Condition-specific or generic preference-based measures in oncology? A comparison of the EORTC-8D and the EQ-5D-3L

被引:34
|
作者
Lorgelly, Paula K. [1 ,2 ]
Doble, Brett [2 ,3 ]
Rowen, Donna [4 ]
Brazier, John [4 ]
机构
[1] Off Hlth Econ, 7th Floor,105 Victoria St, London SW1E 6QT, England
[2] Monash Univ, Fac Business & Econ, Ctr Hlth Econ, Clayton, Vic, Australia
[3] Univ Cambridge, Cambridge Ctr Hlth Serv Res, Cambridge, England
[4] Univ Sheffield, Sch Hlth & Related Res ScHARR, Sheffield, S Yorkshire, England
关键词
Cancer; Condition-specific non-preferencebased measures; Generic preference-based measures; Quality of life; QUALITY-OF-LIFE; HEALTH STATE CLASSIFICATION; OUTCOME MEASURES; SINGLE INDEX; CANCER; VALIDITY; DISEASE; QLQ-C30; SYSTEM; QUESTIONNAIRE;
D O I
10.1007/s11136-016-1443-y
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
It has been argued that generic health-related quality of life measures are not sensitive to certain disease-specific improvements; condition-specific preference-based measures may offer a better alternative. This paper assesses the validity, responsiveness and sensitivity of a cancer-specific preference-based measure, the EORTC-8D, relative to the EQ-5D-3L. A longitudinal prospective population-based cancer genomic cohort, Cancer 2015, was utilised in the analysis. EQ-5D-3L and the EORTC QLQ-C30 (which gives EORTC-8D values) were asked at baseline (diagnosis) and at various follow-up points (3 months, 6 months, 12 months). Baseline values were assessed for convergent validity, ceiling effects, agreement and sensitivity. Quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) were estimated and similarly assessed. Multivariate regression analyses were employed to understand the determinants of the difference in QALYs. Complete case analysis of 1678 patients found that the EQ-5D-3L values at baseline were significantly lower than the EORTC-8D values (0.748 vs 0.829, p < 0.001). While the correlation between the instruments was high, agreement between the instruments was poor. The baseline health state values using both instruments were found to be sensitive to a number of patient and disease characteristics, and discrimination between disease states was found to be similar. Mean generic QALYs (estimated using the EQ-5D-3L) were significantly lower than condition-specific QALYs (estimated using the EORTC-8D) (0.860 vs 0.909, p < 0.001). The discriminatory power of both QALYs was similar. When comparing a generic and condition-specific preference-based instrument, divergences are apparent in both baseline health state values and in the estimated QALYs over time for cancer patients. The variability in sensitivity between the baseline values and the QALY estimations means researchers and decision makers are advised to be cautious if using the instruments interchangeably.
引用
收藏
页码:1163 / 1176
页数:14
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [1] Condition-specific or generic preference-based measures in oncology? A comparison of the EORTC-8D and the EQ-5D-3L
    Paula K. Lorgelly
    Brett Doble
    Donna Rowen
    John Brazier
    [J]. Quality of Life Research, 2017, 26 : 1163 - 1176
  • [2] Comparing Generic and Condition-Specific Preference-Based Measures in Epilepsy: EQ-5D-3L and NEWQOL-6D
    Mulhern, Brendan
    Pink, Joshua
    Rowen, Donna
    Borghs, Simon
    Butt, Thomas
    Hughes, Dyfrig
    Marson, Antony
    Brazier, John
    [J]. VALUE IN HEALTH, 2017, 20 (04) : 687 - 693
  • [3] Modelling a preference-based index for EQ-5D-3L and EQ-5D-3L + Sleep using a Bayesian framework
    Samer A. Kharroubi
    Yara S. Beyh
    John Brazier
    Yaling Yang
    [J]. Quality of Life Research, 2020, 29 : 1495 - 1507
  • [4] Japanese population norms for preference-based measures: EQ-5D-3L, EQ-5D-5L, and SF-6D
    Shiroiwa, Takeru
    Fukuda, Takashi
    Ikeda, Shunya
    Igarashi, Ataru
    Noto, Shinichi
    Saito, Shinya
    Shimozuma, Kojiro
    [J]. QUALITY OF LIFE RESEARCH, 2016, 25 (03) : 707 - 719
  • [5] JAPANESE POPULATION NORMS FOR PREFERENCE-BASED MEASURES: EQ-5D-3L, EQ-5D-5L, AND SF-6D
    Shiroiwa, T.
    Fukuda, T.
    Ikeda, S.
    Igarashi, A.
    Noto, S.
    Saito, S.
    Shimozuma, K.
    [J]. VALUE IN HEALTH, 2015, 18 (07) : A738 - A738
  • [6] Japanese population norms for preference-based measures: EQ-5D-3L, EQ-5D-5L, and SF-6D
    Takeru Shiroiwa
    Takashi Fukuda
    Shunya Ikeda
    Ataru Igarashi
    Shinichi Noto
    Shinya Saito
    Kojiro Shimozuma
    [J]. Quality of Life Research, 2016, 25 : 707 - 719
  • [7] Are condition-specific utilities more valid than generic preference-based ones in asthma? Evidence from a study comparing EQ-5D-3L and SF-6D with AQL-5D
    Kontodimopoulos, Nick
    Stamatopoulou, Eleni
    Brinia, Aikaterini
    Talias, Michael A.
    Ferreira, Lara N.
    [J]. EXPERT REVIEW OF PHARMACOECONOMICS & OUTCOMES RESEARCH, 2018, 18 (06) : 667 - 675
  • [8] A Comparison of Generic and Condition-Specific Preference-Based Measures Using Data From Nivolumab Trials: EQ-5D-3L, Mapping to the EQ-5D-5L, and European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Utility Measure-Core 10 Dimensions
    Shaw, James W.
    Bennett, Bryan
    Trigg, Andrew
    DeRosa, Michael
    Taylor, Fiona
    Kiff, Christopher
    Ntais, Dionysios
    Noon, Katie
    King, Madeleine T.
    Cocks, Kim
    [J]. VALUE IN HEALTH, 2021, 24 (11) : 1651 - 1659
  • [9] Modelling a preference-based index for EQ-5D-3L and EQ-5D-3L+Sleep using a Bayesian framework
    Kharroubi, Samer A.
    Beyh, Yara S.
    Brazier, John
    Yang, Yaling
    [J]. QUALITY OF LIFE RESEARCH, 2020, 29 (06) : 1495 - 1507
  • [10] Study protocol for valuing EQ-5D-3L and EORTC-8D health states in a representative population sample in Sri Lanka
    Kularatna, Sanjeewa
    Whitty, Jennifer A.
    Johnson, Newell W.
    Scuffham, Paul A.
    [J]. HEALTH AND QUALITY OF LIFE OUTCOMES, 2013, 11