| Literature DB >> 8961474 |
S M Grunberg1, N Boutin, A Ireland, S Miner, J Silveira, T Ashikaga.
Abstract
Pharmacoeconomic analysis is often based upon incremental cost per increase in survival (cost-effectiveness). Using this definition supportive care measures, which increase quality but not quantity of life, generate a zero denominator and cannot be directly compared with other components of health care cost. Cost-utility analysis, which measures incremental cost per increase in quality-adjusted life-years (QALY), where QALY = utility score x time at risk, addresses this problem, since successful supportive intervention increases the utility score and thus provides a finite denominator in QALY even when absolute survival is unchanged. However, utility scores for various supportive care modalities have not been well defined. As a pilot study to generate a first approximation of a utility score for nausea/vomiting, we used a rating scale technique and administered two visual analogue scale questions to 30 patients completing a cycle of chemotherapy. Patients rated their global quality of life during their previous cycle of chemotherapy with hypothetical absence or presence of nausea/vomiting as the only variable. The study population included 8 male and 22 female patients, with a median age of 56 years. The most common malignancies were breast cancer (8 patients), lung cancer (7 patients), and hematologic malignancies (7 patients). On a 100 mm visual analogue scale, the mean score for overall quality of life during chemotherapy was 79 mm without nausea/vomiting and 27 mm with nausea/vomiting (P < 0.001, paired t-test). The implied marked increase in utility with relief of nausea/vomiting suggests a significant impact on cost-utility analysis. Similar methodology could be used to estimate utility scores in other areas of supportive care.Entities:
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 1996 PMID: 8961474 DOI: 10.1007/bf01880641
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Support Care Cancer ISSN: 0941-4355 Impact factor: 3.603