asked to assess utilities for them using the standard gamble technique.
RESULTS: A total of 90 participants were interviewed; nine were excluded, leaving 81 for analysis. We obtained the following utility valuations: stage I rectal or stage I/II colon cancer (mean 0.74, median 0.75); stage III colon cancer (mean 0.67, median 0.75); stage II/III rectal cancer without ostomy (mean 0.59, median 0.60), stage II/III rectal cancer with ostomy (mean 0.50, median 0.55), stage IV rectal or colon cancer (mean 0.25, median 0.20). These valuations were statistically different from each other.
CONCLUSIONS: We measured utilities for stage-dependent outcome states of CRC in a sample of persons who had previously undergone removal of colorectal adenoma. We found that our participants were able to differentiate between the presented outcome states and assigned lower utility to increasingly morbid states. Our results show that stage-dependent morbidity is an important consideration in CRC and should be incorporated into any decision analysis model evaluating the cost-effectiveness of CRC screening or surveillance.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  1999        PMID: 10364039     DOI: 10.1111/j.1572-0241.1999.01157.x

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Am J Gastroenterol        ISSN: 0002-9270            Impact factor:   10.864


  60 in total

1.  Cost-effectiveness analysis of chromoendoscopy for colorectal cancer surveillance in patients with ulcerative colitis.

Authors:  Gauree Gupta Konijeti; Mark G Shrime; Ashwin N Ananthakrishnan; Andrew T Chan
Journal:  Gastrointest Endosc       Date:  2013-11-18       Impact factor: 9.427

2.  Real-world cost-effectiveness of oxaliplatin in stage III colon cancer: a synthesis of clinical trial and daily practice evidence.

Authors:  Chantal W M van Gils; Saskia de Groot; William K Redekop; Miriam Koopman; Cornelis J A Punt; Carin A Uyl-de Groot
Journal:  Pharmacoeconomics       Date:  2013-08       Impact factor: 4.981

3.  Cost-utility analysis of colonoscopy or faecal immunochemical test for population-based organised colorectal cancer screening.

Authors:  Miguel Areia; Lorenzo Fuccio; Cesare Hassan; Evelien Dekker; António Dias-Pereira; Mário Dinis-Ribeiro
Journal:  United European Gastroenterol J       Date:  2018-09-19       Impact factor: 4.623

4.  Radiofrequency ablation versus nephron-sparing surgery for small unilateral renal cell carcinoma: cost-effectiveness analysis.

Authors:  Pari V Pandharipande; Debra A Gervais; Peter R Mueller; Chin Hur; G Scott Gazelle
Journal:  Radiology       Date:  2008-05-05       Impact factor: 11.105

5.  Preference values associated with stage III colon cancer and adjuvant chemotherapy.

Authors:  Jennie H Best; Louis P Garrison; William Hollingworth; Scott D Ramsey; David L Veenstra
Journal:  Qual Life Res       Date:  2010-04       Impact factor: 4.147

6.  Patient preference and decision-making for initiating metastatic colorectal cancer medical treatment.

Authors:  Alex Z Fu; Kristi D Graves; Roxanne E Jensen; John L Marshall; Margaret Formoso; Arnold L Potosky
Journal:  J Cancer Res Clin Oncol       Date:  2015-11-18       Impact factor: 4.553

Review 7.  A systematic review of utility values for chemotherapy-related adverse events.

Authors:  Fatiha H Shabaruddin; Li-Chia Chen; Rachel A Elliott; Katherine Payne
Journal:  Pharmacoeconomics       Date:  2013-04       Impact factor: 4.981

8.  Cost-effectiveness of oxaliplatin in the adjuvant treatment of colon cancer in Canada.

Authors:  C L Attard; J A Maroun; K Alloul; D T Grima; L M Bernard
Journal:  Curr Oncol       Date:  2010-02       Impact factor: 3.677

9.  Personalizing colonoscopy screening for elderly individuals based on screening history, cancer risk, and comorbidity status could increase cost effectiveness.

Authors:  Frank van Hees; Sameer D Saini; Iris Lansdorp-Vogelaar; Sandeep Vijan; Reinier G S Meester; Harry J de Koning; Ann G Zauber; Marjolein van Ballegooijen
Journal:  Gastroenterology       Date:  2015-08-04       Impact factor: 22.682

10.  Cost effectiveness of ulcerative colitis surveillance in the setting of 5-aminosalicylates.

Authors:  Joel H Rubenstein; Akbar K Waljee; Joanne M Jeter; Fernando S Velayos; Uri Ladabaum; Peter D R Higgins
Journal:  Am J Gastroenterol       Date:  2009-06-02       Impact factor: 10.864

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.