Literature DB >> 31187319

Quality-adjusted life years in glioma patients: a systematic review on currently available data and the lack of evidence-based utilities.

Vicki Marie Butenschoen1, Anna Kelm1, Bernhard Meyer1, Sandro M Krieg2.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Cost-effectiveness studies gain importance in the context of rising health care expenses and treatment options. Especially in the neuro-oncological context, surgical therapy may increase overall survival, but restrain the patient by postoperative disability. Quality-adjusted life years, express treatment effects and are based on health utilities. In our study, we analyze the current evidence on health economic evaluations in glioma patients.
MATERIAL AND METHODS: We performed a systematic database search including Medline and Cochrane Library. Studies were critically appraised for statistical analyzes including glioma patients, health economic modeling and detailed health outcome. Study evidence was classified according to levels of evidence for therapeutic studies from the Centre for Evidence-Based Medicine (Oxford).
RESULTS: 37 studies (1995-2018) were identified, 29 matched our inclusion criteria. Studies addressed surgical cost-efficiency and/or the standard treatment, postoperative chemotherapy (n = 6) and 5-ALA (n = 3). Only 16 studies used QALY as the outcome measure, most used overall survival or life years gained (LYG). Utilities were either based on one single study (Garside et al. in Health Technol Assess 11:iii-iv, ix-221) or derived from visual analogue scale (VAS). None assessed quality of life values for specific health statuses or utilities. Incremental cost-effectiveness ratios varied from 8325€ per QALY (5-ALA) to 518,342€ per LYG (tumor treating fields).
CONCLUSIONS: Only one study generated utility values to conduct cost-effectiveness analysis (CEA); most studies used indirect outcomes such as LYG or based their model on previously published data. Health economic evaluations lack specific utilities, further investigations are necessary to conduct reliable CEA in the neurosurgical context.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Cost-effectiveness; Glioma; Quality of life

Mesh:

Year:  2019        PMID: 31187319     DOI: 10.1007/s11060-019-03210-2

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Neurooncol        ISSN: 0167-594X            Impact factor:   4.130


  40 in total

1.  Economic evaluation of temozolomide in the treatment of recurrent glioblastoma multiforme.

Authors:  Janne A Martikainen; Akseli Kivioja; Taru Hallinen; Pia Vihinen
Journal:  Pharmacoeconomics       Date:  2005       Impact factor: 4.981

2.  The costs of managing patients with malignant glioma at a neuro-oncology clinic.

Authors:  A Z Latif; D Signorini; A Gregor; I R Whittle
Journal:  Br J Neurosurg       Date:  1998-04       Impact factor: 1.596

3.  A cost-minimising analysis of standard radiotherapy and two experimental therapies in glioblastoma.

Authors:  Tom B Johannesen; Jan Norum; Knut Lote; David Scheie; Henry Hirschberg
Journal:  Radiother Oncol       Date:  2002-02       Impact factor: 6.280

Review 4.  The effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of carmustine implants and temozolomide for the treatment of newly diagnosed high-grade glioma: a systematic review and economic evaluation.

Authors:  R Garside; M Pitt; R Anderson; G Rogers; M Dyer; S Mealing; M Somerville; A Price; K Stein
Journal:  Health Technol Assess       Date:  2007-11       Impact factor: 4.014

5.  Radiotherapy plus concomitant and adjuvant temozolomide for glioblastoma.

Authors:  Roger Stupp; Warren P Mason; Martin J van den Bent; Michael Weller; Barbara Fisher; Martin J B Taphoorn; Karl Belanger; Alba A Brandes; Christine Marosi; Ulrich Bogdahn; Jürgen Curschmann; Robert C Janzer; Samuel K Ludwin; Thierry Gorlia; Anouk Allgeier; Denis Lacombe; J Gregory Cairncross; Elizabeth Eisenhauer; René O Mirimanoff
Journal:  N Engl J Med       Date:  2005-03-10       Impact factor: 91.245

6.  Quality-adjusted survival after tumor resection and/or radiation therapy for elderly patients with glioblastoma multiforme.

Authors:  Alexander Muacevic; Friedrich W Kreth
Journal:  J Neurol       Date:  2003-05       Impact factor: 4.849

7.  Cost-effectiveness of temozolomide for the treatment of newly diagnosed glioblastoma multiforme: a report from the EORTC 26981/22981 NCI-C CE3 Intergroup Study.

Authors:  Leida M Lamers; Roger Stupp; Martin J van den Bent; Maiwenn J Al; Thierry Gorlia; Jean-Blaise Wasserfallen; Nicole Mittmann; Soo Jin Seung; Ralph Crott; Carin A Uyl-de Groot
Journal:  Cancer       Date:  2008-03-15       Impact factor: 6.860

8.  Practical problems with the collection and interpretation of serial quality of life assessments in patients with malignant glioma.

Authors:  M Walker; J Brown; K Brown; A Gregor; I R Whittle; R Grant
Journal:  J Neurooncol       Date:  2003-06       Impact factor: 4.130

9.  Carmustine implants for the treatment of newly diagnosed high-grade gliomas: a cost-utility analysis.

Authors:  Gabriel Rogers; Ruth Garside; Stuart Mealing; Martin Pitt; Rob Anderson; Matthew Dyer; Ken Stein; Margaret Somerville
Journal:  Pharmacoeconomics       Date:  2008       Impact factor: 4.981

10.  Improving the use of research evidence in guideline development: 11. Incorporating considerations of cost-effectiveness, affordability and resource implications.

Authors:  Tessa Tan-Torres Edejer
Journal:  Health Res Policy Syst       Date:  2006-12-05
View more
  3 in total

Review 1.  Research on the Economics of Cancer-Related Health Care: An Overview of the Review Literature.

Authors:  Amy J Davidoff; Kaitlin Akif; Michael T Halpern
Journal:  J Natl Cancer Inst Monogr       Date:  2022-07-05

Review 2.  Sociocognitive Functioning and Psychosocial Burden in Patients with Brain Tumors.

Authors:  Milena Pertz; Uwe Schlegel; Patrizia Thoma
Journal:  Cancers (Basel)       Date:  2022-02-01       Impact factor: 6.639

3.  Quality of life and return to work and sports after spinal ependymoma resection.

Authors:  Vicki M Butenschoen; Till Gloßner; Isabel C Hostettler; Bernhard Meyer; Maria Wostrack
Journal:  Sci Rep       Date:  2022-03-23       Impact factor: 4.379

  3 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.