Literature DB >> 17610339

The use of disease-specific outcome measures in cost-utility analysis: the development of Dutch societal preference weights for the FACT-L scale.

Leida M Lamers1, Carin A Uyl-de Groot, Ivonne Buijt.   

Abstract

INTRODUCTION: The Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-Lung (FACT-L) is a validated, sensitive and reliable patient questionnaire that evaluates and quantifies quality of life (QOL) across several domains, including lung cancer-related symptoms. The FACT-L was not designed for use in economic evaluation and does not incorporate preferences into its scoring system.
OBJECTIVE: To derive a set of Dutch preference weights for FACT-L health states that can be used to convert FACT-L into a single value that can be used in cost-utility analyses.
METHODS: A representative sample of the Dutch population (n = 1076) directly valued an orthogonal set of eight FACT-L health states on a 100-point rating scale with the anchor points 'worst imaginable health state' and 'best imaginable health state'. Eleven FACT-L items were selected to describe the FACT-L health states that were directly valued. Regression analysis was used to interpolate values for all other possible health states. Scores were transformed into values on a scale where 0 indicated dead and 1 indicated full health.
RESULTS: The estimated values for FACT-L health states ranged from 0.08 to 0.93. The estimated value sets were applied to FACT-L data of lung cancer patients participating in a clinical study. Significant differences in the mean value and mean gain of 0.12 and 0.07, respectively, were found between patients in remission and patients with progressive disease at 4 weeks' follow-up.
CONCLUSION: Our results reaffirmed that the methodology used here is a feasible option to convert data collected with a disease-specific outcome measure into preferences. We concluded that the sensitivity of the derived set of societal preferences to capture differences and changes in clinical health states is an indication of its construct validity.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2007        PMID: 17610339     DOI: 10.2165/00019053-200725070-00005

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


  30 in total

1.  The estimation of a preference-based measure of health from the SF-36.

Authors:  John Brazier; Jennifer Roberts; Mark Deverill
Journal:  J Health Econ       Date:  2002-03       Impact factor: 3.883

Review 2.  EuroQol: the current state of play.

Authors:  R Brooks
Journal:  Health Policy       Date:  1996-07       Impact factor: 2.980

Review 3.  Is there a case for using visual analogue scale valuations in cost-utility analysis?

Authors:  David Parkin; Nancy Devlin
Journal:  Health Econ       Date:  2006-07       Impact factor: 3.046

4.  Constructing health state preference values from descriptive quality of life outcomes: mission impossible?

Authors:  J V Chancellor; D Coyle; M F Drummond
Journal:  Qual Life Res       Date:  1997-03       Impact factor: 4.147

5.  Framing and labelling effects in health descriptions: quality adjusted life years for treatment of breast cancer.

Authors:  K Gerard; M Dobson; J Hall
Journal:  J Clin Epidemiol       Date:  1993-01       Impact factor: 6.437

6.  What is a clinically meaningful change on the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-Lung (FACT-L) Questionnaire? Results from Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) Study 5592.

Authors:  David Cella; David T Eton; Diane L Fairclough; Philip Bonomi; Anne E Heyes; Cheryl Silberman; Michael K Wolf; David H Johnson
Journal:  J Clin Epidemiol       Date:  2002-03       Impact factor: 6.437

7.  Phase II study of patients with metastatic nonsmall cell carcinoma of the lung treated with paclitaxel by 3-hour infusion.

Authors:  W J Tester; P Y Jin; D H Reardon; J B Cohn; M H Cohen
Journal:  Cancer       Date:  1997-02-15       Impact factor: 6.860

8.  Impact of ZD1839 on non-small cell lung cancer-related symptoms as measured by the functional assessment of cancer therapy-lung scale.

Authors:  David Cella
Journal:  Semin Oncol       Date:  2003-02       Impact factor: 4.929

9.  Efficacy of gefitinib, an inhibitor of the epidermal growth factor receptor tyrosine kinase, in symptomatic patients with non-small cell lung cancer: a randomized trial.

Authors:  Mark G Kris; Ronald B Natale; Roy S Herbst; Thomas J Lynch; Diane Prager; Chandra P Belani; Joan H Schiller; Karen Kelly; Harris Spiridonidis; Alan Sandler; Kathy S Albain; David Cella; Michael K Wolf; Steven D Averbuch; Judith J Ochs; Andrea C Kay
Journal:  JAMA       Date:  2003-10-22       Impact factor: 56.272

10.  Multi-institutional randomized phase II trial of gefitinib for previously treated patients with advanced non-small-cell lung cancer (The IDEAL 1 Trial) [corrected].

Authors:  Masahiro Fukuoka; Seiji Yano; Giuseppe Giaccone; Tomohide Tamura; Kazuhiko Nakagawa; Jean-Yves Douillard; Yutaka Nishiwaki; Johan Vansteenkiste; Shinzoh Kudoh; Danny Rischin; Richard Eek; Takeshi Horai; Kazumasa Noda; Ichiro Takata; Egbert Smit; Steven Averbuch; Angela Macleod; Andrea Feyereislova; Rui-Ping Dong; José Baselga
Journal:  J Clin Oncol       Date:  2003-05-14       Impact factor: 44.544

View more
  7 in total

Review 1.  Evaluation of content on EQ-5D as compared to disease-specific utility measures.

Authors:  Fang-Ju Lin; Louise Longworth; A Simon Pickard
Journal:  Qual Life Res       Date:  2012-06-23       Impact factor: 4.147

Review 2.  The Role of Condition-Specific Preference-Based Measures in Health Technology Assessment.

Authors:  Donna Rowen; John Brazier; Roberta Ara; Ismail Azzabi Zouraq
Journal:  Pharmacoeconomics       Date:  2017-12       Impact factor: 4.981

3.  Adjuvant hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC) in patients with colon cancer at high risk of peritoneal carcinomatosis; the COLOPEC randomized multicentre trial.

Authors:  Charlotte E L Klaver; Gijsbert D Musters; Willem A Bemelman; Cornelis J A Punt; Victor J Verwaal; Marcel G W Dijkgraaf; Arend G J Aalbers; Jarmila D W van der Bilt; Djamila Boerma; Andre J A Bremers; Jacobus W A Burger; Christianne J Buskens; Pauline Evers; Robert J van Ginkel; Wilhelmina M U van Grevenstein; Patrick H J Hemmer; Ignace H J T de Hingh; Laureen A Lammers; Barbara L van Leeuwen; Wilhelmus J H J Meijerink; Simon W Nienhuijs; Jolien Pon; Sandra A Radema; Bert van Ramshorst; Petur Snaebjornsson; Jurriaan B Tuynman; Elisabeth A Te Velde; Marinus J Wiezer; Johannes H W de Wilt; Pieter J Tanis
Journal:  BMC Cancer       Date:  2015-05-24       Impact factor: 4.430

4.  A Checklist for Reporting Valuation Studies of Multi-Attribute Utility-Based Instruments (CREATE).

Authors:  Feng Xie; A Simon Pickard; Paul F M Krabbe; Dennis Revicki; Rosalie Viney; Nancy Devlin; David Feeny
Journal:  Pharmacoeconomics       Date:  2015-08       Impact factor: 4.981

5.  A Patient-Centered Utility Index for Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer in the United States.

Authors:  J Shannon Swan; Inga T Lennes; Natalie N Stump; Jennifer S Temel; David Wang; Lisa Keller; Karen Donelan
Journal:  MDM Policy Pract       Date:  2018-10-15

6.  Estimating quality adjusted progression free survival of first-line treatments for EGFR mutation positive non small cell lung cancer patients in The Netherlands.

Authors:  S Cora Verduyn; Bonne Biesma; Franz M N H Schramel; Feike W van der Scheer; Merel K Langenfeld; Maria A de Peuter; Anne-Marie C Dingemans
Journal:  Health Qual Life Outcomes       Date:  2012-09-10       Impact factor: 3.186

Review 7.  Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Community- and Choice-Based Health State Utility Values for Lung Cancer.

Authors:  Erik F Blom; Kevin Ten Haaf; Harry J de Koning
Journal:  Pharmacoeconomics       Date:  2020-11       Impact factor: 4.981

  7 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.