Literature DB >> 12113388

Stability of time trade-off utilities for health states associated with the treatment of prostate cancer.

Christopher S Saigal1, Jeffrey Gornbein, Kristen Reid, Mark S Litwin.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Patients diagnosed with localized prostate cancer face several treatment options. Patient preferences for treatment side effects often dominate the decision making process. We proposed to learn more about the nature of patient preferences, or utilities, for these side effects.
METHODS: Two hundred and fifteen men were consecutively enrolled from three institutions for assessment after prostate needle biopsy. Baseline and 6 month follow-up assessments were done using the University of California, Los Angeles Prostate Cancer Index (UCLA PCI), and a laptop utility assessment application, U-Titer II. Patient utility was assessed for current pelvic functions as well as hypothetical pelvic dysfunctions. We calculated stability of utility scores and correlations between utility scores and UCLA PCI scores.
RESULTS: Utility scores for current pelvic functions exhibited a significant 'ceiling effect.' Utility scores for current pelvic functions and hypothetical impaired states were stable after 6 months in patients with negative biopsies. In patients who underwent treatment, utility for current sexual function decreased by 0.13 units (p < 0.00) and utility for current urinary function decreased by 0.09 units (p < 0.01). Utility for hypothetical stress urinary incontinence rose in men with a >25-point drop in UCLA PCI score.
CONCLUSION: Utilities for some 'current' pelvic functions decreased in tandem with UCLA PCI scores in men who experienced >25-point changes in these scores. Utilities for some 'hypothetical' pelvic dysfunctions rose as men began to actually experience functional changes in those areas.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2002        PMID: 12113388     DOI: 10.1023/a:1015609126536

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Qual Life Res        ISSN: 0962-9343            Impact factor:   4.147


  33 in total

1.  Decision analysis as an aid to determining the management of early low rectal cancer for the individual patient.

Authors:  L K Temple; D Naimark; R S McLeod
Journal:  J Clin Oncol       Date:  1999-01       Impact factor: 44.544

2.  A comparison of external beam radiation therapy versus radical prostatectomy for patients with low risk prostate carcinoma diagnosed, staged, and treated at a single institution.

Authors:  A A Martinez; J A Gonzalez; A K Chung; L L Kestin; M Balasubramaniam; A C Diokno; E L Ziaja; D S Brabbins; F A Vicini
Journal:  Cancer       Date:  2000-01-15       Impact factor: 6.860

Review 3.  Utility approach to measuring health-related quality of life.

Authors:  G W Torrance
Journal:  J Chronic Dis       Date:  1987

Review 4.  Relationship between psychometric and utility-based approaches to the measurement of health-related quality of life.

Authors:  D A Revicki; R M Kaplan
Journal:  Qual Life Res       Date:  1993-12       Impact factor: 4.147

5.  Do patients' evaluations of a future health state change when they actually enter that state?

Authors:  H A Llewellyn-Thomas; H J Sutherland; E C Thiel
Journal:  Med Care       Date:  1993-11       Impact factor: 2.983

6.  Toward a peer review process for medical decision analysis models.

Authors:  F A Sonnenberg; M S Roberts; J Tsevat; J B Wong; M Barry; D L Kent
Journal:  Med Care       Date:  1994-07       Impact factor: 2.983

7.  Preferences for health states: a review of measurement methods.

Authors:  G W Torrance
Journal:  Mead Johnson Symp Perinat Dev Med       Date:  1982

8.  Auranofin therapy and quality of life in patients with rheumatoid arthritis. Results of a multicenter trial.

Authors:  C Bombardier; J Ware; I J Russell; M Larson; A Chalmers; J L Read
Journal:  Am J Med       Date:  1986-10       Impact factor: 4.965

9.  Eliciting preferences for alternative drug therapies in oncology: influence of treatment outcome description, elicitation technique and treatment experience on preferences.

Authors:  A M O'Connor; N F Boyd; P Warde; L Stolbach; J E Till
Journal:  J Chronic Dis       Date:  1987

10.  Methodological issues of patient utility measurement. Experience from two clinical trials.

Authors:  M P Rutten-van Mölken; C H Bakker; E K van Doorslaer; S van der Linden
Journal:  Med Care       Date:  1995-09       Impact factor: 2.983

View more
  4 in total

1.  The stability of utility scores: test-retest reliability and the interpretation of utility scores in elective total hip arthroplasty.

Authors:  D Feeny; C M Blanchard; J L Mahon; R Bourne; C Rorabeck; L Stitt; S Webster-Bogaert
Journal:  Qual Life Res       Date:  2004-02       Impact factor: 4.147

2.  Use of forecasted assessment of quality of life to validate time-trade-off utilities and a prostate cancer screening decision-analytic model.

Authors:  Scott B Cantor; Ashish A Deshmukh; Murray D Krahn; Robert J Volk
Journal:  Health Expect       Date:  2013-10-23       Impact factor: 3.377

3.  Association between utility and treatment among patients with prostate cancer.

Authors:  Ravishankar Jayadevappa; J Sanford Schwartz; Sumedha Chhatre; Alan J Wein; S Bruce Malkowicz
Journal:  Qual Life Res       Date:  2010-03-05       Impact factor: 4.147

4.  Eliciting utilities using functional methodology: people's disutilities for the adverse outcomes of cardiopulmonary resuscitation.

Authors:  Alexandra Gamelin; María Teresa Muñoz Sastre; Paul Clay Sorum; Etienne Mullet
Journal:  Qual Life Res       Date:  2006-04       Impact factor: 4.147

  4 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.