Literature DB >> 17335308

Recombinant erythropoietin for chemotherapy-related anaemia: economic value and health-related quality-of-life assessment using direct utility elicitation and discrete choice experiment methods.

Diego F Ossa1, Andrew Briggs, Emma McIntosh, Warren Cowell, Tim Littlewood, Mark Sculpher.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: To assess both the health-related quality of life (HR-QOL) and the economic value of erythropoietin treatment in chemotherapy-related anaemia using direct utility elicitation and discrete choice experiment (DCE) methods from a societal perspective in the UK.
METHODS: The time trade-off (TTO) method was employed to obtain utility values suitable for the calculation of QALYs for no, mild, moderate and severe anaemia. Health-state descriptions were developed using the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy - Anaemia (FACT-AN) subscale and the EQ-5D questionnaires, and were validated by clinical experts and patients. In addition, a DCE was implemented to elicit preferences for various anaemia treatment scenarios. The DCE analysis comprised important aspects of treatment identified from a literature review and by consultation with expert clinicians and cancer patients. The DCE included cost as an attribute in order to elicit willingness-to-pay (WTP) values (pound, 2004 values). The two methods were applied in the same cross-sectional sample of 110 lay people. Face-to-face interviews were conducted between February and March 2004.
RESULTS: The mean utility scores were 0.86 (standard error [SE] 0.014) for the no-anaemia state, and 0.78 (SE 0.016), 0.61 (SE 0.020) and 0.48 (SE 0.020) for the mild, moderate and severe anaemia states, respectively. The DCE results revealed the following preferences as significant predictors of choice: higher level of relief from fatigue, lower duration of administration, subcutaneous/intravenous administration versus cannula injection, GP versus hospital location, lower risk of infection or allergic reactions and lower cost per month to the patient. Attribute levels were valued higher for recombinant erythropoietin than for blood transfusion; this is reflected in an incremental welfare value of 368 pounds (95% CI 318, 419).
CONCLUSIONS: The results highlight a societal view that the severity of chemotherapy-related anaemia will significantly affect cancer patients' HR-QOL. The DCE survey shows that the public value favourably the attributes of treatment with recombinant erythropoietin, and indicates a likely patient preference for treatment with recombinant erythropoietin over blood transfusion.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2007        PMID: 17335308     DOI: 10.2165/00019053-200725030-00005

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Pharmacoeconomics        ISSN: 1170-7690            Impact factor:   4.981


  33 in total

Review 1.  Recent advances in the methods of cost-benefit analysis in healthcare. Matching the art to the science.

Authors:  E McIntosh; C Donaldson; M Ryan
Journal:  Pharmacoeconomics       Date:  1999-04       Impact factor: 4.981

2.  Public perception of the risk of blood transfusion.

Authors:  M L Finucane; P Slovic; C K Mertz
Journal:  Transfusion       Date:  2000-08       Impact factor: 3.157

3.  A consistency test of the time trade-off.

Authors:  Han Bleichrodt; Jose Luis Pinto; Jose Maria Abellan-Perpiñan
Journal:  J Health Econ       Date:  2003-11       Impact factor: 3.883

4.  A cost utility analysis of treatment options for gallstone disease: methodological issues and results.

Authors:  J Cook; J Richardson; A Street
Journal:  Health Econ       Date:  1994 May-Jun       Impact factor: 3.046

5.  Impact of therapy with epoetin alfa on clinical outcomes in patients with nonmyeloid malignancies during cancer chemotherapy in community oncology practice. Procrit Study Group.

Authors:  J Glaspy; R Bukowski; D Steinberg; C Taylor; S Tchekmedyian; S Vadhan-Raj
Journal:  J Clin Oncol       Date:  1997-03       Impact factor: 44.544

6.  Effects of epoetin alfa on hematologic parameters and quality of life in cancer patients receiving nonplatinum chemotherapy: results of a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial.

Authors:  T J Littlewood; E Bajetta; J W Nortier; E Vercammen; B Rapoport
Journal:  J Clin Oncol       Date:  2001-06-01       Impact factor: 44.544

7.  Perceptions and preferences of autologous blood donors.

Authors:  S J Lee; B Liljas; W H Churchill; M A Popovsky; C P Stowell; M E Cannon; M Johannesson
Journal:  Transfusion       Date:  1998-08       Impact factor: 3.157

8.  Frequency and significance of anemia in non-Hodgkin's lymphoma patients.

Authors:  I Moullet; G Salles; N Ketterer; C Dumontet; F Bouafia; E M Neidhart-Berard; C Thieblemont; P Felman; B Coiffier
Journal:  Ann Oncol       Date:  1998-10       Impact factor: 32.976

9.  What are cancer patients willing to pay for prophylactic epoetin alfa? A cost-benefit analysis.

Authors:  A Ortega; G Dranitsaris; A L Puodziunas
Journal:  Cancer       Date:  1998-12-15       Impact factor: 6.860

10.  Patients' preferences for the management of non-metastatic prostate cancer: discrete choice experiment.

Authors:  Mark Sculpher; Stirling Bryan; Pat Fry; Patricia de Winter; Heather Payne; Mark Emberton
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  2004-01-29
View more
  12 in total

1.  Health-related quality of life in Parkinson's: impact of 'off' time and stated treatment preferences.

Authors:  Cicely Kerr; Emily J Lloyd; Charlotte E Kosmas; Helen T Smith; James A Cooper; Karissa Johnston; Emma McIntosh; Andrew J Lloyd
Journal:  Qual Life Res       Date:  2015-12-01       Impact factor: 4.147

Review 2.  A descriptive review on methods to prioritize outcomes in a health care context.

Authors:  Inger M Janssen; Ansgar Gerhardus; Milly A Schröer-Günther; Fülöp Scheibler
Journal:  Health Expect       Date:  2014-08-25       Impact factor: 3.377

Review 3.  Risk as an attribute in discrete choice experiments: a systematic review of the literature.

Authors:  Mark Harrison; Dan Rigby; Caroline Vass; Terry Flynn; Jordan Louviere; Katherine Payne
Journal:  Patient       Date:  2014       Impact factor: 3.883

4.  Does the inclusion of a cost attribute result in different preferences for the surgical treatment of primary basal cell carcinoma?: a comparison of two discrete-choice experiments.

Authors:  Brigitte A B Essers; Debby van Helvoort-Postulart; Martin H Prins; Martino Neumann; Carmen D Dirksen
Journal:  Pharmacoeconomics       Date:  2010       Impact factor: 4.981

5.  Cost-effectiveness of pazopanib compared with sunitinib in metastatic renal cell carcinoma in Canada.

Authors:  J Amdahl; J Diaz; J Park; H R Nakhaipour; T E Delea
Journal:  Curr Oncol       Date:  2016-08-12       Impact factor: 3.677

Review 6.  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

7.  Lenalidomide for multiple myeloma: cost-effectiveness in patients with one prior therapy in England and Wales.

Authors:  Ruth E Brown; Sean Stern; Sujith Dhanasiri; Steve Schey
Journal:  Eur J Health Econ       Date:  2012-05-10

8.  A Systematic Review of Discrete Choice Experiments in Oncology Treatments.

Authors:  Hannah Collacott; Vikas Soekhai; Caitlin Thomas; Anne Brooks; Ella Brookes; Rachel Lo; Sarah Mulnick; Sebastian Heidenreich
Journal:  Patient       Date:  2021-05-05       Impact factor: 3.883

9.  Obstetrical outcome valuations by patients, professionals, and laypersons: differences within and between groups using three valuation methods.

Authors:  Denise Bijlenga; Erwin Birnie; Ben Wj Mol; Gouke J Bonsel
Journal:  BMC Pregnancy Childbirth       Date:  2011-11-12       Impact factor: 3.007

10.  The challenges of meeting the blood transfusion requirements in Sub-Saharan Africa: the need for the development of alternatives to allogenic blood.

Authors:  Erhabor Osaro; Adias Teddy Charles
Journal:  J Blood Med       Date:  2011-02-06
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.