Health state utilities for non small cell lung cancer

被引:324
作者
Nafees, Beenish [1 ]
Stafford, Megan [1 ]
Gavriel, Sonia [1 ]
Bhalla, Shkun [2 ]
Watkins, Jessamy [2 ]
机构
[1] United BioSource Corp, London WC1A 2NS, England
[2] Eli Lilly & Co, Basingstoke RG24 9NL, Hants, England
关键词
D O I
10.1186/1477-7525-6-84
中图分类号
R19 [保健组织与事业(卫生事业管理)];
学科分类号
摘要
Background: Existing reports of utility values for metastatic non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) vary quite widely and are not all suitable for use in submissions in the UK. The aim of this study was to elicit UK societal based utility values for different stages of NSCLC and different grade III-IV toxicities commonly associated with chemotherapy treatments. Toxicities included neutropenia, febrile neutropenia, fatigue, diarrhoea, nausea and vomiting, rash and hair loss. Methods: Existing health state descriptions of metastatic breast cancer were revised to make them suitable as descriptions of metastatic NSCLC patients on second-line treatment. The existing health states were used in cognitive debrief interviews with oncologists (n = 5) and oncology specialist nurses (n = 5). Changes were made as suggested by the clinical experts. The resulting health states (n = 17) were piloted and used in a societal based valuation study (n = 100). Participants rated half of the total health states in a standard gamble interview to derive health state utility scores. Data were analysed using a mixed model analysis. Results: Each health state described the symptom burden of disease and impact on different levels of functioning (physical, emotional, sexual, and social). The disutility related to each disease state and toxicity was estimated and were combined to give health state values. All disease states and toxicities were independent significant predictors of utility (p < 0.001). Stable disease with no toxicity (our base state) had a utility value of 0.653. Utility scores ranged from 0.673 (responding disease with no toxicity) to 0.473 for progressive disease. Conclusion: This study reflects the value that society place on the avoidance of disease progression and severe toxicities in NSCLC.
引用
收藏
页数:15
相关论文
共 32 条
[1]  
Bennett KJ, 1996, QUALITY LIFE PHARMAC
[2]   Assessment of quality of life in the supportive care setting of the big lung trial in non-small-cell lung cancer [J].
Brown, J ;
Thorpe, H ;
Napp, V ;
Fairlamb, DJ ;
Gower, NH ;
Milroy, R ;
Parmar, MKB ;
Rudd, RM ;
Spiro, SG ;
Stephens, RJ ;
Waller, D ;
West, P ;
Peake, MD .
JOURNAL OF CLINICAL ONCOLOGY, 2005, 23 (30) :7417-7427
[3]  
BUSICK NP, 1999, STAGING SMALL CELL N
[4]   Symptom prevalence, distress, and change over time in adults receiving treatment for lung cancer [J].
Cooley, ME ;
Short, TH ;
Moriarty, HJ .
PSYCHO-ONCOLOGY, 2003, 12 (07) :694-708
[5]   Experiencing neutropenia: Quality of life interviews with adult cancer patients [J].
Fortner B.V. ;
Tauer K.W. ;
Okon T. ;
Houts A.C. ;
Schwartzberg L.S. .
BMC Nursing, 4 (1)
[6]   What happens to patients undergoing lung cancer surgery? Outcomes and quality of life before and after surgery [J].
Handy, JR ;
Asaph, JW ;
Skokan, L ;
Reed, CE ;
Koh, S ;
Brooks, G ;
Douville, EC ;
Tsen, AC ;
Ott, GY ;
Silvestri, GA .
CHEST, 2002, 122 (01) :21-30
[7]   Randomized phase III trial of pemetrexed versus docetaxel in patients with non-small-cell lung cancer previously treated with chemotherapy [J].
Hanna, N ;
Shepherd, FA ;
Fossella, FV ;
Pereira, JR ;
De Marinis, F ;
von Pawel, J ;
Gatzemeier, U ;
Tsao, TCY ;
Pless, M ;
Muller, T ;
Lim, HL ;
Desch, C ;
Szondy, K ;
Gervais, R ;
Shaharyar ;
Manegold, C ;
Paul, S ;
Paoletti, P ;
Einhorn, L ;
Bunn, PA .
JOURNAL OF CLINICAL ONCOLOGY, 2004, 22 (09) :1589-1597
[8]   SYMPTOMS AT PRESENTATION FOR TREATMENT IN PATIENTS WITH LUNG-CANCER - IMPLICATIONS FOR THE EVALUATION OF PALLIATIVE TREATMENT [J].
HOPWOOD, P ;
STEPHENS, RJ .
BRITISH JOURNAL OF CANCER, 1995, 71 (03) :633-636
[9]  
HOPWOOD P, 2004, ANN ONCOLOGY S3, V15
[10]   A new decision model for cost-utility comparisons of chemotherapy in recurrent metastatic breast cancer [J].
Hutton, J ;
Brown, R ;
Borowitz, M ;
Abrams, K ;
Rothman, M ;
Shakespeare, A .
PHARMACOECONOMICS, 1996, 9 :8-22